- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hospital nurse arrested after refusing illegal blood draw order
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:22 am to Fat and Happy
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:22 am to Fat and Happy
quote:
There is nothing illegal about it.
Our supreme court disagrees, I believe.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:23 am to Fat and Happy
quote:
That's normally done.
When a crash results in a death or serious injury, blood is always drawn.
There is nothing illegal about it.
People may not like it but it's how the process is done.
I'm pretty sure as of a SCOTUS case in 2016, that is incorrect.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:23 am to Fat and Happy
The patient was unconscious. He can't consent to the procedure. And there was no court order or warrant authorizing the hospital to give law enforcement a sample. There is a reason why this nurse wasn't even charged with a crime: she didn't commit one. If the police department thought they were entitled to blood, they would have charged her with a crime.
This post was edited on 9/1/17 at 8:24 am
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:23 am to NYNolaguy1
If her lawyer is worth a shite she'll get paid.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:24 am to Fat and Happy
quote:
There is nothing illegal about it.
People may not like it but it's how the process is done.
Why don't you give your legal opinion to the hospital's lawyers who prepared the hospital's policy? They probably don't have the thorough legal knowledge that you do.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:25 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
The patient was unconscious. He can't consent to the procedure. And there was no court order or warrant authorizing the hospital to give law enforcement a sample. There is a reason why this nurse wasn't even charged with a crime: she didn't commit one. If the police department thought they were entitled to blood, they would have charged her with a crime.
Being as the LEO knew it would have been an unlawful search/seizure, and he decided to arrest her anyway, does that open him up to a 1983 action in fed court?
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:26 am to Mo Jeaux
The article also states that the injured is a cop and they were quickly trying to release him of any wrongdoing.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:27 am to NYNolaguy1
Did Birchfield specifically address cases of crashes with injuries? I could see the court recognizing this as a legitimate exception to the Birchfield ruling or holding that there is no difference. Just a quick check of the Googles doesn't show either way. I would think as the availability of e-warrants becomes more widespread that courts will draw a harder line on the necessity of obtaining warrants prior to searches and seizures.
Our agency has an electronic document accountability system. When new court decisions come out or legislative changes are made to statutes, we have to e-sign stating we have read and are up to date on the changes. If this officer's agency has a similar system in place, he could be in deep kimshee. If not, the agency and not necessarily the officer may be on the hook (failure to train, etc).
Our agency has an electronic document accountability system. When new court decisions come out or legislative changes are made to statutes, we have to e-sign stating we have read and are up to date on the changes. If this officer's agency has a similar system in place, he could be in deep kimshee. If not, the agency and not necessarily the officer may be on the hook (failure to train, etc).
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:27 am to NolaAg04
quote:New Orleans and an Aggie. Figures.
NolaAg04
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:29 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I dont hate cops. I just wish their average IQ and pay was much higher so we dont have to read stories like this.
I took a CHL refresher and the teacher was a Harris County Sheriff. He did an hour on what to do when a police officer stops you and you produce your CHL. He started with the statement " Unfortunately every police department in the world has to recruit their officers from the human race. You never know what is going to happen when you are stopped."
He then proceeded to tell us a few stories about some of the stupidity that he experienced being stopped when he wasn't in uniform.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:30 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
If not, the agency and not necessarily the officer may be on the hook (failure to train, etc).
Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:31 am to NYNolaguy1
the patient was in an accident in which a person was killed.
is that probable cause?
is that probable cause?
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:33 am to Golfer
quote:
The article also states that the injured is a cop and they were quickly trying to release him of any wrongdoing.
quote:
Gray is a truck driver when he is not serving as a reserve police officer, according to the Idaho State Journal.
At about 2 p.m. on July 26, Gray was driving a semi north on State Road 89/91 near Sardine Canyon when a man fleeing from the Utah Highway Patrol crashed a pickup truck into him head-on, according to Logan police, who investigated the collision.
The patient was unconscious and not facing criminal charges(no warrant). You can't draw the blood on him, no matter how much the police try to force you to.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:35 am to DelU249
quote:
the patient was in an accident in which a person was killed.
:disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just married to one...
....but I would imagine you would have a hard time proving that the LEO had probable cause to believe the victim committed a crime.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:36 am to Fat and Happy
quote:
That's normally done.
So people normally get arrested when they don't comply with an illegal request from the authorities?
You're probably right, but that doesn't make it right.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:37 am to Golfer
quote:
Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse.
Well actually... Heien changed that. IIRC they ruled as long as its a reasonable misunderstanding of the law, it's allowed for LEO.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:38 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
Did Birchfield specifically address cases of crashes with injuries? I could see the court recognizing this as a legitimate exception to the Birchfield ruling or holding that there is no difference. Just a quick check of the Googles doesn't show either way. I would think as the availability of e-warrants becomes more widespread that courts will draw a harder line on the necessity of obtaining warrants prior to searches and seizures.
Our agency has an electronic document accountability system. When new court decisions come out or legislative changes are made to statutes, we have to e-sign stating we have read and are up to date on the changes. If this officer's agency has a similar system in place, he could be in deep kimshee. If not, the agency and not necessarily the officer may be on the hook (failure to train, etc).
Thats a better question for the lawyers on the board.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:38 am to NYNolaguy1
YouTube - much longer video of the incident
Includes conversations between officers and nurse after she is in handcuffs. It actually makes it worse for the officers.
Officer says about the hospital..."your policy interfering with my law"...that is just bad.
Includes conversations between officers and nurse after she is in handcuffs. It actually makes it worse for the officers.
Officer says about the hospital..."your policy interfering with my law"...that is just bad.
This post was edited on 9/1/17 at 8:42 am
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:40 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:how is that not reasonable suspicion you were driving intoxicated...which is a crime...if for example he was driving on the wrong side of the road.
probable cause to believe the victim committed a crime
Posted on 9/1/17 at 8:40 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
The victim in this case was a driver injured in a crash that was caused by a police chase. They wanted his blood sample to prepare a comparative negligence defense to try and get out of a lawsuit that they thought would be forthcoming. Congrats on being an authoritarian tool.
Spot on. Fricking disgusting actions by the cops.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News