In recent years quite a lot of these damning videos have come from the cops' own body-cams and dash-cams. I'm amazed it hasn't burrowed into their brains that "we are recording ourselves here ... better play by the rules".
Last edited:
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
nurse cuffed by cop for not breaking law
- Thread starter Travis
- Start date
In recent years quite a lot of these damning videos have come from the cops' own body-cams and dash-cams. I'm amazed it hasn't burrowed into their brains that "we are recording ourselves here ... better play by the rules".
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
Maybe a number of them have been *********** around willy-nilly for so long, they've essentially forgotten what the precise rules are.
ETA - "What? She said no to me. More than once! What do you mean I'm not allowed to arrest her?"
Last edited:
Let's see if there are any consequences. So far there aren't many consequences, so they seem to be catching on rather more quickly than we are.
Imhotep
Graduate Poster
The Mayor and Police Chief have apologized. IA called in. Let's see how that turns out.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/09/...ho-refused-blood-draw-of-unconscious-patient/
http://www.sltrib.com/news/2017/09/...ho-refused-blood-draw-of-unconscious-patient/
p0lka
Illuminator
If you watch the full vid you can hear the other officer saying to her in the police car that if 'they are found to have taken it unlawfully it couldnt be used anyway, so whats the problem?' or words to that effect.
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
I'm pleased with the public reaction this time, although very troubled that the detective is so far continuing his job, with merely some vague "reeducation" to ensure this never happens again. In some cases, that may be an appropriate response. However, in THIS one, the law officer demonstrated either egregious ignorance of or flagrant disregard for the very law it is his job to uphold. That IS the foundational basis of his job.
If I threw lattes in peaceful customer's faces one day at my job, I wouldn't be reeducated or any such thing. I'd be fired, and possibly worse. This guy is supposed to have received a LOT more training and preparation for his job than I did. And he's trusted with a much greater responsibility toward society (important as lattes are these days). Why shouldn't his consequences for borking it up so outrageously be equal to, nay greater than, those facing us mere disgruntled plebs?
If I threw lattes in peaceful customer's faces one day at my job, I wouldn't be reeducated or any such thing. I'd be fired, and possibly worse. This guy is supposed to have received a LOT more training and preparation for his job than I did. And he's trusted with a much greater responsibility toward society (important as lattes are these days). Why shouldn't his consequences for borking it up so outrageously be equal to, nay greater than, those facing us mere disgruntled plebs?
p0lka
Illuminator
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
What's the old chestnut, something about "with great power..."
p0lka
Illuminator
"With great power comes a responsibility far greater than the power you have, your responsibility has to own that power."
That one?
Last edited:
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
p0lka
Illuminator
Last edited:
Do you know the result of this appeal and/or the status of the original ruling?
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/2..._no_First_Amendment_right_to_film_police.html
This is my theory as well. And in the past if the cop wanted to press it further they would have accused the nurse of taking a swing at them, of pushing them against the wall, or otherwise aggressively resisting arrest. And who would not take the work of a cop, right?
I still believe that there are many good cops. But the advent of cell phones with video has lead to dramatic decreases in the numbers of reported UFOs and Big Foots (Feet?) while leading to substantial increases in the numbers of police caught doing illegal things. I can only assume that the former are rare/non-existant whereas the latter are much more common than I ever suspected.
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
That made my gad damn day!
This incident is on Snopes now, by the way, everybody. Usually a good comprehensive take.
http://www.snopes.com/2017/09/01/officer-handcuffs-nurse/
Last edited:
Again- I absolutely agree! This was not simply the cop failed to understand the legal details of what was required to obtain a blood sample from someone, so he only needs to be re-educated on the details of the current rules. Instead, in the middle of a very calm and non-threatening situation the cop became ballistic because he was not getting his way. In response to multiple hospital professionals calmly explaining and documenting what the rules were, and in the absence of any physical resistance, the cop threatens to arrest the nurse, grabs her, has her handcuffed and tossed in the back of a police car. He clearly demonstrated that he is emotionally unfit as a LEO. I can only imagine what he might do in a real life or death situation when he was under some real stress.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Yes. Utah has an implied-consent law which reads in part
Utah Code 41-6a-520 said:
It was this implied consent that the detective cited as legal justification to draw the blood. However, the detective was still wrong, as the highlighted section emphasizes. In this case the intent of the blood draw was to prove that the patient was not intoxicated. The detective wrongly believed implied consent was operative for his purpose, but in fact he had no grounds to believe the patient was in violation.
While his misunderstanding of the law can be excused, obviously his subsequent actions cannot. There seems to have been little done effectively to de-escalate the situation. It should not have come to the arrest of the nurse. In the nurse's favor, we have a female mayor who doesn't tolerate this sort of thing.
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
Also, he admitted on the video to the other cop that he couldn't get a warrant because he had no probable cause. That contradicts any assertion the cop believed he had probable cause because of the implied consent law if the cop was using that excuse.
Last edited:
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
Good point! I forgot to even start dissecting that part.
The other, second officer was the ultimate little phony "nice cop" thespian here. I don't have any true hostility in me for the institution of the police, quite the contrary. But I experience profound senses of hostility toward the ones who behave like either of these lulus in an extreme situation.
Just disgraceful. The oft-tripping security at Burning Man does a better job of knowing the policies they enforce.
Last edited:
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Agreed. In the SLCPD, as I suspect is the case in many police departments, detectives are very different from beat cops. Specifically, I doubt whether they're ever under any real stress in the same way beat cops are. Here that cuts the wrong way; you want someone who is used to managing confrontation without it getting out of hand. That clearly didn't happen in this case.
In addition to Internal Affairs, we also have a citizen oversight board that has actual teeth. And I've just learned that there will be a criminal investigation. So just because the detective hasn't been handed his walking papers just yet doesn't mean he's at all out of the woods. He's facing three separate investigations and has, as of today, been placed on administrative leave.
Last edited: