Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm surprised this hasn't shown up yet.

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45637083&nid=148&title=two-sl-police-officers-placed-on-leave-as-video-of-nurse-arrest-spreads

From KSL:

"SALT LAKE CITY — Two Salt Lake police officers were placed on leave Friday and a criminal investigation was ordered after video of a veteran officer dragging a nurse out of a hospital when she refused to allow a blood draw from an unconscious patient was broadcast across the country.

The Salt Lake Police Department announced Friday afternoon that the officer involved in the startling video had been placed on paid administrative leave — hours after Chief Mike Brown announced that the officer had still been working on duty but in a limited role since the incident occurred more than a month ago.


The statement from the department does not name the officer, but police officials made no effort to dispute that it is the same individual seen arresting the nurse in the video — detective Jeff
The change in status halts Payne's policing powers and requires that he hand over his badge and any department equipment while the Unified Police Department conducts an independent investigation into they controversial July 26 arrest.

KSL made repeated inquiries into the status of Salt Lake Police Lt. James Tracy, the watch commander at the time of the incident who, according to a police report, instructed Payne to arrest the nurse. Department officials confirmed that a statement was being prepared about those inquiries.

In a tweet sent Friday evening, the department announced that a second officer had also been placed on leave in light of the criminal investigation, but would not confirm the name of that officer or what role the officer played in the incident.

In addition to being the supervisor over the department's officers during that shift, Tracy also came to the scene and was recorded in the video exchanging sharp words with the handcuffed woman.

Payne also works as a paramedic for Gold Cross Ambulance Service and was even dropping off patients at University Hospital Friday morning.

Mike Moffitt, Gold Cross president, said Payne was also placed on paid leave from that company Friday based on his statements in the video in which the detective talks to another officer about transporting homeless patients to University Hospital while "good" patients are taken elsewhere.

Moffitt said Payne is a longtime employee with the company and a "great paramedic."

"He doesn't have anything like this in his history," Moffitt said.


Relieved nurse
Video captured by an officer's body camera was first released to the public Thursday and shows Payne dragging a screaming charge nurse, Alex Wubbels, out of University Hospital's burn unit, handcuffing her and stuffing her into his squad car.

The recording spread nationwide in a matter of hours, and Wubbels' account of the harrowing arrest was the top story on several national news outlets Friday, as hashtags of #AlexWubbels and #FireJeffPayne spread widely on social media.

Wubbels, a two-time Olympian in alpine skiing, released the video and pushed for better training of police officers in hopes of preventing "harassment," as she called it, of hospital doctors and nurses.

In an interview with NBC Friday, Wubbels said she feels relieved after sharing the details of her experience.

"Now that its been released to the public, I will say that I feel a little bit less of a burden that I was holding for a long time, and the outpouring of support has been more than I could have ever, ever, ever imagined and I'm very, very, very grateful for that," Wubbels said.

Though Brown confirmed during midday Friday that the department began taking action within hours of the incident in July, Payne had been allowed to remain at work but was suspended from the blood draw program. He was not placed on leave until Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill saw the video and called for the criminal investigation.

Gill called the video "concerning" Friday, noting that Wubbels is clear and articulate in the video as she insists she is following hospital policy.

"The question is if that behavior is not reasonable and is subject to police action, then under what context? And that's exactly what I would like to be investigated," Gill said."


Video link:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RSFzRD5z9QM


A bit more on the story:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v6TFdRMCCI8

The person they wanted to draw blood from was not even suspected of anything. He was just a motorist the man fleeing from the police happened to hit.

Pretty unsettling, yes, I saw it earlier.

What kind of really annoys me that this poor nurse had backup from a row of superiors, but when that LEO didn't get what he wanted, he simply arrested the person talking to him basically the poor middlewoman, probably knowing that he'd rather get away with arresting a nurse than arresting her bosses...

Okay, so I have been following this a few days and I have noticed some things. Most people get very confused by the article for some reason. Here is the rundown:

The person they are wanting blood draws from is the victim, not the suspect. The suspect died in the wreck, therefore he does not fall under the state's implied consent laws.

The nurse is obligated by law to keep this officer from illegally drawing blood from this man.

I just wanted to point that out, I guess there were a few issues with articles stating he was the suspect, not the victim. Which is false.

Oh look, more thugs in uniform. I'm sure glad I have to respect these people for some reason.

What's really crazy is that the arresting officer is also a paramedic. You'd think he would know better than most about this policy.

Victim? No, no. He is a suspect, actually, although we won't know for which crimes until after we search his home and work.

Yeah, this whole thing is not OK. Guy should lose his job. Especially since the guy they wanted blood from wasn't even the suspect in the crash.

Relapse wrote:
The person they wanted to draw blood from was not even suspected of anything. He was just a motorist the man fleeing from the police happened to hit.

The question we should ask then is "why would the officer even want a blood test?"

At least over here, when there is a traffic accident and police on the scene, they will routinely test all involved parties for blood alcohol (sometimes drugs too) even if only one driver is the obvious cause. They can do that as part of their normal traffic control duties, and if you don't consent they will ask you to come along to a hospital for a blood test. If they don't they leave a possible line of investigation open - it might look 100% sure to them but a judge might not think so even if police testimony is generally regarded as more weighty than some random civilian's testimony.

So, in this particular US state, would police be expected to get tests from all parties involved in a crash?If so I can see how the officer would be upset at not getting that, and even if a paramedic he might not know all the rules the hospital follows.

Edit: Ah, there:

" The request for the blood draw came from the Logan Police Department, which was called on by the Utah Highway Patrol to investigate the chase and the crash, Logan Police Capt. Curtis Hooley said Friday. Though police do not suspect that Gray was impaired in any way, Hooley said the department's policy is to request blood tests of all drivers involved in such crashes. "

Still, dragging a nurse away in the middle of her shift was a bad call. He had her name, he had her explanation. If he thought she broke some law he could let her carry on with her (pretty important) job and filed a complant along with his report. Arresting a screaming nurse on the scene was not necessary, no one else there was going to do it anyway and he made the department look bad.

Unless they have a warrant, he is under arrest, or has given consent, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal to draw blood from a person.

The reason they wanted the blood was to prove he was not under the influence in the crash. But, the law still applies even in cases where it is benificial to the person. This is to protect the patient as well as the caregivers.

Additionally the question arises on what authority do they have to arrest the nurse. This must be some Constitutional grant from a different constitution than the one in Washington DC.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Unless they have a warrant, he is under arrest, or has given consent, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal to draw blood from a person.

The reason they wanted the blood was to prove he was not under the influence in the crash.

Very doubtful.

The driver's only involvement in the crash was being in the wrong place at the wrong time when the suspect in a high speed chase plowed into him. There's no legitimate reason for detective dip gak to be demanding a blood draw without consent.

My best guess on why they REALLY wanted the blood was to cover their own rear-ends. Many times when the police chase someone and it leads to a fatality or injury, especially to innocent third parties, there is a lawsuit regardless of the police's liability.

This looks really bad against the police, so they usually settle and someone gets a smudge on their record. If they could prove the victim was impaired, well then it is his fault for being on the road.


Whatever the officer's reason for it, his execution of his duties were flawed. I'm glad their are now investigating him criminally.

Then again, what do you expect? The courts have ruled that the police are under no obligation to protect anyone, nor are they ever expected to actually know the laws they are supposed to enforce.

It sounds ranty but Cuda is actually citing Scotus findings on both police duty and whether they are supposed to know the law.

Spetulhu wrote:

Relapse wrote:
The person they wanted to draw blood from was not even suspected of anything. He was just a motorist the man fleeing from the police happened to hit.

The question we should ask then is "why would the officer even want a blood test?"

At least over here, when there is a traffic accident and police on the scene, they will routinely test all involved parties for blood alcohol (sometimes drugs too) even if only one driver is the obvious cause. They can do that as part of their normal traffic control duties, and if you don't consent they will ask you to come along to a hospital for a blood test. If they don't they leave a possible line of investigation open - it might look 100% sure to them but a judge might not think so even if police testimony is generally regarded as more weighty than some random civilian's testimony.

So, in this particular US state, would police be expected to get tests from all parties involved in a crash?If so I can see how the officer would be upset at not getting that, and even if a paramedic he might not know all the rules the hospital follows.

Edit: Ah, there:

" The request for the blood draw came from the Logan Police Department, which was called on by the Utah Highway Patrol to investigate the chase and the crash, Logan Police Capt. Curtis Hooley said Friday. Though police do not suspect that Gray was impaired in any way, Hooley said the department's policy is to request blood tests of all drivers involved in such crashes. "

Still, dragging a nurse away in the middle of her shift was a bad call. He had her name, he had her explanation. If he thought she broke some law he could let her carry on with her (pretty important) job and filed a complant along with his report. Arresting a screaming nurse on the scene was not necessary, no one else there was going to do it anyway and he made the department look bad.

There was an agreement made years ago between the SLCPD and the area hospitals that the conditions for the blood draw the nurse spoke with the cop about needed to be met before she could legally do so.

OK I want to say that cop should not have cuff the nurse. I think the reason they wanted a blood sample is what I believe is the unconscious patient is a truck driver with a CDL. When a CDL driver get into major accident they have to get test within 24 hour after the accident . I think it a Fed law for all CDL driver.I know because I' am CDL A driver which is a Tractor trailer. I also know that 3 of my fellow driver that were in major accident had to submit to testing regardless if you at fault or not. The gray area is the driver (patient) is unconscious. I hope this help you all .

I think the previous idea is far more likely.

Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

 Bookwrack wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Unless they have a warrant, he is under arrest, or has given consent, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal to draw blood from a person.

The reason they wanted the blood was to prove he was not under the influence in the crash.

Very doubtful.

The driver's only involvement in the crash was being in the wrong place at the wrong time when the suspect in a high speed chase plowed into him. There's no legitimate reason for detective dip gak to be demanding a blood draw without consent.

There is no reason for the detective to demand the blood draw. But that doesn't mean they didn't try to come up with one.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

If he were the suspect in the crash, then the detective could have gone before a judge to obtain a warrant/compelling order for the blood draw.

Putting it bluntly, the detective in question was overstepping and he knew it. I hope his ass gets nailed to the wall over this.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

 Bookwrack wrote:

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

Don't forget that Payne was also assigned to a special blood draw unit within the department; meaning his whole assignment was to get blood draws for cases.


Oh and to put a bit more context into things:
Over the years, it's been shown that police departments can be held liable if a fleeing suspect injures/kills other motorists. The reasoning is that police don't necessarily have to pursue a fleeing suspect.

Likely they wanted the blood drawn from the crash victim to try and see if they had anything in their system as it could be used as a mitigating circumstance("they were coming down from the effects of an energy drink" as an example) that would make it so that a case could reasonably be built that the victim's reflexes were impaired.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

Don't forget that Payne was also assigned to a special blood draw unit within the department; meaning his whole assignment was to get blood draws for cases.


Oh and to put a bit more context into things:
Over the years, it's been shown that police departments can be held liable if a fleeing suspect injures/kills other motorists. The reasoning is that police don't necessarily have to pursue a fleeing suspect.

Likely they wanted the blood drawn from the crash victim to try and see if they had anything in their system as it could be used as a mitigating circumstance("they were coming down from the effects of an energy drink" as an example) that would make it so that a case could reasonably be built that the victim's reflexes were impaired.

Kan is right here...

I hope this officer is reprimanded harshly if not fired. My bro-inlaw is a po-po... and he think this is beyond the pale.

 Bookwrack wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

we are blaming pawn. His BOSS told him to arrest the nurse. Both should be terminated. The fact they haven't been (following contract union procedures) says novels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Whembly I feel for your Bro in law. For all the Goodwill where officers help in Harvey, one of these just wipes out so much of that Goodwill.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

we are blaming pawn. His BOSS told him to arrest the nurse. Both should be terminated. The fact they haven't been (following contract union procedures) says novels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Whembly I feel for your Bro in law. For all the Goodwill where officers help in Harvey, one of these just wipes out so much of that Goodwill.

Yeah... this goes to show that in a large homogeneous group, there will always be bad actors... the police are no exceptions to that.

This ordeal seems to be that policy of "Cover Yo Azz All Da Time!"... which in a general sense, isn't all bad. It's just when it crosses the line (in the case) that'd make all rational people goes... What The Feth?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

If he were the suspect in the crash, then the detective could have gone before a judge to obtain a warrant/compelling order for the blood draw.

Putting it bluntly, the detective in question was overstepping and he knew it. I hope his ass gets nailed to the wall over this.

This. When I was a cop, we had to get a court order or warrant to get blood samples, even if the suspect volunteered to give a sample. It was also the same when I was working in Corrections before I finally retired.


"Implied consent" is a tricky gray area that agencies here in North Carolina didn't want to venture into. Even if you win, lawsuits cost money. State, County, and local agencies usually, as part of their SOPs, just went ahead and implemented "CYA" polices across the board to avoid both legal headaches and possible abuse. You need blood? Go get a warrant from a magistrate or (depending on the situation) a district court order.

The nurse was in the right here. If she drew that blood, odds are that she would have lost her State nursing license and barred for practicing for life (according to my mother, who worked in nursing for thirty years).

 Frazzled wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

we are blaming pawn. His BOSS told him to arrest the nurse. Both should be terminated. The fact they haven't been (following contract union procedures) says novels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Whembly I feel for your Bro in law. For all the Goodwill where officers help in Harvey, one of these just wipes out so much of that Goodwill.

So far, the cop, the one who told him to arrest the nurse, and another cop, are now all subjects of a criminal investigation. The mayor and police chief are apologizing again and again to the nurse, saying this shouldn't have happened. It'll be interesting to see how far the cops sink into that gak pile they stepped into with this, especially since the police were in on the defining of the legal circumstances over a year ago where a blood sample may be taken.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

Even if he were a suspect I would hope a nurse would be well within their rights to refuse to draw blood, or perform any procedure, for whatever reason. The officer seemed to come from the Judge Dread/Eric Cartman school of policing, which is not the reality. The police should not be able to demand (or think they can demand) anything from anyone. After all the US is not a police state.

Relapse wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Seems a bit worrying that you can be roughed up and arrested for not obeying a police officer who is making demands without having got required warrant first. Yet I've seen people defending it online, if you've nothing to hide why not just comply, he was just following orders, why was she blocking him trying to do his job, etc.

I hope anyone defending the cop one day has police come to their house demanding to search it without cause or a warrant, but tell them that not agreeing anyway will see them dragged down the station.

Well, I would guess that many people are misunderstanding the situation. The reporting initially made it seem like the unconscious guy was the suspect in the crash. In which case getting a blood sample when he's unconscious is both legal and justified. So under that information, it would seem like the Nurse was obstructing an investigation.

No it wouldn't, not under any circumstance. The law across the U.S. is very clear in this regard, so we're left with the question - is Payne too stupid to know how to do his job, or does he think that the law doesn't apply to him?

we are blaming pawn. His BOSS told him to arrest the nurse. Both should be terminated. The fact they haven't been (following contract union procedures) says novels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Whembly I feel for your Bro in law. For all the Goodwill where officers help in Harvey, one of these just wipes out so much of that Goodwill.

So far, the cop, the one who told him to arrest the nurse, and another cop, are now all subjects of a criminal investigation. The mayor and police chief are apologizing again and again to the nurse, saying this shouldn't have happened. It'll be interesting to see how far the cops sink into that gak pile they stepped into with this, especially since the police were in on the defining of the legal circumstances over a year ago where a blood sample may be taken.

it's all talk unless the dude and his boss are demoted or terminated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Further, the hospital should end any relationship it has with the police.

I have only ever had to decline a blood draw once from an officer.

Why?

The Judge didn't sign the court order. I explained this to the officer (who did not arrest me) and he got it fixed in about 15 minutes.

Barney Fife should have chosen a different career path. In the video he is asked by another officer why they just don't go ahead and get a warrant and he admits they have no probable cause to mandate the blood draw.