Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

by Original Quill Sat Sep 02, 2017 12:45 am

First topic message reminder :

ABC News wrote:US nurse arrested for refusing to draw blood from unconscious patient

September 2 201y

A US nurse says she was scared to death and trying to find anything to hold on to when a police officer dragged her from a Utah hospital and handcuffed her for refusing to allow blood to be drawn from an unconscious patient.

Alex Wubbels said in an interview on Friday (Saturday NZ time) that the officer - later identified as Salt Lake City police detective Jeff Payne - lost his temper on July 26 and "attacked me and assaulted me and dragged me out of my emergency department".

She said she was screaming and "just trying to hold on to anything that was keeping me safe because no one else was keeping me safe".

Wubbels said that before her arrest, Payne was agitated and angry as she explained that hospital policy prevented her from drawing the patient's blood without a warrant, the patient being under arrest or with their consent.

The hospital said it was proud of the way their nurse handled the confrontation with the officer, who has been slammed by fellow nurses as violent.

The University of Utah Health hospital said in a statement on Friday that Wubbels followed procedures and protocols in the incident.

National Nurses United called it a disgraceful and outrageous act of violence.

The union also cited a US Supreme Court ruling in 2016, which affirms that a blood sample cannot be taken without patient consent or a warrant.

After the incident, Wubbels accepted apologies from the Salt Lake City mayor and police chief, saying she felt they were sincere.

She also said she was looking forward to working with them to promote civil dialogue and education.

Utah Governor Gary Herbert also weighed in on Friday, saying in a tweet that the footage was disturbing and he trusted police would rectify the situation.

Police Chief Mike Brown said he was alarmed and sad the incident caused a rift between police and nurses.

He said the department had taken steps to ensure it wouldn't happen again. Payne had been removed from blood-draw duties but remained in his role as a detective in the investigations unit during an internal investigation.

Wubbels said the outpouring of support she had received since releasing dramatic video of the exchange was beyond what she could have imagined.

So, an appropriate response would be for the nurses at the University of Utah Hospital to unilaterally refuse to treat any police officer brought in on an emergency basis. You never know when you are going to be attacked by them.

Tell 'em to go to Provo for help.

by Original Quill Mon Sep 04, 2017 8:32 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:A neighboring police department sent Payne, a trained police phlebotomist, to collect blood from the patient and check for illicit substances, as the Tribune reported. The goal was reportedly to protect the trucker, who was not suspected of a crime. His lieutenant ordered him to arrest Wubbels if she refused to let him draw a sample, according to the Tribune...'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/09/01/this-is-crazy-sobs-utah-hospital-nurse-as-cop-roughs-her-up-arrests-her-for-doing-her-job/

Seems he was sent to get a sample, wasn't given all the facts about incident or the person he was sent to take sample from... but he had been ordered to get sample or arrest anyone who tried to prevent him carrying out taking sample...!

But he knew he didn't have a judicial warrant as required by the 5th-Amendment. He knew he would be found in judicial contempt if he was caught requesting...meaning he knew he was wrong! That's something that is learned in the first day of police academy (I know, I taught criminal procedure at the police academy, University of Arizona).

So he never intended to be caught. This was always between the nurse and Officer Payne. He just was frustrated, and wanted to beat up a female. Mormons do that.

A superior officer would never give such an order that is unconstitutional...he would be fired if he did. And Officer Payne will likely be fired because of his behavior. Anyone who hasn't learned criminal procedure by the time he's let loose on the public, has already failed the grade.

by Tommy Monk Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:04 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:A neighboring police department sent Payne, a trained police phlebotomist, to collect blood from the patient and check for illicit substances, as the Tribune reported. The goal was reportedly to protect the trucker, who was not suspected of a crime. His lieutenant ordered him to arrest Wubbels if she refused to let him draw a sample, according to the Tribune...'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/09/01/this-is-crazy-sobs-utah-hospital-nurse-as-cop-roughs-her-up-arrests-her-for-doing-her-job/

Seems he was sent to get a sample, wasn't given all the facts about incident or the person he was sent to take sample from... but he had been ordered to get sample or arrest anyone who tried to prevent him carrying out taking sample...!

But he knew he didn't have a judicial warrant as required by the 5th-Amendment. He knew he would be found in judicial contempt if he was caught requesting...meaning he knew he was wrong! That's something that is learned in the first day of police academy (I know, I taught criminal procedure at the police academy, University of Arizona).

So he never intended to be caught. This was always between the nurse and Officer Payne. He just was frustrated, and wanted to beat up a female. Mormons do that.

A superior officer would never give such an order that is unconstitutional...he would be fired if he did. And Officer Payne will likely be fired because of his behavior. Anyone who hasn't learned criminal procedure by the time he's let loose on the public, has already failed the grade.

From what ive read... he only needed to believe that man was a suspect to justify taking blood sample... he was under the belief that man was a suspect... and was instructed by senior officer to take blood sample... which was why he was sent there and what he was sent there to do...

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:53 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

But he knew he didn't have a judicial warrant as required by the 5th-Amendment. He knew he would be found in judicial contempt if he was caught requesting...meaning he knew he was wrong! That's something that is learned in the first day of police academy (I know, I taught criminal procedure at the police academy, University of Arizona).

So he never intended to be caught. This was always between the nurse and Officer Payne. He just was frustrated, and wanted to beat up a female. Mormons do that.

A superior officer would never give such an order that is unconstitutional...he would be fired if he did. And Officer Payne will likely be fired because of his behavior. Anyone who hasn't learned criminal procedure by the time he's let loose on the public, has already failed the grade.

From what ive read... he only needed to believe that man was a suspect to justify taking blood sample... he was under the belief that man was a suspect... and was instructed by senior officer to take blood sample... which was why he was sent there and what he was sent there to do...

Nope. Any cop needs 'probable cause' and a warrant to gather evidence in one's possession. United States Constitution, 4th Amendment. And, a witness may not be compelled to testify against himself. United States Constitution, 5th Amendment. A superior could not order an officer to do something unconstitutional, as that would be illegal.

So Payne, or someone on his behalf, would have had to (1) appear before a judge, and (2) obtain a written document called a warrant. Ofc. Payne knew that had not happened. Let's understand it fully:

FindLaw wrote:"Probable cause" generally refers to the requirement in criminal law that police have adequate reason to arrest someone, conduct a search, or seize property relating to an alleged crime.

The probable cause requirement comes from the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be searched."

As seen in those words, in order for a court to issue a warrant -- for someone's arrest, or to search or seize property -- there must be "probable cause."

Police must also have probable cause to arrest without a warrant, and in many cases to search or seize property without a warrant.

Prosecutors must also have probable cause to charge a defendant with a crime.

Warrants and Probable Cause

Typically, to obtain a warrant, an officer will sign an affidavit stating the facts as to why probable cause exists to arrest someone, conduct a search or seize property. Judges issue warrants if they agree that probable cause exists.

There are many instances where warrants are not required to arrest or search, such as arrests for felonies witnessed in public by an officer. Here is more information on when warrants are not required.

If a warrantless arrest occurs, probable cause must still be shown after the fact, and will be required in order to prosecute a defendant.

Probable Cause for Arrest

Probable cause for arrest exists when facts and circumstances within the police officer's knowledge would lead a reasonable person to believe that the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. Probable cause must come from specific facts and circumstances, rather than simply from the officer's hunch or suspicion.

"Detentions" short of arrest do not require probable cause. Such temporary detentions require only "reasonable suspicion." This includes car stops, pedestrian stops and detention of occupants while officers execute a search warrant. "Reasonable suspicion" means specific facts which would lead a reasonable person to believe criminal activity was at hand and further investigation was required.

Detentions can ripen into arrests, and the point where that happens is not always clear. Often, police state that they are arresting a person, place him/her in physical restraints, or take other action crossing the line into arrest. These police actions may trigger the constitutional requirement of probable cause.

Someone arrested or charged without probable cause may seek redress through a civil lawsuit for false arrest or malicious prosecution.

Probable Cause to Search

Probable cause to search exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer provide the basis for a reasonable person to believe that a crime was committed at the place to be searched, or that evidence of a crime exists at the location.

Search warrants must specify the place to be searched, as well as items to be seized.

There are many instances where a search warrant is not required. Common situations in which police are allowed to search without a warrant include:

* when they have consent from the person in charge of the premises (although who
that person is can be a tricky legal question);
* when conducting certain searches connected to a lawful arrest; and
* in emergency situations which threaten public safety or the loss of evidence.

Police also do not need a warrant to search or seize contraband "in plain site" when the officer has a right to be present.

Probable Cause to Seize Property

Probable cause to seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer would lead a reasonable person to believe that the item is contraband, is stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

When a search warrant is in play, police generally must search only for the items described in the warrant. However, any contraband or evidence of other crimes they come across may, for the most part, be seized as well.

Should evidence prove to have resulted from an illegal search, it becomes subject to the "exclusionary rule" and cannot be used against the defendant in court. After hearing arguments from the prosecuting and defense attorneys, the judge decides whether evidence should be excluded.

Conclusion

Probable cause refers to the amount and quality of information required to arrest someone, to search or seize private property in many cases, or to charge someone with a crime. Probable cause to arrest, search, or seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the police officer would lead a reasonable person to believe:

* that the person to be arrested has committed a crime;
* that the place to be searched was the scene of a crime;
* that the place to be searched contains evidence of a crime; and/or
* that property to be seized is contraband, stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

A blood sample is a part of a person's body, and therefore is private property and cannot be seized under the 4th Amendment. In addition, blood comes from one's own person, so it constitutes self-incrimination and cannot be seized under the 5th Amendment. Any violation is unconstitutional under the highest law of the land.

Any police officer knows that from the first day of class. Ofc. Payne was trying to do something that he knew was illegal, and his frustration led him to beat up a nurse.

What can I say? He's now a criminal.

by 'Wolfie Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:55 am

Nurse arrested for not drawing blood - Page 2 479860004

Tommy and Ragamuffin really need to broaden their horizons -- and learn how other countries think and work...

If they stopped apparently reading the Daily Flail so often, could be a good start..

by Raggamuffin Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:19 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Tommy and Ragamuffin really need to broaden their horizons -- and learn how other countries think and work...

If they stopped apparently reading the Daily Flail so often, could be a good start..

If you actually learnt to read anything, you'd know that I haven't said he was right to arrest her, I merely said that she wasn't beaten, which she wasn't.

by Original Quill Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:27 pm

Both Officer Payne and his superior have been relieved of duty...with pay. WTF...can I get a job where I break the law, and they give me a paid vacation?

The Salt Lake Tribune wrote:SLC mayor, police chief apologize for officer who arrested nurse; criminal investigation to follow

Police department places two officers on leave as internal investigation continues.

Hours after Salt Lake City’s mayor and police chief apologized for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse who refused to take blood from an unconscious patient, Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill announced Friday he wanted a criminal investigation into the episode.

“On the face of the evidence, there is concern that is raised about this officer’s conduct,” Gill said in a Friday interview. “But the whole point of an investigation is to gather the information about this situation.”

Gill said he discussed the situation with Mayor Jackie Biskupski and Chief Mike Brown on Friday morning, and they agreed it would be appropriate to conduct an investigation in the name of ”transparency and institutional accountability.”

City officials said late Friday the Unified Police Department would conduct the criminal probe. Meanwhile, an internal affairs investigation by Salt Lake City police into the officer, Detective Jeff Payne, also is ongoing. Payne was placed on administrative leave Friday afternoon, as was a second unnamed officer connected to the confrontation.

Earlier in the day, Brown and Biskupski called the University Hospital nurse, Alex Wubbels, to apologize.

They then held a news conference, saying they were alarmed by what they saw on police body camera footage of the arrest, which took place July 26, and said changes to police blood draw policies and officer training had been made.

The mayor said Thursday was the first time she had seen the officer body camera footage documenting the encounter between Payne and Wubbels. The chief said it was the first time he had seen the video in full. The footage became public Thursday during a news conference held by Wubbels’ attorney, Karra Porter, who said no claim or lawsuit has been filed.

“I am sad at the rift this has caused between law enforcement and the nurses we work so closely with,” Brown said. ”I want to be clear, we take this very seriously.”

“What I saw is completely unacceptable to the values of my administration and of the values of the Salt Lake City Police Department,” added Biskupski. “I extend a personal apology to Ms. Wubbels for what she has been through for simply doing her job.”

City offices, including the police department, were bombarded with social media backlash and phone calls as the video skipped around the country Thursday and Friday. And several city and state officials weighed in on Payne’s conduct, including Gov. Gary Herbert, who tweeted Friday morning that Wubbels’ arrest was ”disturbing” and that the city’s police should ”rectify the situation.”

Payne arrived at the hospital July 26, seeking a blood sample from a burned and unconscious patient, 43-year-old William Gray, who had been involved in a fiery collision the same day in northern Utah. Gray was driving a semi north on U.S. 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 crash. That man, Marcos Torres, 26, died at the scene.

Logan police Capt. Tyson Budge said an investigator on the crash called Salt Lake City police and requested the department get a blood draw on Gray. Budge said such a request is routine, especially involving serious injury or fatal accidents, despite the fact that Gray was not a suspect in the crash. ”It’s being thorough, and documenting everything in a serious crash,” Budge said.

The video footage shows Wubbels explaining that blood cannot be taken from an unconscious patient unless the patient is under arrest, unless there is a warrant allowing the draw or unless the patient consents. Payne acknowledges in the footage that none of those requirements is in place, but he insists that he has the authority to obtain the draw, according to the footage.

After Wubbels consults with several hospital officials about the policy, Payne tells her she is under arrest and grabs her, pulling her arms back and handcuffing her, then putting her in a patrol car. Wubbels screams, ”Stop! Stop! I did nothing wrong!”

In Payne’s report of the episode, he writes that Lt. James Tracy had ordered him to over the phone to arrest Wubbels if she refused to allow him to get a blood sample.

But after Tracy arrived, he learned that the hospital automatically draws and tests blood, and that accident investigators often get a warrant to access the hospital record of the blood draw, Tracy wrote in his own report.

Tracy wrote that it was ultimately determined “that we would release the nurse and write our reports and detectives could decide if charges were appropriate or not for this case.” Police spokeswoman Christina Judd declined to say if the second officer put on leave was Tracy.

Another officer, Denton Harper, who was dispatched to the hospital to assist Payne, wrote in his report that he asked Payne “why he didn’t look into drafting a search warrant for the patient’s blood. Payne told me Logan Police Department said they didn’t have enough probable cause to do so.”

Gill said he reached out to the police chief and the mayor late Friday morning expressing his concern and requesting a criminal investigation into the episode. The district attorney said he asked Brown to find an outside agency to look into the case, and by the end of the day, Unified had agreed to look into it.

Gill said once the investigation is handed over to his office, prosecutors can decide if any laws were broken and if there is “somebody who should be held accountable.” He added that he was grateful that the mayor and chief were “committed to transparency” and were in support of further investigation.

The district attorney wouldn’t specify whether the investigation will be centered on the officer’s actions or something else, saying it would be unfair to make that call without having all the evidence in front of him.

Judd said the agency had initiated an internal affairs investigation within hours of the July 26 encounter. Payne was initially taken off the blood-draw team, and allowed to stay on desk duty as a detective. But, by Friday, as a criminal investigation got underway, he was placed on administrative leave.

The internal affairs investigators would gather the footage, and conduct interviews with all parties involved, then present the information and a recommendation to Chief Brown. Such a probe could result in Payne’s firing.

Payne could not be reached for comment Friday.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski conclude a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) The statement to be given by Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown is accidentally left open prior to his press conference alongside Mayor Jackie Biskupski at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski conclude a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown and Mayor Jackie Biskupski hold a press conference at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) The statement to be given by Salt Lake City's Police Chief Mike Brown is accidentally left open prior to his press conference alongside Mayor Jackie Biskupski at the City and County building on Friday, Sept. 1, 2017, to apologize for an officer handcuffing a hospital nurse for refusing a blood draw from an unconscious patient.

Judd said that soon after the blood-draw episode, the assistant chief quickly apologized to hospital administration for the encounter and arrest. The department examined its policy for blood draws, which was tweaked, and committed to additional training for its officers who conduct draws. The department has continued to meet with university medical officials in recent weeks, she said, to ensure adequate procedures are in place so ”it doesn’t happen again.”

The updated policy, provided by the department, states that a blood draw requires consent by the subject, or a search warrant — noting that ”implied consent” by the subject of the draw is no longer allowed. The updated policy also notes that ”blood draws are subject to established search and seizure laws.”

Payne is one of about 10 officers who are certified to take blood from people who have been involved in serious crashes or other accidents, or are suspected of driving under the influence, Judd said. They carry their own blood-draw kits, she said, and are often called upon by other police departments, such as Logan, to take blood at Salt Lake City hospitals.

Judd said there was some confusion about the video, with many people assuming “that the officer was demanding that the nurse draw the blood.” But Judd said Payne was in fact ”demanding to find out where Gray was” being treated in the burn unit of the hospital, so Payne could draw the blood himself. (Gray remained in serious condition at the hospital this week, officials there said.)

Several Salt Lake City Council members and state officials, including Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, who heads the Senate’s judiciary committee, weighed in on the encounter Friday, with Weiler saying he would “stand against any form of unnecessary police brutality or inappropriate behavior.”

Councilman Derek Kitchen posted on Facebook that the bodycam footage “is one of the most disturbing things I’ve seen in awhile.“

Many others around the country apparently agreed.

The video caused an uproar on social media, and multiple national and international news outlets picked up the story Friday. Thousands of people angrily commented on the police department’s Facebook page, many demanding Payne’s firing or suspension. Other Utah police agencies were also being mistakenly bombarded by angry social media commenters, including the Unified Police Department and South Salt Lake police.

A change.org petition called ”Justice for Alex Wubbels” had about 85,000 supporters by Friday evening, while various YouTube videos documenting the encounter had been viewed millions of times. And the local organization Utah Against Police Brutality announced it was holding a protest rally at 6 p.m. Saturday at the Salt Lake City Public Safety Building.

National nursing associations weighed in, too.

“It is outrageous and unacceptable that a nurse should be treated in this way for following her professional duty to advocate on behalf of the patient as well as following the policies of her employer and the law,” American Nurses Association President Pam Cipriano said in a statement.

Jean Ross, co-president of National Nurses United, the largest union and professional association of registered nurses, said there was ”no excuse” for Payne’s actions, which she added would send a ”chilling message about the safety of nurses and the rights of patients.”

Hospital administrators sent an open letter to faculty and staff Friday morning. It said when law enforcement officers request blood samples, they should immediately be directed to a supervisor. It said that since the incident, hospital staff has worked with Salt Lake City police to ”create a clear policy” that allows for better communication and protects nurses and patients.

“During a stressful situation Nurse Wubbels chose to focus first and foremost on the care and well-being of her patient,” the letter said. ”She followed hospital procedures and protocols in this matter and was acting in her patient’s best interest.”

Wubbels, in a statement, said she accepted the apologies of the chief and mayor.

“The outpouring of support has been beyond what I could have imagined,” she said. “Since the incident, the city has taken this matter seriously, and I believe that positive change will occur.”

Tribune reporters Jessica Miller, Tiffany Frandsen, Pamela Manson and Mariah Noble contributed to this story.

by Original Quill Sat Sep 09, 2017 5:05 pm

Police: Officer arrested nurse after being told to let it go

LINDSAY WHITEHURST, Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A Utah police officer whose rough arrest of a hospital nurse has drawn condemnation put the woman in handcuffs even after investigators told him not to worry about getting a blood sample he was seeking from a patient, the chief whose department asked for it said Friday.

Officers initially wanted the sample as a routine part of a car crash investigation, said Logan Police Chief Gary Jensen. But after Salt Lake City Police detective Jeff Payne was told he'd need a warrant or formal consent to get it, colleagues told him that they would pursue another strategy.

"He simply said, 'Don't worry about it. We'll go another way,'" Jensen said.

Payne nevertheless insisted. When nurse Alex Wubbels held her ground based on the University of Utah hospital's policy, Payne dragged her screaming from the hospital in handcuffs. Salt Lake City police apologized and put Payne on paid leave after dramatic video of the July 26 arrest surfaced.

Police spokeswoman Christina Judd said an internal review will look at the directions Payne received and how he responded.

Prosecutors also opened a criminal investigation that widened Thursday when the district attorney asked the FBI to look into possible civil rights violations.
Payne's lawyer, Greg Skordas, declined to comment Friday.

Payne was supported by his supervisor, Lt. James Tracy, who is shown on the body-camera video continuing to insist that police have the right to get the blood after Wubbels was handcuffed in a police car.

Tracy's lawyer told the Deseret News that he's been the target of multiple online threats and had to shut down his social media pages since the video was released. Attorney Ed Brass said Tracy has served Salt Lake City for nearly 30 years, and judgment should be withheld until a full investigation is complete. Tracy has also been placed on paid leave.

The patient, William Gray of Rigby, Idaho, had been driving a tractor-trailer in northern Utah when he was hit head-on by a man fleeing from Utah Highway Patrol troopers in a pickup truck.

The troopers had tried to stop the pickup for reckless driving but the man sped away, the highway patrol said in a statement. The pickup driver was killed when the two vehicles collided. The semi exploded and caught fire.

Gray was flown 75 miles (120 kilometers) south to the University of Utah hospital's burn unit. Police from Logan, near the scene of the crash, were called in to investigate.

Though Gray wasn't suspected of wrongdoing, officers routinely test everyone involved in serious accidents to make sure they've investigated every aspect of the crash, Jensen said.

Logan police asked for help from Salt Lake City police because the hospital was so far away, and Payne was sent there because he belonged to a unit trained to perform blood draws.

Police body camera video shows Payne telling his supervisor he's discussed the situation with Logan police and that they're not angry about not getting the blood immediately.

by Original Quill Sat Sep 09, 2017 5:08 pm

After Utah nurse's violent arrest, local prosecutors ask FBI to help investigate police

San Francisco Chronicle

Prosecutors in Salt Lake County, Utah, have asked the FBI to join a criminal probe into the violent arrest of a local nurse who was manhandled by a detective and shoved screaming into a squad car as she tried to protect the legal rights of a patient.

In a letter made public Thursday, District Attorney Sim Gill called on FBI agents to investigate whether the arresting officer or anyone else in the chain of command violated nurse Alex Wubbels' civil rights or broke other laws during the July 26 incident.

Police body camera footage released last week showed Detective Jeff Payne of the Salt Lake City Police Department erupting at Wubbels at the University of Utah Hospital after she refused to let him to draw blood from an unconscious patient, in accordance with hospital policy and federal law. Payne could be seen grabbing Wubbels by the arms and pushing her out of the building as she screamed "help me" and "your're assaulting me."

The altercation drew national attention and prompted the hospital to bar police from direct contact with nurses. The Salt Lake City mayor and other officials condemned the arrest, saying Wubbels had done nothing wrong.

Multiple investigations are already underway, and Payne and another officer have been placed on administrative leave.

Gill's office is conducting its own criminal probe but needs the FBI's help to look into criminal civil rights violations, which fall under federal law.

by 'Wolfie Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:00 pm

Typical police arrogance...

Believing that they themselves are above the law...

Police administrations and unions/"associations" are often seen jumping to the defence of even the most corrupt, bullying and criminal (even if only minorities..) wrongdoers among their number..

And then exacerbate their stuffups by claiming that police are a special, uniquely stessed and god-like brand of superbeing, doing a job that most normal people couldn't do (yeh, right !!! What about ambo's, firies, nurses and doctors, military, rescue personnel..).

Those police unions/reps/bosses often do themselves no favours, when seen to be protecting the bad apples, attacking their victims through the media, playing on others sympathies or fears, or behaving like they never do anything wrong. Suspect

by Tommy Monk Sat Sep 09, 2017 7:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

From what ive read... he only needed to believe that man was a suspect to justify taking blood sample... he was under the belief that man was a suspect... and was instructed by senior officer to take blood sample... which was why he was sent there and what he was sent there to do...

Nope. Any cop needs 'probable cause' and a warrant to gather evidence in one's possession. United States Constitution, 4th Amendment. And, a witness may not be compelled to testify against himself. United States Constitution, 5th Amendment. A superior could not order an officer to do something unconstitutional, as that would be illegal.

So Payne, or someone on his behalf, would have had to (1) appear before a judge, and (2) obtain a written document called a warrant. Ofc. Payne knew that had not happened. Let's understand it fully:

FindLaw wrote:"Probable cause" generally refers to the requirement in criminal law that police have adequate reason to arrest someone, conduct a search, or seize property relating to an alleged crime.

The probable cause requirement comes from the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be searched."

As seen in those words, in order for a court to issue a warrant -- for someone's arrest, or to search or seize property -- there must be "probable cause."

Police must also have probable cause to arrest without a warrant, and in many cases to search or seize property without a warrant.

Prosecutors must also have probable cause to charge a defendant with a crime.

Warrants and Probable Cause

Typically, to obtain a warrant, an officer will sign an affidavit stating the facts as to why probable cause exists to arrest someone, conduct a search or seize property. Judges issue warrants if they agree that probable cause exists.

There are many instances where warrants are not required to arrest or search, such as arrests for felonies witnessed in public by an officer. Here is more information on when warrants are not required.

If a warrantless arrest occurs, probable cause must still be shown after the fact, and will be required in order to prosecute a defendant.

Probable Cause for Arrest

Probable cause for arrest exists when facts and circumstances within the police officer's knowledge would lead a reasonable person to believe that the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. Probable cause must come from specific facts and circumstances, rather than simply from the officer's hunch or suspicion.

"Detentions" short of arrest do not require probable cause. Such temporary detentions require only "reasonable suspicion." This includes car stops, pedestrian stops and detention of occupants while officers execute a search warrant. "Reasonable suspicion" means specific facts which would lead a reasonable person to believe criminal activity was at hand and further investigation was required.

Detentions can ripen into arrests, and the point where that happens is not always clear. Often, police state that they are arresting a person, place him/her in physical restraints, or take other action crossing the line into arrest. These police actions may trigger the constitutional requirement of probable cause.

Someone arrested or charged without probable cause may seek redress through a civil lawsuit for false arrest or malicious prosecution.

Probable Cause to Search

Probable cause to search exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer provide the basis for a reasonable person to believe that a crime was committed at the place to be searched, or that evidence of a crime exists at the location.

Search warrants must specify the place to be searched, as well as items to be seized.

There are many instances where a search warrant is not required. Common situations in which police are allowed to search without a warrant include:

* when they have consent from the person in charge of the premises (although who
that person is can be a tricky legal question);
* when conducting certain searches connected to a lawful arrest; and
* in emergency situations which threaten public safety or the loss of evidence.

Police also do not need a warrant to search or seize contraband "in plain site" when the officer has a right to be present.

Probable Cause to Seize Property

Probable cause to seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the officer would lead a reasonable person to believe that the item is contraband, is stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

When a search warrant is in play, police generally must search only for the items described in the warrant. However, any contraband or evidence of other crimes they come across may, for the most part, be seized as well.

Should evidence prove to have resulted from an illegal search, it becomes subject to the "exclusionary rule" and cannot be used against the defendant in court. After hearing arguments from the prosecuting and defense attorneys, the judge decides whether evidence should be excluded.

Conclusion

Probable cause refers to the amount and quality of information required to arrest someone, to search or seize private property in many cases, or to charge someone with a crime. Probable cause to arrest, search, or seize property exists when facts and circumstances known to the police officer would lead a reasonable person to believe:

* that the person to be arrested has committed a crime;
* that the place to be searched was the scene of a crime;
* that the place to be searched contains evidence of a crime; and/or
* that property to be seized is contraband, stolen, or constitutes evidence of a crime.

A blood sample is a part of a person's body, and therefore is private property and cannot be seized under the 4th Amendment. In addition, blood comes from one's own person, so it constitutes self-incrimination and cannot be seized under the 5th Amendment. Any violation is unconstitutional under the highest law of the land.

Any police officer knows that from the first day of class. Ofc. Payne was trying to do something that he knew was illegal, and his frustration led him to beat up a nurse.

What can I say? He's now a criminal.

Listen... the officer didn't just decide himself that he would turn up there and take sample... he was SENT THERE to do it... so must have been under the belief that he was authorised to do so, and that the legal authority to do so had been obtained...!

Otherwise... why had he been sent there to carry out this order to take blood sample at all...?

by Victorismyhero Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:07 pm

Tommy...the blokes NOT a robot...he should know the rules, HE has to have authorisation, and NOT merely verbal.

he HAS to have that warrant, otherwise HE is breaking the law

bear in mind that america has slightly different rules than here for a start, so obtaining that samaple without a warrant is ILLEGAL. Indeed it could be assault.

IOf a cop wants to enrtr your property he has to have a warrant doesnt he....and he has to SHOW you that warrant, or absent you , ANYONE who demands to see it (even a neighbour can ask to see it ....AND PREVENT access if he hasnt got one.)

this is one area where simply being a cop doesnt wash, nor does merely "believing" one has the authority....

and HE should know the rules.....those who apply the law should (must) KNOW the law.

by Ben Reilly Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:04 am

I have a friend and next-door neighbor, actually, who's a former cop, and the way she tells it, they're asked the impossible -- to learn all the laws pertinent to their job (which is a lot) in a matter of months.

I can easily see how this officer may not have understood that he wasn't allowed to seize the blood sample, especially if he thought it was going to exonerate the man of a crime.

The nurse, of course, is in the right though.

by Original Quill Sun Sep 10, 2017 4:06 am

Ben Reilly wrote:I have a friend and next-door neighbor, actually, who's a former cop, and the way she tells it, they're asked the impossible -- to learn all the laws pertinent to their job (which is a lot) in a matter of months.

I can easily see how this officer may not have understood that he wasn't allowed to seize the blood sample, especially if he thought it was going to exonerate the man of a crime.

The nurse, of course, is in the right though.

I'll add that Salt Lake City police detective Jeff Payne, the officer involved, has attained the rank of detective. That's a couple of steps above the rank of patrolman, and he should have the ability to teach teach recruits, so far from being ill-trained.

Detective Payne was not asked the impossible. YOU NEED AN WARRANT! What is so difficult about that? There are circumstances by which a warrant may be disposes of, exigent circumstances such as hot pursuit or making an arrest. But none of those circumstances were present in this case...the guy was out cold. Moreover, the hospital and the SLC Police had entered into an written contract as to how to handle just such a situation.

This was a situation in which a police officer lost it, abandoned all of his training, and showed he is not to be trusted with the enormous responsibility of a peace officer. It's as if a fireman were seen to run from a fire, and was last seen hightailing it down Main Street screaming Mama, Mama.... I can't really think of another example. Nurse arrested for not drawing blood - Page 2 3986371719

Nurse arrested for not drawing blood - Page 2 3986371719

by Cass Sun Sep 10, 2017 4:38 am

He was also a EMT, from which job he has been fired, so he was well aware of the rules pertaining to this.

She did a great job. Him? Not so much. Asshat.

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:34 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I have a friend and next-door neighbor, actually, who's a former cop, and the way she tells it, they're asked the impossible -- to learn all the laws pertinent to their job (which is a lot) in a matter of months.

I can easily see how this officer may not have understood that he wasn't allowed to seize the blood sample, especially if he thought it was going to exonerate the man of a crime.

The nurse, of course, is in the right though.

He was sent there to take sample from A FELLOW COP, for the purpose of exonerating him from any liability of criminal responsibility in the crash... and had this fellow cop been in a position to consent then no doubt that he would have been more than happy to give sample... and we know that cops will stick together and try to look after each other 100% when it is for the right reasons...

And it may well have been in the best interests of this seriously injured cop that a sample was provided for the purpose of eliminating any questions of doubt over him being in a fit state to drive, as no doubt he will be requiring full financial support for medical costs and other insurance cover for vehicle and for his injuries etc, as well as the fact he is likely to be off work for some considerable time (maybe never working again) and in need of the full range of other possible levels of (financial/other) support available from his police force employers etc... and all this support needed by the cop crash victim without any future legal wrangling/arguments that may now be caused by a simple blood sample now not being available, because the nurse wouldn't allow it...

But of course the nurse was 'right'...!!!

by Andy Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:49 pm

Banana boy speaks his utter crap as usual. She was right. He was wrong.
She was exonerated. He got fired.
Don't write to us about him being in the right.
Tell his bosses.

by Cass Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:05 pm

Tommy. You don't get it do you. No matter what ifs you talk about, it was against the law what he was trying to do. End of story.

He was wrong and the nurse was right and did her job correctly. There is nothing more that you can say that will change this situation.

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:12 pm

I'm sure the seriously injured cop will be thanking the nurse for being 'right'... if he now faces a long and difficult road ahead in getting all the insurance payouts and other support he/family would normally have got... because no blood sample was allowed to be taken to exonerate him of any doubt...!

She's done him a real favour there...!!!

by Cass Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:19 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I'm sure the seriously injured cop will be thanking the nurse for being 'right'... if he now faces a long and difficult road ahead in getting all the insurance payouts and other support he/family would normally have got... because no blood sample was allowed to be taken to exonerate him of any doubt...!

She's done him a real favour there...!!!

That doesn't change a thing about this whole case. The nurse followed the law.

by Victorismyhero Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:42 pm

Tommy??? what part of "the law is the law" and applies where relevant to all equally dont you get

make an exception here and next time someones rights are abrogated.
then some other right is abrogated and the excuse is well it was ok in this instance....and thus it proceeds. untill a cop can shoot you dead for "looking at him funny"

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:32 pm

I understand the principle of law entirely...

I am merely exploring the facts and possibilities around this case, and how they fit within the law...

Laws are one thing... made up rules that fit for general use/guidelines etc...

And subject to change... when needed... and normally a result of common sense...

The nurse was 'right' in that she was following the law as of the 2016 supreme court ruling, as well as the subsequent Utah state laws...

The crash cop may well disagree with this failure to take blood sample when he wakes up and where the lack of proof of him being alcohol/drug free at the time of crash may cause him serious legal problems in future for getting insurance payouts and other support etc...

by Cass Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:36 pm

Then why put " marks around right? She was. End of.

I really do hope he does get everything sorted out. I expect with the vast amount of coverage that the insurance companies won't want to be seen on the bad side either.

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:47 pm

What if he was drunk and/or drugged up... and should never have been on the road...!?

by Cass Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:51 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:What if he was drunk and/or drugged up... and should never have been on the road...!?

And that's a fair point, BUT like Vic says, you can't arbitrarily decide which laws to enforce. Sometimes guilty people go free. No system is perfect.

Even if he was, it doesn't change the law.

by Tommy Monk Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:11 pm

If drunk/drug people can evade justice by pretending to be unconscious for a couple of days in hospital... because the law prevents blood sample from 'unconscious' people...

And if a police officer victim of crash can have a blood sample refused, which would have helped him to have had taken for future insurance/medical cost payouts, and where he would have totally agreed to sample if able to...

Then maybe the law is wrong, and needs changing...!?

by Original Quill Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:18 am

Tommy Monk wrote:I'm sure the seriously injured cop will be thanking the nurse for being 'right'... if he now faces a long and difficult road ahead in getting all the insurance payouts and other support he/family would normally have got... because no blood sample was allowed to be taken to exonerate him of any doubt...!

She's done him a real favour there...!!!

If necessary, the blood was taken. It just can't be handed over to the cops.

by Original Quill Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:21 am

Tommy Monk wrote:What if he was drunk and/or drugged up... and should never have been on the road...!?

They've got to find other evidence to prove that. Self-incriminating evidence is prohibited (5th Amendment), and evidence obtained without a warrant is impermissible (4th Amendment).

by Original Quill Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:32 am

Tommy Monk wrote:I understand the principle of law entirely...

I am merely exploring the facts and possibilities around this case, and how they fit within the law...

Laws are one thing... made up rules that fit for general use/guidelines etc...

And subject to change... when needed... and normally a result of common sense...

The nurse was 'right' in that she was following the law as of the 2016 supreme court ruling, as well as the subsequent Utah state laws...

The crash cop may well disagree with this failure to take blood sample when he wakes up and where the lack of proof of him being alcohol/drug free at the time of crash may cause him serious legal problems in future for getting insurance payouts and other support etc...

We live in a nation where one is innocent until guilty. He doesn't have to prove he was alcohol/drug free at the time of crash, as there is no probable cause to believe he was under the influence. He doesn't need to defend where there are no charges.

It is important to note that the Constitutional issue is not a prohibition to draw any blood, but a prohibition to turn it over to the police. The 5th Amendment holds that neither he nor his body can be used to give evidence against him in any proceeding...at least, absent consent. If the blood was needed for medical purposes, nothing prevents the doctors and technicians from obtaining it.

That aside, if there was blood drawn (there probably was), he can always sign a consent to release later, should he need to It is just that the cops cannot have it without his knowing consent.

by Cass Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:00 am

Update...

His ass was fired today. Good.

by Maddog Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:06 am

This is why that old document called the constitution is so important. It protects us from an overzealous government. Maybe we shouldn't mess with it?

by Cass Wed Oct 11, 2017 6:51 pm

Maddog wrote:This is why that old document called the constitution is so important. It protects us from an overzealous government. Maybe we shouldn't mess with it?

I see what you’re saying, but things should always be organic, allowing them to grow and change with current times.

I think currently we need protection from an incompetent and overzealous government.

by Maddog Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:38 am

Cass wrote:
Maddog wrote:This is why that old document called the constitution is so important. It protects us from an overzealous government. Maybe we shouldn't mess with it?

I see what you’re saying, but things should always be organic, allowing them to grow and change with current times.

I think currently we need protection from an incompetent and overzealous government.

We have always needed it.

“...in questions of power then, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.”

It was true in 1798, and still true today.

by Maddog Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:11 am

Meanwhile in NYC.

A Bronx cop has been indicted on 67 counts related to paying a teenage girl for sex and recording the encounter, seven months after police raided his apartment.

The authorities seized Officer Raul Olmeda's computer, multiple external hard drives, his phone, and a video camera, reportedly obtaining recordings of his sexual encounters.

Nevertheless, the New York Police Department (NYPD) kept Olmeda on the job, where he was able to keep tabs on the Internal Affairs investigation of him. Prosecutors claim that Olmeda was even able to have sex with the teenager two more times after the raid. Olmeda is also under investigation for tax fraud.

This happened in the 42nd Precinct, whose high levels of misconduct are an open secret. This summer, another cop faced multiple lawsuits for false arrest and intimidation, including at least one case in which he allegedly offered to treat one teen he arrested better if his mother would have sex with him. That officer, David Terrell, had previously been sued seven times, was placed on desk duty after an unspecified domestic violence incident, and was caught on tape playing dice with neighborhood residents to determine whether to arrest them.

The 42nd Precinct regularly places near the top across the five boroughs when it comes to the number of claims filed against cops.

There is absolutely no reason Olmeda should have been allowed to remain on the force and abuse his access and power to monitor his investigation. No reason, that is, except that the NYPD's union contract keeps the department from summarily dismissing officers who misbehave.

Instead, such officers are placed on desk duty, as Olmeda was. That only gave him more spare time to follow his own investigation and potentially try to impede it.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/10/11/bronx-cop-kept-job-after-authorities-fou

by Cass Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:54 am

Gross. Just gross.

by JulesV Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:44 pm

Cass wrote:Update...

His ass was fired today. Good.

The nurse won an impressive settlement too - around half a million dollars. clappy

One nil to the pretty nurse. queen

Pick on your own size next time, Punk!

by Cass Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:28 am

Jules wrote:
Cass wrote:Update...

His ass was fired today. Good.

The nurse won an impressive settlement too - around half a million dollars.
One nil to the pretty nurse.
Pick on your own size next time, Punk!

Good for her! I like that she is going to donate some of it to a nurses association as well as an organization trying to stop nurse abuse. I hear so many horror stories from friends in the business. ER nurses especially.

by JulesV Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:15 pm

Cass wrote:
Jules wrote:

The nurse won an impressive settlement too - around half a million dollars.
One nil to the pretty nurse.
Pick on your own size next time, Punk!

Good for her! I like that she is going to donate some of it to a nurses association as well as an organization trying to stop nurse abuse. I hear so many horror stories from friends in the business.

ER nurses especially.

Yeah the ER (A&E) is the most dangerous place for nurses to work in, apart from psychiatric wards.
Patients are very often confused and disorientated - or plain drunk - and can often get violent.
Cops are called in frequently to calm patients down,
So ironic that here it's a cop who is causing all the violence.

Moral of the story: Dragging an on-duty nurse down a corridor is NOT a good look. Do it and you will pay. In more ways than one.

by Sponsored content

Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood

Re: Nurse arrested for not drawing blood