nurse cuffed by cop for not breaking law

[Nessie]

Unfortunately police officers face a strange dichotomy - meant to be honest yet they are also expected to act dishonestly to do their job. It is not surprising to me that many a police officer has problems straddling the dichotomy.

You need to explain that claim to me as well please.

 

[Jodie]

"With great power comes a responsibility far greater than the power you have, your responsibility has to own that power."

That one?

That is crazy, cops are never going to interfere with another officer violating the law and a citizens rights.

They should have prevented the city cop from arresting the nurse. They should have backed up the patient's rights and the hospital policy. That is a failure of duty, that's the reason they are employed by the hospital.

 

[ponderingturtle]

They should have prevented the city cop from arresting the nurse. They should have backed up the patient's rights and the hospital policy. That is a failure of duty, that's the reason they are employed by the hospital.

Yea cops really should do a lot of things, but going against another cop is just not going to happen.

 

[The Don]

You need to explain that claim to me as well please.

My understanding is that, in some circumstances, the police are allowed (or even encouraged) to make misleading and/or untrue statements in order to elicit a confession from a suspect. At least in the US

https://www.njmoorelaw.com/10-ways-police-can-lie-to-you

Hence acting dishonestly as part of their job.

The situation may be different in the UK

 

[rockinkt]

Because the matter has already been tested in a court.

I really can't understand why you think this will make it less likely for a police officer to take physical action when trying to prevent someone from killing themselves.

This actual case makes it less likely a police officer will even be investigated never mind charged in similar circumstances in the future. So for the police officer on the front line they can be more confident in taking such action in future as it has been deemed legal and proper to do so.

You seem to not understand how precedent in court is set.

The accused was found not guilty because there was no mens rea established in this particular case. It did not make a general ruling that it was perfectly OK to kick a prisoner in the chest to stop him/her from strangling themselves.

There is nothing in this ruling that stops other police officers from being charged under the exact same circumstances and found guilty of using too much force.

It is the perception of the intent of the police officer that will decide any further investigations or charges of this type. In other words - whether in the specific case under review the intent of the police officer was to not only stop the prisoner from self harm - but to also inflict a lesson and/or cause pain due to anger or frustration.

I agree with Nessie that another police officer could easily find themselves under investigation or charged for doing the same physical act with the focus of the investigation/prosecution being on the "demeanor" of the officer before, during, and after the event; and, questioning the amount of force actually needed and if that amount of force was purposefully exceeded.

 

[Drewbot]

Look at this conversation shortly after he arrested her:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d36_1504304260

Saying things like how he is only gonna drop of transients and bad patients at their hospital from now on.

I am thinking the reason they wanted blood from the truck driver, is because they were told to call off the high-speed chase, that ended up injuring the truck driver. They are trying to get his blood, so they can say "Well it would have been fine if he hadn't been drinking".

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Look at this conversation shortly after he arrested her:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d36_1504304260

Saying things like how he is only gonna drop of transients and bad patients at their hospital from now on.

I am thinking the reason they wanted blood from the truck driver, is because they were told to call off the high-speed chase, that ended up injuring the truck driver. They are trying to get his blood, so they can say "Well it would have been fine if he hadn't been drinking".

Told to call it off or not, the only reason for such fervor in getting the blood sample would have been the hope they might be able to smear the truck driver. The idea they simply needed to follow the standard procedure is inconsistent with the cop's actions.

 

[Mumbles]

Given a situation out in public where I might need assistance for any reason, I'm more likely to choose a police officer than a stranger if both are near me. But then I've never been abused by a cop or had any reason to fear them.

So who would you ask for assistance from if it is needed?

For anything medical? Local fire department.As a younger man?

See someone getting attacked, especially a friend - jump in and fight for/with them. Unless it's gunfire or such, in which case just stay away.


When driving? I do my best to stay away from any police car, up to and including taking a turn I don't have to if they're tailing me.

IOW, it depends on the situation. I suppose there might be a situation where had no other choice but to call the cops, but I'd much rather avoid doing so.

 

[jimbob]

For anything medical? Local fire department.As a younger man?

See someone getting attacked, especially a friend - jump in and fight for/with them. Unless it's gunfire or such, in which case just stay away.


When driving? I do my best to stay away from any police car, up to and including taking a turn I don't have to if they're tailing me.

IOW, it depends on the situation. I suppose there might be a situation where had no other choice but to call the cops, but I'd much rather avoid doing so.

Having read through the DoJ report of Ferguson, and Baltimore, I can understand it, especially when you consider that Ferguson had a lower disparity index for blacks in vehicle stops than the Missouri statewide average - which simplistically would suggest that they are less biased than other PDs...

https://ago.mo.gov/home/vehicle-stops-report/2016-executive-summary#summary

https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/public-safety/2016appendixb.pdf?sfvrsn=2

 

[Nessie]

You seem to not understand how precedent in court is set.

The accused was found not guilty because there was no mens rea established in this particular case. It did not make a general ruling that it was perfectly OK to kick a prisoner in the chest to stop him/her from strangling themselves.

There is nothing in this ruling that stops other police officers from being charged under the exact same circumstances and found guilty of using too much force.

It is the perception of the intent of the police officer that will decide any further investigations or charges of this type. In other words - whether in the specific case under review the intent of the police officer was to not only stop the prisoner from self harm - but to also inflict a lesson and/or cause pain due to anger or frustration.

I agree with Nessie that another police officer could easily find themselves under investigation or charged for doing the same physical act with the focus of the investigation/prosecution being on the "demeanor" of the officer before, during, and after the event; and, questioning the amount of force actually needed and if that amount of force was purposefully exceeded.

The information from the trial, is that the accusation was the prisoner was kicked in the chest with the same level of force required to kick down a door. That is not backed up by the medical evidence, whereby the prisoner was not injured in any way. The physical evidence contradicted the witness evidence, but COPFS decided to believe the witness and ignore the physical evidence.

The physical evidence backs up the claim of a push, not a kick. So, say a cop decides to slap a prisoner who is strangling themself, but another cop states it was a full force punch to the face. How would this case affect the other? I do not see how it would prevent that cop from being charged with assault.

 

[Ranb]

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/police-barred-contact-staff-utah-043215953.html

The hospital now says its nurses will no longer work directly with law enforcement.

Have not seen this anywhere else.

ETA; CNN link. http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/05/health/nurse-arrested-police-protocol/index.html

Instead of interacting with nurses, law enforcement officers will be directed to health supervisors "who are highly trained on rules and laws," and those interactions won't take place in patient care areas, officials said.

 

[ddt]

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/police-barred-contact-staff-utah-043215953.html

Have not seen this anywhere else.

ETA; CNN link. http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/05/health/nurse-arrested-police-protocol/index.html

So, next time a cop-on-rage will arrest the health supervisor on duty?

 

[quadraginta]

So, next time a cop-on-rage will arrest the health supervisor on duty?

Maybe the idea is that a cop is less likely to try to bully a bureaucrat on their own turf than a nurse working an emergency treatment.

 

[rockinkt]

The information from the trial, is that the accusation was the prisoner was kicked in the chest with the same level of force required to kick down a door. That is not backed up by the medical evidence, whereby the prisoner was not injured in any way. The physical evidence contradicted the witness evidence, but COPFS decided to believe the witness and ignore the physical evidence.

The physical evidence backs up the claim of a push, not a kick. So, say a cop decides to slap a prisoner who is strangling themself, but another cop states it was a full force punch to the face. How would this case affect the other? I do not see how it would prevent that cop from being charged with assault.

Agreed.

 

[ddt]

Maybe the idea is that a cop is less likely to try to bully a bureaucrat on their own turf than a nurse working an emergency treatment.

I guess that's the idea, I just wonder if that will work out. Short of the military, I don't think there's much that will stop a cop on a power trip.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Maybe the idea is that a cop is less likely to try to bully a bureaucrat on their own turf than a nurse working an emergency treatment.

It might also be the hospital clarifying that the house supervisor should have intervened sooner, without coming right out and saying they were scolding the supervisor who hand been on that day.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I guess that's the idea, I just wonder if that will work out. Short of the military, I don't think there's much that will stop a cop on a power trip.

Not necessarily. If you are dealing with the front line nurse blocking you from the patient or the patient's blood access you might feel you can get past that person if you insist.

If you are dealing with the bureaucracy and there is now a distance between you and the patient front line, the situation is different.

 

[Babbylonian]

Not necessarily. If you are dealing with the front line nurse blocking you from the patient or the patient's blood access you might feel you can get past that person if you insist.

If you are dealing with the bureaucracy and there is now a distance between you and the patient front line, the situation is different.

Removing the argument from public view also ameliorates the face-saving issue that seems to escalate things for pathetic, insecure pansies with badges.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Salt Lake police Detective Jeff Payne has been fired from his part-time paramedic job.

That's as it should be, he proved patient's rights could be violated if he so chose. But admitting this on camera no doubt doomed his job.

SLC cop who threatened to ‘take good patients elsewhere’ before arresting Utah nurse gets fired from his paramedic job

 

[Ranb]

Payne was told by his own supervisor to arrest Wubble. It remains to be seen how high up the "rotten" in the department extends.