It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 41
126
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


He was the one making the request? it was up to him to ask. If I get pulled over I offer the police whatever they ask me for I don't start asking them do you need my registration? Do you need my insurance card? Do you want to search my car? Now I know you are not really LE.




posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel



By the way Utah state law provides for civil immunity for performing blood draws at the direction of law enforcement.


But that doesn't mean a person must throw away their ethics or desire to follow rules.


Of course not however in that situation liability goes to the police and not the hospital. A nurse has no more business telling an officer what he legally needs than an officer has telling medical staff how to provide patient care. They both occupy 2 critical parts of society and need to understand they both have to respect those roles.

It is why civil immunity is specifically laid out for medical staff in these situations.

The way courts view professional roles is also very clear. Individuals with advanced training are held to a higher standard. An officer directing medical care / medical directing law enforcement actions would be faced with the question -

* - Are you certified to provide advanced patient medical care - yes or no.
* - As a nurse / doctor are you certified to enforce the criminal laws in the state of Utah?

That is specifically the reason immunity's are built into certain laws. For when a person is directed to take an action they arent certified in where they must rely on the training / expertise / certifications of the person directing them.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Xcathdra


Hospital also today stated that law enforcement is no longer allowed to have direct interaction with medical staff. So one moron has messed it all up for good cops, yet you still defend the one moron you are in bad company


and that only applies to voluntary contact. they cant prevent police from asking contact with staff during the course of their official duties.

and again im not defending him.

For someone who claims to be former federal law enforcement you sure do have hard time with facts.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

In fact he did unless you are accusing the detective of lying in his report now. He released her when he found out a blood draw was done by medical staff.

Why didnt the nurses present tell him?


Why didn't the officer ask the question? She answered the question he did ask with the answer she was legally obligated to give. We have to hold LEO's hands now and tell them the questions they were supposed to ask?


Back to my question - Why didnt medical staff inform of the blood draw when he first arrived and explained why he was there and what he was there for?

We have to hold medical staffs hands when it comes to providing information to law enforcement that they are legally entitled to have?


Well he was not legally entitled to order the nurse to draw blood without the proper paperwork was he? So why even ask?

X, your are a former LEO right? I know it's hard for LEO to do their duties as humans and not expect human error from time to time but you must respect the fact that you are depended on for doing things to the letter in order to uphold the public's respect for the law, you have to take the responsibility for the situations you have been given armed control over. LEO kill people all the time because the perp didn't say or do what he or she was supposed to, no your whinning cause a cop has to get a slap on the wrist for abusing someone that was doing their job.

I don't ever agree with you but we are riding the line on whether I have respect for you which I did till now.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

To be honest im not concerned about who does or does not respect me on the forums. respect is earned and its not through post count, stars or whether the person agrees with your position.

He was not ordering the nurse to draw blood by the way. the detective was a trained phlebotomist and was a member of the departments blood draw section. He was there to make contact with the patient to do the blood draw himself. Medical staff refused that information.

So if you are going to judge me, please make sure you have the facts correct first.

My position is and has been -
The officer acted inappropriately and could have handled it better.
The medical staff also handled the situation poorly, only providing info after the nurse was taken into custody that blood was already taken.

and I have had my issues with medical staff on legal matters. When you have to call a prosecutor to the hospital to explain why their policy is not worth the paper its printed on because a warrant is present is just sad. when that prosecutor finally has to tell medical staff that the warrant will be enforced and every person refusing to comply will be charged is even worse.

Medical staff are like cops. they hold positions of authority and dont like it when someone else comes in with their own authority.

In the end though both parties have a job they must do and interference in that job will lead to consequences.


edit on 4-9-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: norhoc

Yup its one of the reason I have been ignoring some of your posts. Specifically the ones that have been disproven pages back that you cant accept.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA



Mal, what X also fails to realize was the medical staff were the ones acting professionally by offering documented policy, and were being calm and not escalating the situation and had the law on their side in all this. It was the police that ratcheted things up by making unlawful requests and then escalating things when it did not go his way



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: norhoc



Also to all on here remember, The onus is on the police's side when doing an investigation you do not have to be the one that asks what they need, it is on them to know what they need or want and ask you ( see my traffic stop example above)



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: norhoc

What part of the Mayor and Police Chief stated that when they learned of the incident the pd policy was immediately updated do you just not understand?

The Hospital policy at that time did not apply to the Detective.

Or is it your position the Chief and Mayor are lying?



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: norhoc



Also to all on here remember, The onus is on the police's side when doing an investigation you do not have to be the one that asks what they need, it is on them to know what they need or want and ask you ( see my traffic stop example above)


and when asked to comply with whats being asked for or an explanation as to why it cant happen. At which point the officer decides what happens.

The detective never should of had to arrest the nurse in order for medical to explain the blood draw was already done.

Also under HIPPA certain information is required to be released to law enforcement during official investigations. I am going to guess you didnt know that or know what it is without having to google it.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


Not sure what part of I am done speaking to you you don't get. Must be the same part of your brain that doesn't get PC and Reasonable Suspicion. Please stop butting into replies I am making to others.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

She seemed to be following hospital protocol. That's what she is to do.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: MALBOSIA

To be honest im not concerned about who does or does not respect me on the forums. respect is earned and its not through post count, stars or whether the person agrees with your position.

He was not ordering the nurse to draw blood by the way. the detective was a trained phlebotomist and was a member of the departments blood draw section. He was there to make contact with the patient to do the blood draw himself. Medical staff refused that information.

So if you are going to judge me, please make sure you have the facts correct first.

My position is and has been -
The officer acted inappropriately and could have handled it better.
The medical staff also handled the situation poorly, only providing info after the nurse was taken into custody that blood was already taken.



Fine. Let's sum up. Hospital staff are more educated and intelligent than LEO but we give LEO weapons so they take control of situations that they are clearly not educated or intelligent enough to handle.

Moving on. I had enough jack-booted authoritarian point of view for this year.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

For medical care sure.

for criminal law requirements no, law enforcement is more educated than medical staff and trying to make a weapons argument shows your true colors towards law enforcement.

I was going to send this as a pm but since you reacted the way you did i will post it here.

This issue in Utah is not as black and white as being portrayed and a lot of critical info is being ignored that is just now coming to light.

This board has a lot of people who hate cops because of their own personal experiences. When those experiences spill over into anything law enforcement people, like me, who explain the side they choose to ignore and hate, get attacked and accused of holding a certain view, even when we have already stated our view.

My opinion / feeling is they just want to attack law enforcement and will ignore any and all facts that put a wrench in those gears.

Its why I participate the way I do in these types of threads.

I try to provide the information as to why an officer could do something. If people dont like the officers actions and demand they be held accountable then the first step to making the change is to understand the law in question and then go from there.

People, not all, refuse to see the information provided in that manner and instead chose to beleieve its an absolute defense of an officers actions when it is not.

If you guys are incapable of processing information then that is o you and not me..

I will continue to participate in threads like these and give the side that people dont care about in hopes that maybe 1 person might come away from one of these threads with an open mind to ask questions for understanding.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Xcathdra

She seemed to be following hospital protocol. That's what she is to do.


and the Detective was following his, which is what he was supposed to do.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra



By the way Utah state law provides for civil immunity for performing blood draws at the direction of law enforcement.


But the 2nd officer said he needed the blood drawn for the "criminal" investigation he was doing.

You're just gaslighting us now.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Xcathdra


Not sure what part of I am done speaking to you you don't get. Must be the same part of your brain that doesn't get PC and Reasonable Suspicion. Please stop butting into replies I am making to others.


when you provide wrong information i will. for instance the fact the policy was changed for the pd AFTER the incident occurred.

when you get the facts right I wont reply to your posts.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel


Also---

Implied consent assumes that a person with a driver’s license has given approval for blood draws, alcohol breath screenings or other tests if there’s reason to believe the driver is under the influence.
Paul Cassell, a criminal law professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law, wrote in an opinion piece for The Salt Lake Tribune that state law doesn’t permit a blood draw in this situation — especially since the blood was being sought to prove the patient was not under the influence.

So implied consent applies when there is "reason to believe" IE Reasonable suspicion or PC, in this case there was neither, hence no implied consent.

reason to believe



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcathdra



By the way Utah state law provides for civil immunity for performing blood draws at the direction of law enforcement.


But the 2nd officer said he needed the blood drawn for the "criminal" investigation he was doing.

You're just gaslighting us now.



uhm no -

People acting under the direction of law enforcement are provided immunity from being sued for following their direction.

if you are going to accuse me of something at least know what you are talking about.


Effective 5/9/2017

Index Utah Code
Title 41 Motor Vehicles
Chapter 6a Traffic Code
Part 5 Driving Under the Influence and Reckless Driving
Section 523 Persons authorized to draw blood -- Immunity from liability. (Effective 5/9/2017)
41-6a-523. Persons authorized to draw blood -- Immunity from liability.

(1)
(a) Only the following, acting at the request of a peace officer, may draw blood to determine its alcohol or drug content:
(i) a physician;
(ii) a registered nurse;
(iii) a licensed practical nurse;
(iv) a paramedic;
(v) as provided in Subsection (1)(b), emergency medical service personnel other than paramedics; or
(vi) a person with a valid permit issued by the Department of Health under Section 26-1-30.
(b) The Department of Health may designate by rule, in accordance with Title 63G, Chapter 3, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, which emergency medical service personnel, as defined in Section 26-8a-102, are authorized to draw blood under Subsection (1)(a)(v), based on the type of license under Section 26-8a-302.
(c) Subsection (1)(a) does not apply to taking a urine, breath, or oral fluid specimen.
(2) The following are immune from civil or criminal liability arising from drawing a blood sample from a person whom a peace officer has reason to believe is driving in violation of this chapter, if the sample is drawn in accordance with standard medical practice:
(a) a person authorized to draw blood under Subsection (1)(a); and
(b) if the blood is drawn at a hospital or other medical facility, the medical facility.



new topics

top topics



 
126
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join