Nurse forcibly arrested for not allowing cop to draw blood of unconscious patient(Video)

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: diggindirt
Let me ask you this one more time---it's been asked over and over and yet you avoid answering---

Actually I have answered it. You and some others apparently refused to read or you didnt understand it.
Why didnt the nurse tell the detective when he first made contact they already took blood? A question asked that you guys have refused to answer.

This has been answered repeatedly: nobody asked.

It's generally evident to most reasonable people that hospitals are going to do blood work on people who are admitted with major trauma. Why didn't he ask?

He was present for a blood draw. She should have informed him the medical staff completed one. Secondly the Lt. never asked her if medical obtained a blood sample. The nurse was all to willing to disclose that fact to the Lt. after she was taken into custody.

Yeah, no, if you want something, then ask for it.

It is not reasonable to require someone volunteer information without requesting it. That is nonsensical. For example, an officer stopping a motorist will ask for license and registration, no?

a reply to: Greven


Correct. And not just "of any person". It's "of any person regarding conduct that constitutes a criminal offense".

There was no investigation, PC, or even suspicion that the victim had committed a crime. The exact same reason they couldn't force a blood draw in the first place. The victim had not committed a crime, was under no suspicion of having committed a crime, the officers involved were aware there was no probable cause to suspect such or demonstrate need for a warrant. They still sought to compel a blood draw and according to the IA reports the Lt. candidly states to Payne during the incident the arrest was not warranted was merely an investigative ruse to intimidate the nurse into submission.
It's also the same reason implied consent was not applicable because the Utah statute clearly states "A test or tests authorized under this Subsection (1) must be administered at the direction of a peace officer having grounds to believe that person to have been operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while in violation of any provision under Subsections (1)(a)(i) through (iii)." Not just administered by a police officer, but one "having grounds to believe that person" to have been committing a crime involving comtrolling substances while in control of a vehicle.
There were no such grounds.


Today was the deadline for the Lt. and Det. to notify their intent to waive (or not waive) their pre-determination hearing to respond to the policy findings.

The charges against the nurse were not "dropped", btw. She was never charged with a crime.

a reply to: RadioRobert


This part of the investigation report is most interesting to me......


when in fact, the situation shows Complaintant (Nurse) was attempting to stop Suspect (Detective) from breaking the law


Wubbels was attempting to "Stop the detective from breaking the law"

And some of the Detective's statement is protected by Garrity, and all of the Lieutenant's was so redacted. That only applies if the information therein tended to incriminate them. You know, of committing a crime, not just a policy violation or embarrassing screwup. A legal department decided that applied. That's why third party witness statements and video/audio evidence did not get redacted from the report, only their own statements (actually I think the unnamed third officer [W/Witness] had one or two words/phrases redacted. He's going to get off light).

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: KansasGirl

Utah Highway Patrol were within policy for the pursuit. There is no law enforcement liability with regards to the accident caused by the fleeing suspect.

You guys accuse me of bias and yet fail to recognize your own bias towards law enforcement.

classy.

I've never slapped a cell phone out of a nurse's hand (or anyone's hand), so at least I am classier than than your champion Det. Payne.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
fox13now.com... guess the truck driver is still in critical condition,i am unsure if he has woken up or if he is still in a medically induced coma .he has burns over 46% of his body and a 22% chance of survival

www.deseretnews.com...

Terrible! And this is the person who ahole Detective Payne wanted to barge in on and take blood from even though he was told to drop it. Needs to be fired, along with his superior, and the wussy cop there with him who just let it all happen. And Xcatheter, before you come in and repeat the BS you've been spouting over and over for 64 pages: if you actually ARE a cop, you shouldn't be. Your defense of this cop with insecurity issues so bad he can't take no, plus the attitude you display that cops are free to interpret the law however they wish, proves you utterly and totally unfit for any position of authority. Ever.

The thin blue line is not going away anytime soon.

It has nothing to do with the thin blue line and everything to do with getting all the facts and understanding whats in play.

If you and some others could check your blind hatred of law enforcement you might understand that.

I think you are the one with blinders on, I've said to you many times I'm against corruption in the force, I do not hate cops, your justification for me disagreeing with you is that I hate you...

Really you are doing exactly what that cop did to the nurse, your trying to escalate the situation so you can feel justified to act out your authoritarian fantasies.

This thread seems to be stuck on the same argument for the last 30 or so pages.

Closed ....for staff review.