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

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Greven

Which was my point...

You guys keep claiming a arrant only bs narrative when its not true.

You guys have still failed to address the fact getting blood from drivers involved in fatality accidents is common in Utah / this region. So why did they all of a sudden decide not to allow law enforcement to do it?

As I said there is a history between the Hospital and Law Enforcement in this area where the Hospital thinks its policies apply to people from other departments.

At the time this occurred pd policy was different.

This circumstance was different. The patient was not under arrest and not suspected of any crime. There was no probable cause to obtain a warrantless blood sample, ergo no exigent circumstance.

Regardless of the whether or not a blood draw is routine in Utah, the SCOTUS has ruled strongly against warrantless blood draws: it's a clear 4th Amendment violation against unreasonable searches.

A warrant could have been obtained, supposing the police could convince a judge that a person not suspected of a crime may be guilty of a crime, but they chose not to do so. I suspect that they would not have been able to obtain a warrant, and so did not attempt to do so. Instead, they tried to circumvent THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and obtain 'evidence' when they insisted there wasn't any crime.

How, pray tell, does this support your point?

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to HIPAA.

You are the one who is ignorant of HIPAA compliance and the law. He did not have a warrant, or any other documentation that entitled him to that information.

Exactly. The officer's word, that he "has the right" is not enough. The request HAS to be in writing. There must be a proper paper trail. Otherwise, the evidence is tainted and the hospital is screwed.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

God your inability to follow a conversation is getting old.

Disclosure that medical staff already took a blood sample. They should have told the detective that when he showed up for the blood draw.

The nurses actions are in fact a contributing factor to the overall situation.

It is not her job to delve into criminal law and how an officer does their job.

I'm just gonna say what probably a lot of us are thinking....

Is that you, Detective Payne?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

God your inability to follow a conversation is getting old.

Disclosure that medical staff already took a blood sample. They should have told the detective that when he showed up for the blood draw.

The nurses actions are in fact a contributing factor to the overall situation.

It is not her job to delve into criminal law and how an officer does their job.

And by the way, Det. Payne, I mean "Xcathdra:"

Why don't you freaking know that a blood draw is going to be a routine procedure when the victim comes in to the ER? WTF?? You, being an officer of the blood draw program, should KNOW THIS, SHOULDNT you? What kind of sh$tty detective are you? FURTHERMORE, you've worked as an EMT for ten years! Are you telling me that after working as an EMT for ten years, you havent picked up on this basic fact? I'm a friggin' MUSICIAN and I know that they're gonna draw blood first thing in any trauma situation like this. Jesus!

You do NOT sound smart enough to be a cop. You certainly shouldn't be allowed anywhere near needles. Jesus, dude.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to HIPAA.

You are the one who is ignorant of HIPAA compliance and the law. He did not have a warrant, or any other documentation that entitled him to that information.

Exactly. The officer's word, that he "has the right" is not enough. The request HAS to be in writing. There must be a proper paper trail. Otherwise, the evidence is tainted and the hospital is screwed.

Add to those circumstances the fact that the requesting department had told him to "forget about it" in regard to the blood sample and yet he kept demanding it. After he was told to let it go, that they would get what they needed another way, each time he demanded it, he lied---because he knew he had no right to it after being told to forget it. It is quite plain that is he who had a burr under his saddle and wanted a fight. Had he not, he would have turned around and walked out of the hospital the minute he was told to forget it.

www.sltrib.com... ds-show/ well seems they are looking into the past reccord of the officers suspended and it does not shine a good light on officer payne ,it appears this isnt his first suspension,nor his first time getting in trouble for interactions with a female
www.sltrib.com... ds-show/

The controversial arrest of a University Hospital nurse wasn’t the first time Salt Lake City police Detective Jeff Payne had faced an internal investigation for violating department policies, newly released records show. About four years ago, Payne received a written reprimand for allegedly sexually harassing another department employee “over an extended period of time,” internal police records state. And in 1995, Payne was found to have violated multiple department policies related to a vehicle pursuit that involved the Utah Highway Patrol. He was suspended 80 hours without pay.

so it seems he has had problems following policy over his job history ,and im sure if this ends up in court both sides will try to dig up as much dirt as they can on those involved.with one being a former olyimpian and the other with a history of ignoring policy

from same link www.sltrib.com... ds-show/

‘Harassing behavior’ A May 2013 letter to Payne from then-Chief Chris Burbank states another Salt Lake City Police Department employee testified Payne had harassed her for a long time. “Your harassing behavior was severe and persistent and created a hostile, intimidating work environment for this employee, significantly interfering with her ability to work,” the letter states. Burbank added the behavior was “particularly serious” because Payne made unwanted physical contact and sent a “disparaging email.” The chief found Payne violated several department policies, including one barring discrimination and sexual harassment. The letter served as Payne’s reprimand, the chief wrote, adding that any further misconduct could result in termination. Additional details of the case were not included.

so it seems he may have been on his last warning even before the nurse incident occurred,this could very well end up being the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak.

www.nydailynews.com... apaprently he also violated policy on a pursuit

In another incident in 1995, Payne was suspended for 80 hours without pay after he violated the department’s code of ethics as well as a vehicle pursuit policy in connection to a late night car chase. Additional details were unavailable.

while officer James Tracy had only recived one write up in his entire 27 year career with the police force,for violating arrest protocol by hand cuffing two suspects and releasing them on the other side of the city with out filing/filling out a report way back in 1997 as indicated in above link

allnurses.com... nurse wubbles interviewed by allnurses at a nursing convention its a short 1:27 minute interview that can be viewed at the link above

PDF and im honestly not sure about this at all and hopefully zaphoid could clear it up as the apparant expert on trucking regulations in this thread,but this link seems to imply that taking of urine from an unconscious person is not permitted by cathertrization or other means. now again this applies to urine not blood and im honestly not sure if blood draws for DOT testing are under other rules but in my own admittedly ignorant opinion(am not nor will i ever be a truck driver) it seems to at least IMPLY that at least for urine its frowned upon to take urine from an unconcious person for post crash testing

www.transportation.gov...

1) If the employee is also going to take a DOT alcohol test, you must, to the greatest extent practicable, ensure that the alcohol test is completed before the urine collection process begins. Example to Paragraph (b)(1): An employee enters the test site for both a drug and an alcohol test. Normally, the collector would wait until the BAT had completed the alcohol test process before beginning the drug test process. However, there are some situations in which an exception to this normal practice would be reasonable. One such situation might be if several people were waiting for the BAT to conduct alcohol tests, but a drug testing collector in the same facility were fr ee. Someone waiting might be able to complete a drug test without unduly delaying his or her alcohol test. Collectors and BATs should work together, however, to ensure that post -accident and reasonable suspicion alcohol tests happen as soon as possible (e. g., by moving the employee to the head of the line for alcohol tests). (2) If the employee needs medical attention (e.g., an injured employee in an emergency medical facility who is required to have a post -accident test), do not delay this treatment to co llect a specimen. (3) You must not collect, by catheterization or other means, urine from an unconscious employee to conduct a drug test under this part. Nor may you catheterize a conscious employee. However, you must inform an employee who normally voids through self -catheterization that the employee is required to provide a specimen in that manner. (4) If, as an employee, you normally void through self -catheterization, and decline to do so, this constitutes a refusal to test. (c) Require the employee t o provide positive identification. You must see a photo ID issued by the employer (other than in the case of an owner -operator or other self -employed individual) or a Federal, state, or local government (e.g., a driver's license). You may not accept faxes or photocopies of identification. Positive identification by an employer representative (not a co -worker or another employee being tested) is also acceptable. If the employee cannot produce positive identification, you must contact a DER to verify the iden tity of the employee. (d) If the employee asks, provide your identification to the employee. Your identification must include your name and your employer's name, but does not have to include your picture, address, or telephone number. (e) Explain the bas ic collection procedure to the employee, including showing the employee the instructions on the back of the CCF. (f) Direct the employee to remove outer clothing (e.g., coveralls, jacket, coat, hat) that could be used to conceal items or substances that c ould be used to tamper with a specimen. You must also direct the employee to leave these garments and any briefcase, purse, or other personal belongings with you or in a mutually agreeable location. You must advise the employee that failure to comply with your directions constitutes a refusal to test. (1) If the employee asks for a receipt for any belongings left with you, you must provide one. (2) You must allow the employee to keep his or her wallet.

this seems to be current (the most current i could find ) as of Agust 8th 2016 ,but like i said i am not an expert so this could be way off and hopefully any other members that are truckers could clarify any ignorance of mine in this post

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to HIPAA.

You are the one who is ignorant of HIPAA compliance and the law. He did not have a warrant, or any other documentation that entitled him to that information.

Exactly. The officer's word, that he "has the right" is not enough. The request HAS to be in writing. There must be a proper paper trail. Otherwise, the evidence is tainted and the hospital is screwed.

No its the right words and right phrasing. The request doesnt have to be in writing and no the hospital isnt screwed. Like I said you dont know what you are talking about.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Nope not even close.

What parts are you not understanding?

a reply to: Xcathdra

www.hhs.gov...

Under what circumstances m ay a HIPAA covered entity disclose PHI to law enforcement ? A HIPAA covered entity may disclose PHI to law enforcement with the individual’s signed HIPAA authorization. A HIPAA covered entity also may disclose PHI to law enforcement without the individual’s signed HIPAA authorization in certain incidents, including: • To report PHI t o a law enforcement official reasonably able to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health or safety of an individual or the public. • T o report PHI that the covered entity in good faith believes to be evidence of a crime that occurred on the premises of the covered entity . • T o alert law enforcement to the death of the individual , when there is a suspicion that death resulted from criminal conduct. • W hen responding to an off -site medical emergency, as necessary to alert law enforcement to criminal activity. • T o report PHI to law enforcement when required by law to do so (such as reporting gunshots or stab wounds). • To comply with a court order or court -ordered warrant, a subpoena or summons issued by a judicial o fficer , o r an administrative request from a law enforcement official (the administrative request must include a written statement that the information requested is relevant and material, specific and limited in scope, and de -identified information cannot be used). • To respond to a request for PHI for purposes of identifying or locating a suspect, fugitive, material witness or missing person , but the information must be limit ed to basic demographic and health information about the person. • T o respond to a request for PHI about an adult victim of a crime when the victim agrees (or in limited circumstances if the individual is unable to agree) . Child abuse or neglect may be reported , without a parent’s agreement, to any law enforcement official authorized by law to receive such reports. For More Information This is a summary of the relevant provisions and does not include all requirements that are found in the HIPAA Privacy Rule . For complete information, please v isit the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Office for Civil Rights HIPAA web site at www.hhs.gov... .

hipaa.bsd.uchicago.edu...

Patient Information Patient information means all information about the patient, including name, medical record number, condition, sex, age, physician name, diagnosis, medical unit, and other treatment information ("PHI"). The fact that a patient is in the medical center is PHI. Procedures City, State or Federal Law Enforcement may seek access to a patient or access to patient information. Before providing access, follow these steps: 1. Verify the Identity of the Police Officer. If law enforcement appears in person, verify the officer's name, badge number or other agency identification, credentials or proof of government status. If you receive a request from a law enforcement officer or agency in writing, verify that the request is on the appropriate letterhead. 2. Identify What Law Enforcement Wants and the Purpose For the Request. Identify the reason that the police officer is requesting the information. 3. Provide Access Only as Follows -- and Only Provide the Minimum Amount of Information Necessary for the Purpose. Access to Patients General Statement: Physician approval: Access to the patient is subject to the physician's opinion that such access would not impede the patient's care. Patient approval: Upon physician approval, a healthcare provider will ask the patient whether he/she wants to speak to the police. The patient is not required to speak to police, and UCMC will respect the patient's wishes. This applies even if the patient is an alleged perpetrator of a crime. Note: Mental health, HIV/AIDS, and genetic information may not be disclosed without the written consent of the patient or his/her legal representative. Exception: If a patient wants to talk to the police but the physician believes his/her medical condition could be affected, alert the patient of the physician's concerns but allow the access. Access to Health Care Information, Both Oral and Written (i.e. talking to providers) General Statement: A healthcare provider may share patient information with police with the consent of the patient or the patient's legal representative (for example, the parent, spouse, child, or guardian). Document the patient's consent and the information provided in the patient's medical record. In addition, there are occasions when the law permits or requires you to share patient information with law enforcement. Mental Health, HIV/AIDS, and genetic information may not be disclosed without the written consent of the patient or patient's legal representative. Directory Information: You may provide "directory information" to law enforcement personnel if they inquire whether a patient is an inpatient. You may call the UCMC operator at 2-1000 and ask if the person is a patient. If the person is a patient, you may disclose the fact that the person is a patient. Note that if an inpatient has opted out of the inpatient directory, the operator would have no information; however it does not necessarily mean the patient is not here. Crime Committed On The Medical Center's Property: If a crime has occurred on the Medical Center's property, you may share patient information, but only to the extent necessary for the investigation. Crime Committed Off The Medical Center's Property: If the patient is a victim of a crime at a location other than the UCMC, then the patient's information may be shared upon the patient's permission. If the patient's permission is not obtainable, then upon written confirmation that the patient information is needed immediately by law enforcement, a healthcare provider may provide the patient information needed to meet the officer's needs. The healthcare provider must document in the medical record the following elements: The healthcare provider cannot obtain the patient's consent because of incapacity or other emergency circumstances; and The officer represents that the patient information is needed to determine whether a violation of law by a person other than the victim has occurred and information is not intended to be used against the victim; and The officer represents that immediate law enforcement activity that depends on the disclosure would be materially and adversely affected by waiting until the patient is capable of giving consent; and Disclosure is determined by professional judgment to be in the best interest of the patient. The Verification of Law Enforcement's Immediate Need of Information About a Patient Victim form can be used to document this information, but it is acceptable to document each of these four elements in the patient's medical record. Alleged Perpetrator of a Crime: If law enforcement is seeking the information of a patient who is an alleged perpetrator of a crime, patient information may be shared if permitted by the patient and only the amount necessary for the investigation. Alternatively, patient information may be shared if the officer completes the Law Enforcement Official's Request for Protected Health Information. DCFS and Its Delegates: Upon verification by an officer that he/she has been delegated the investigation authority by DCFS, patient information may be disclosed in response to questions that are related to the investigation. Verification can be made by either receipt of a DCFS assignment form showing the officer requesting the information has investigation authority, by the officer completing the Verification of Law Enforcement's Immediate Need of Information About a Patient Victim form, or Social Services validation of the delegation of the authority. See below for specific procedures. Witness to a Crime: If a patient informs you that he/she is a witness to a crime, tell the patient we are going to notify the University of Chicago Police Department, and ask the patient if they would like to file a report or make a statement to the UCPD. Patient information is only given to the extent the patient consents. Court Order: You may provide patient information in response to a valid court order after receiving advice and direction from the Office of Legal Affairs. Sexual Assault: A sexual assault survivor's kit may not be disclosed unless: An adult sexual assault survivor or a minor sexual assault survivor 13 years of age or older provides written consent. Upon the written request of the parent, guardian, investigating law enforcement officer or DCFS for a minor sexual assault survivor under the age of 13. Reporting Obligations: UCMC must report the following facts -- these reports are required by municipal and/or state laws and the reporting requirements are set forth in Administrative Policy 02-04. The policy also identifies who may report this information. An injury by a patient who is a victim of or during the commission of a crime or an injury resulting from a firearm or object used as a weapon. A patient's blood alcohol content obtained as part of the patient's medical care for injuries resulting from a motor vehicle accident should be disclosed upon police request. Any of the following injuries sustained by a patient: Injury resulting from animal or human bite or from poisoning; Injury on public property; Injury involving a moving motor vehicle; Injury of any cause where it is evident that death will probably ensue as a direct result thereof, or when death has resulted. Reminder Note: If a patient comes in under law enforcement authority, law enforcement is responsible for continuous monitoring of the patient. While law enforcement may be exposed to patient information while monitoring the patient, no additional patient information should be given unless it falls within one of the areas listed above.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

and health centers are required to release certain info to law enforcement without consent when its part of a law enforcement investigation. That would include basic personal information, status of patient, nature of injuries etc etc.

A nurse telling law enforcement they already took blood is not PHI information.

www.aele.org...

Crime Victims. A covered entity may disclose PHI concerning an actual or suspected victim of a crime in response to a law enforcement request in two circumstances. Either: the individual agrees to the disclosure; or the individual’s agreement cannot be obtained due to incapacity or emergency circumstances, and a law enforcement official represents that: the information is needed to determine if someone other than the individual has committed a crime, and such information will not be used against the individual; and the need for the information is acute and without it law enforcement efforts will be adversely affected; and the covered entity determines in the exercise of professional judgment that disclosure is in the best interests of the individual. Note that disclosures regarding crime victims may be made only in response to a law enforcement request, unless otherwise required by law. Note also that disclosures concerning victims of abuse, neglect or domestic violence are governed by different provisions of the HIPAA rules, which are discussed in the Consent section and the Mandatory and Discretionary Releases section of these guidelines. Implementation Tip. Again, ideally law enforcement representations about the need for and use of PHI should be made in writing. At a minimum, the covered entity should document them. In addition, the factual basis and rationale for a professional judgment that disclosure is in the individual’s best interests also should be documented.

so yeah in addition to above links it seems you have litterally no idea what the heck your taking about,hospitals like paper work and they LOVE things in writing ,i cant fathom how you still cant see that the officer screwed up and will be punished (after a trial or review board proceeding as is his right) .right now your proceeeding as if your Payne under the false assumtion that this is a contempt by cop issue not an officer over stepping his authroity and exceeding his powers as a law enforcement officer ,the review board,IA investigation,mayor,city coucil,hosptial and in general public opinion all disagree with you and what you fail to see to grasp that this isnt some cop hating situation this is the perfect example of why people are loosing faith in law enforcement>
cop has a dirty jacket,complaints of sexual harassment that seem to show he has a history of having a problem with women saying NO to him and a pattern of ignoring policy and procedure . members far smarter and cohearnt then me have provided links showing that he violated the policy agreed upon by the hospital and his department that he willfully and ignorantly ignored because he didnt like the word NO to his authority,he looks more foolish then cartman saying "respect ma authority!!!" and even throwing in the CDL they still have a LEGAL right to refuse testing even if conscious at peril of CIVIL NOT CRIMINAL punishments . Scotus has ruled on this and yet you sound like the birthers during obama's term (hated him my self so far from a defender of big O" Scotus has ruled blood is property and not subject to seizure with out a warrant and probable cause and even by the officers own admission in the full unedited video says he has none.

im mostly unemployed work from home and do this stuff for fun whats your excuse why you feel the need to denfed another officer who is blatantly wrong and a stellar example of why the citizens have a growing lack of faith of police officers in this day and age . is it your thin blue line that compels you to continue 59 pages in to defend some one who would violate one of the citizens he took an oath to defend? if so that makes YOU part of the problem if cops are guilty of violating rights let them hang but dont let mob mentality take over there are obiously good cops (ive known dozens if not hundreds in my time as a bounty hunter in my state) and ive known bad cops that would do terrible things because they lack the self control to be an honest cop this isnt all cops are bad or a cop hating thread,this officer screwed up and should pay for his actions as otherwise he will be another notch on the belt of cop haters who will demonize and condemn all who wear the badge

community.corporatecompliance.org... more on hippa not that i think you will actually read it as you seem to have your cop hating nurse naritive firmly in your brain ,and just as a personal aside(mods feel free to delete if its out of line) but i honestly find it ironic your defending the concious officer who violated the rights of a citizen rather then a fellow officer who was injured during his side job as a truck driver who was a victim of an obviously suicidal felon who kamikaze into the officer driving the truck

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Because the information being requested is not PHI. Anything beyond those basics and yes, the officer needs to file a request with the patients consent. Consent is required for PHI.

The officer does not need to file a written request for a nurse to say they took blood. Now, the results of a blood test fall into the restrictive category.

I know what im talking about and have extensive training with regards to HIPAA. Before i went into law enforcement I worked public safety in a level 1 trauma facility for 6 years and dealt with it daily.

a reply to: Xcathdra

www.aha.org... again you seem to be wrong

Disclosures f or Identif ication and Location Pur poses. In response to a request by a law enforcement official, a hos- pital may release certain limited information to the official for purposes of identification and location of a suspect, fugi- tive, material witness, or missing person. A hospital may dis- close only the following information: • Name and address; • Date and place of birth; • Social security number; • ABO blood type and rh factor; • Type of injury; • Date and time of treatment; • Date and time of death, if applicable; and • A description of any distinguishing physical character- istics (e.g., height, weight, gender, race, hair and eye color and presence or absence of facial hair, scars, and tattoos). In responding to a request to help locate or identify a person,a hospital may not disclose any information related to the individual’s DNA, DNA analysis, dental records, or typing, samples, or analysis of body fluids or tissues.

so no warrant no accues the the last part of the snippet what else you got? that right there in clear black and white text says hey you dont get to know with out a warrant ,so all payne needed was a warrant,he chose either by negligence or ignroace to not get one ,plus him on camera saying he has no probable cause should end the matter but we can beat this dead horse all day if you really want

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

so all payne needed was a warrant,he chose either by negligence or ignroace to not get one

He clearly felt he was above the law, a natural progression for officers drunk on power.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

What the hell are you talking about?

We arent talking about a warrant. We were talking about the nurs3e failing to disclose to the detective they took a blood draw already. Windword tried to say she couldnt tell the officer that because HIPAA prevented it.

It does not and everything I stated is confirmed in your latest post.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

so all payne needed was a warrant,he chose either by negligence or ignroace to not get one

He clearly felt he was above the law, a natural progression for officers drunk on power.

I see your in this thread to bash on cops once again. Wasnt the Minnesota thread enough for you?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

so all payne needed was a warrant,he chose either by negligence or ignroace to not get one

He clearly felt he was above the law, a natural progression for officers drunk on power.

I see your in this thread to bash on cops once again. Wasnt the Minnesota thread enough for you?

Not all cops buddy, just the corrupt ones that need to be exposed and removed from the force. I realise they are only a small proponent, but they are the ones that make the news and give us all something to complain about.