To not understand why the nurse was arrested?

[exisaknob]

Why would you arrest someone for refusing to take blood from someone unconscious?

Was the policeman on glue?!

Even if say it was actually policy, surely you just ask for a superior and medics are allowed to refuse to perform any procedure personally?

I think Charles Kinsey was incredibly brave and professional, trying to protect someone clearly vulnerable.

It looks like the police were just unable to absorb new information and adapt their response to the changing situation.

Definately a very kind brave man. He must have been petrified who wouldn't be having guns pointed at them. Yet stayed so calm and still thinking of someone else.

They should get some black police officers to go train forces with no black police officers... imo.

It's 2017 not 1947. It's unacceptable that authorities still fear black people to the point they'd rather shoot them than engage and believe them

The guy is still on active duty.

Fucking outrageous that this guy thinks he can just set the law. I hope she does sue for assault and illegal arrest - both him and his idiot colleague / superior personally and the force.

That police officer is an absolute bastard who should never be allowed to work again.

I hope to God the nurse sues the shit out of them, if only for enough cash to warrant a relaxing two week holiday involving sun loungers and cocktails. I don't think a nurse exists who doesn't deserve a good holiday, even without going through such a traumatic experience.

No wonder she was scared, given how trigger happy US cops seem to be when someone is "obstructing" or "threatening" them. She was very calm and professional and he threw a tantrum. Shit head.

So reading more closely, the officer was following his superior's explanation of policy and law the same way the nurse was. The officer had a genuine (though mistaken) belief that he had the legal right to take blood from the truck driver. The nurse was obstructing him from doing that because she had a belief (supported by law) that the officer was not entitled to take blood?

In the wake of the incident the department has been retrained.

If I've got that right I'm not sure the officer should be taken off duty or disciplined. He was following the training and orders he was given. It's a systemic issue for the department, not a matter of individual misconduct. The hospital should sue the department on the nurses (and its own) behalf though.

BoomBooms

But in that kind of situation, the way to handle it is to escalate it to higher authorities in both organizations for resolution. The police officer had credible evidence that the policy and the law were different than what he thought. It was not appropriate for him to use force to resolve the situation to his advantage.

Non daily mail link ....
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/01/utah-nurse-arrested-for-refusing-to-draw-blood-from-unconscious-patient

PS
trying to explain to an American relative that kick and runis a good policy in this country as very few people own guns
was a real shock to them

There is not much that shocks me but this is just awful!

It was horrific treatment by an utter cunt that will not be a police officer for much longer, if he hasn't been fired already. She did NOTHING wrong at all and it was incredibly distressing to watch let alone experience.

Lol, you reckon? They're untouchable, and they know it. They can murder black kids with impunity and still keep their jobs.

Senca I disagree with you to some extent. When an officer is enforcing the law and someone is physically obstructing them, physical arrest isn't unreasonable. It may not be the best thing in all situations and I see a strong argument that disrupting a healthcare worker at their place of work if you could go back and arrest them later with no loss to the case is not the best decision, but (if his department had been right about the law) it wouldn't be a wrong one. Police shouldn't be letting corporations tell them what the law is - they need their own authority on that (of course it needs to be the correct).

Boom are you having trouble understanding what happened? He was not legally allowed to take the blood sample. He had NO Warrant, the person wasn't under arrest and they were not able to give consent due to being unconscious. SHE did the right thing, upheld the law and got treated like shit by an angry man. Would he have done the same to a male nurse, I doubt it. I have seen both videos and it is horrific that it happened and more so that he is still employed.

boom
The nurse obeyed the law
the police officer broke it
how hard is that to understand ?

I am not misunderstanding Fluffy no.

The arrest was illegal because he was not in fact entitled to take the sample. I get that. I don't deny it. The nurse was brave and tried to do her job well, protecting the patient from an unlawful procedure.

I have only said that the responsibility should lie with the department rather than the officer personally because his mistake in law was one that the department training, policy and management made. That if his training had been right, then his actions would not have been incorrect (though also probably not ideal). So firing him when his training and management pointed him to those actions would be unfair (and unlikely to improve policing in the area).

boom
it was on film that her seniors quoted the rules at him
then he cuffed her
how is that an issue for anybody other than him ?

"I was just obeying orders" was the nazi response
it was discredited from then on
common sense and professional analytical thought is a good idea in paid jobs

It is absolutely baffling. I could kind of see how they could ask for a blood sample from someone who caused an accident but this was the victim! As for the cuffs - ridiculous. As if that would bring other nurses rushing forward to help instead

I hope he is disciplined. Even if he did have the wrong info, in what world would handcuffs be the next step in this procedure?!

Ta1kin how often do you think police officers get told that the law isn't what they think it is? - all the time. Police officers trying to collect evidence are constantly told they aren't entitled to things. They can't take someone else's word for it.

I agree that just obeying orders isn't a defence. But he wasn't just obeying orders. He was applying his training to the situation and his training told him there was evidence to be gathered that he was legally entitled to and there were people obstructing him from getting that evidence. He did what he was trained to do and what would have been acceptable if his training on that matter in law was correct. He wasn't a nazi trying to gas Jews. He was a police officer trying to collect evidence in a criminal investigation. He wasn't trying to kill anyone. He will make arrests all the time. Whether they are legal or not depends on all sorts of things. Sometimes there will make mistakes. When they are his mistakes rather than the department's, he should be held personally accountable by the department, but when they are the department's mistakes the department shouldn't take it out on him by firing him.

Boomboom

Even if the nurse had been wrong and he had been right it was not appropriate to arrest. He heard the supervisor tell the nurse not to. Therefore the appropriate action was to get his supervisor (or as far up the chain as necessary) to contact the supervisor (or further up the chain) to get that changed.

Not to violently arrest a nurse who had already confirmed the correct action.

And those actions are completely his decision.

I strongly suspect he'll be very quickly fired now though (plus his supervisor and maybe even their supervisor). The nurse has drawn a very clear roadmap of "sort this or I'll sue the fuck out of you". Whoever is in charge will be currently thinking very carefully exactly who to fire the ensure that this is contained very quickly. As otherwise they will quickly find themselves being fired.

Boom according to the Washington Post's version, the US Supreme Court ruled that blood could not be drawn from non-consenting or unconscious patients without a warrant on the grounds of probable cause (i.e. grounds for thinking the person has committed a crime - at the time of the incident the reasonable assumption was that the truck driver was simply a totally innocent bystander caught up in things; no judge would have signed such a warrant). And the policeman's words to his colleague (caught on video) show that he knows this. He actually says "they don't have PC".

It's as clear cut a case of a police officer over-stepping the bounds of his authority as you could come across. I don't know why you're arguing the toss on this one, I really don't.

Boom
She showed him the rules (on his chest cam)
Her boss quoted the rules (on his chest cam)
His request was not legal
He then cuffed her (on his chest cam)

He will make arrests all the time. Whether they are legal or not depends on all sorts of things. Sometimes there will make mistakes

If you can defend that I suspect you are a fan of Arapio, not any form of public service and civil rights.

Therefore the appropriate action was to get his supervisor (or as far up the chain as necessary) to contact the supervisor (or further up the chain) to get that changed.

Exactly. In a situation like this, with the evidence presented to him, you go up the chain. I think this would be the expectation in similar circumstances in most US jurisdictions.

Ta1kin She showed him a piece of paper with the hospital policy on it and told him it was an agreement they had with the department, but that isn't the same thing as proving a legal point.

And no, I'm not a fan of Arapio and there is absolutely nothing in thinking that professionals in all sorts of capacities can sometimes make good faith mistakes that supports such a hyperbolic accusation.

and told him it was an agreement they had with the department

And that was his clue to check it out further before laying hands on a healthcare worker doing her job.

She showed him a piece of paper with the hospital policy on it and told him it was an agreement they had with the department, but that isn't the same thing as proving a legal point.
Sorry, what ?
Headed paper hospital policy is just to be pissed on?

Do you expect people to respect your legal rights ??