JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Actually, the detective, himself, was a trained phlebotomist and was going to draw the blood himself. He wanted to have personal access to the patient. I am reading that they have detectives who have special training in performing legal blood draws. Allowing the police officer to draw blood from the patient in the hospital definitely could also pose serious liability issue to the hospital. In fact, had they allowed the officer to perform that blood test, in theory, the patient could also come back and sue the hospital and the nurse.

It was a very sticky situation for the hospital. Not just morally, but also legally and financially. That nurse would have possibly lost her job to by violating the hospital's policy.

That sounds wierd, but so does the antics the detective whipped up.
 
If you read a little deeper into the article, the person being treated in the hospital was deemed the victim and was hit by a person evading the Utah Highway Patrol. There was no suspicion that he committed any criminal offense and he was not arrested. According to the law, the police are allowed to draw blood from somebody who is arrested and suspected of committing a criminal offense. However, the man was viewed as the victim and was not arrested and therefore the hospital was actually protecting his civil rights against unauthorized legal actions of the police department. So, the nurse was stating what was law, that in order to draw blood from somebody who does not consent (such as being unconscious) they would require a warrant from a judge. This is the case when a law-abiding citizen (who is not a suspect or arrested) is being demanded to have their blood drawn by law enforcement for analysis.

It could go both ways, as the hospital had him doped up on all types of painkillers, which could also potentially be misused to incriminate the victim as being complicent in the crash. The whole incident was not so black and white. As far as HIPAA, they could have possibly violated HIPAA in many ways, by giving the name and all types of personal details to the officer, but HIPAA maybe gives provisions for Law Enforcement to be given PHI information.

Yes, some may view the officer as doing some type of moral duty, but, in addition to having no legal authority to demand a blood test, he also was not doing anything to protect the victim of the crash. The victim of the crash was a reserve police officer, himself, and he was hit in his truck by the driver who was be chased by the police. From what I am reading, had the driver been the suspect, he could have been arrested, even while unconscious and then had a subseqent blood test done for toxicology reports. However, that was not the situation.

In my opinion, this episode was the result of a police officer who got pissed off that somebody interfered with his authority. Even, if he was in the right (which he wasn't), I would still have to question him manhandling and arresting an ER nurse and threatening to arrest all the staff in the ER. Most ERs are overworked and hauling nurses in ER to jail, could mean bringing harm to the lives of other innocent people who are in desperate need of medical care.

Agreed. One other point is why they were so determined to get a blood sample. IMO they were hoping that the victim was driving under the influence to protect themselves. The accident happened during a high speed car chase, giving the police a certain amount of liability and I'm sure the right attorney could frame them as the cause if the truck driver elected to get a payday out of things. If his blood came back with any illegal substance (planted or otherwise) then they are off the hook.

Note that the officer was told to get a blood sample (from a victim) and arrest anybody that refused to provide it before the officer set foot in the hospital. Also note how the Policeman in charge bald face lied to the nurse when she was in the car. Somebody was mighty worried about something. I'm surprised we got the recording.
 
Asked wife and her response was:

"A: I don't work in the ER.
B: I follow protocol."

She wouldn't expand upon that much but following protocol would be what's in the interest of the hospital then the patient.

Let me quote part of the article:

"Payne — who says he wanted the blood sample to protect the patient, not punish him —"

Reminds me of "anything you say can be used against you..." not for your benefit.
 
Last Edited:
Asked wife and her response was:

"A: I don't work in the ER.
B: I follow protocol."

She wouldn't expand upon that much but following protocol would be what's in the interest of the hospital then the patient.

Let me quote part of the article:

"Payne — who says he wanted the blood sample to protect the patient, not punish him —"

Reminds me of "anything you say can be used against you..." not for your benefit.

Just watched the recorded portion on the news,
this nurse followed hospital protocol the whole time,
well I suppose her screams for help were optional
 
I isually adamantly defend LEOs, However, there's no defense for violating someone's rights.

If I read this correctly this wasn't the person fleeing the cops it was the guy killed when the suspect they were chasing got hit head on?

Were they trying to save face after causing an accident?
 
I isually adamantly defend LEOs, However, there's no defense for violating someone's rights.

If I read this correctly this wasn't the person fleeing the cops it was the guy killed when the suspect they were chasing got hit head on?

Were they trying to save face after causing an accident?

This person was driving the 18 wheeler behind the car that wrecked,
he was brought to the hospital as a burn victim and was unconscious
at the time this incident took place. He was not a suspect in the wreck
just an injured party
 
my wife, a labor and delivery nurse said "the hospital has protocals. the guy could not give consent, they didnt have a warrant, i like being a nurse and i would have done the same thing to NOT lose my license"
 
my wife, a labor and delivery nurse said "the hospital has protocals. the guy could not give consent, they didnt have a warrant, i like being a nurse and i would have done the same thing to NOT lose my license"
Ha! Both our wives see more vagina than college douchebags. Guess that entitles us to that brotherhood of husbands of L&D nurses.
 
No she does not need it. Will not matter. The city or county will pay just to make it go away. They have no choice at this point. If they let this go some bottom feeders will sign her on and take the tax payers for even more. This is an easy one. They do not want this in front of a jury. If it was me I would tell them if LEO can be fired and his pension taken? Great, I will take nothing. Since I am sure that can't happen the only way things change is if there is yet another pay out. Sad that this is how things work now.
I can't see how losing his pension is right. That guy had a bad day maybe. If this is a string of many many issues, then sure garnish a % of it. But at his age, taking his pension is a bad idea.
 
I isually adamantly defend LEOs, However, there's no defense for violating someone's rights.

If I read this correctly this wasn't the person fleeing the cops it was the guy killed when the suspect they were chasing got hit head on?

Were they trying to save face after causing an accident?

It looks like the guy who the cops were chasing moved in front of the 18 wheeler & wrecked his car & he died at the scene, the person in the hospital is the driver of the 18 wheeler, he was taken in for burns. The police wanted a sample of his blood, hoping it was dirty, thereby mitigating their damages, as they caused this accident by chasing the dead guy, kinda
 
It looks like the guy who the cops were chasing moved in front of the 18 wheeler & wrecked his car & he died at the scene, the person in the hospital is the driver of the 18 wheeler, he was taken in for burns. The police wanted a sample of his blood, hoping it was dirty, thereby mitigating their damages, as they caused this accident by chasing the dead guy, kinda

Yeh, in today's legal (media) system.

If we could change that to he (the bad guy) caused everything he did by his actions, wouldn't that be something?

Doesn't make that detectives action rite by any means...
 
I can't see how losing his pension is right. That guy had a bad day maybe. If this is a string of many many issues, then sure garnish a % of it. But at his age, taking his pension is a bad idea.

If I have a bad day my house can be taken from me by somebody suing, my accounts can be drained and my life can be ruined

How the hell is he more special than I am?

One bad decision or hell even a false allegation can cost us thousands...

Equality... justice should be blind right and not care who you are or what you are backed by..
 
If I have a bad day my house can be taken from me by somebody suing, my accounts can be drained and my life can be ruined

How the hell is he more special than I am?

One bad decision or hell even a false allegation can cost us thousands...

Equality... justice should be blind right and not care who you are or what you are backed by..
I see your points and they are actually very true. Thanks for opening my mind. I think the only difference is, cops deal with bad nasty people all day. They write tickets to folks like us. But they put most of there energy into losers. Especially detectives. They are human. Not a excuse. I can see myself thinking this lady is a hurdle. I need to run this blood. But the world is full of stupid rules. Run the blood in my world.
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Wes Knodel Gun & Knife Show - Albany
Albany, OR
Lakeview Spring Gun Show
Lakeview, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR
Falcon Gun Show - Classic Gun & Knife Show
Stanwood, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top