General Police Abuse Thread

[White Haven]

I totally grasp that. Something's got to give, and my demand for law enforcement honesty would rather it be unfeasible laws (which are common as fuck anyway and nobody really cares) rather than the concept that law enforcement has to be trustworthy to be worthy of trust. I realize that the police are caught in the middle here, but ultimately they need to be willing to stand up and say 'look, you want two different things that are at odds with one another. You've picked one by passing these laws. If you want the other, fucking say so.'

Individual police forces might not have that power, but law enforcement endorsements are solid fucking gold in elections. The police absolutely do have political influence in aggregate, and this is totally the kind of legitimate issue that warrants throwing it around.

[The Romulan Republic]

Didn't law endorsements heavily favor Trump?

I'd say that's pretty telling about what most of our law enforcement community wants.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I used to live in a ruthlessly gentrified area of town with a bunch of other younger, upper-middle-class twits, separated from a much poorer community by a large main road. Our homeowner's association standard of practice was: if you see anything in our neighbourhood, bring it up at the homeowner's meeting so we can discuss it. If you see anything over there, call the cops immediately 'cause it's probably drugs or molestation or loitering or something.

It is the same in my city at that border. Hell, even deep in the upper class neighborhoods they are always calling our dispatch to report suspicious people and the details can be pretty slim on why they're suspicious and some of the times they are blatantly racist. If we can justify it we won't go but we have to speak to the caller first and specifically ask what they thought was suspicious. It feels good to cancel a call when they aren't able to tell you why it is suspicious criminal activity.

I totally grasp that. Something's got to give, and my demand for law enforcement honesty would rather it be unfeasible laws (which are common as fuck anyway and nobody really cares) rather than the concept that law enforcement has to be trustworthy to be worthy of trust. I realize that the police are caught in the middle here, but ultimately they need to be willing to stand up and say 'look, you want two different things that are at odds with one another. You've picked one by passing these laws. If you want the other, fucking say so.'

Individual police forces might not have that power, but law enforcement endorsements are solid fucking gold in elections. The police absolutely do have political influence in aggregate, and this is totally the kind of legitimate issue that warrants throwing it around.

That would be liberating.

You're correct. Individual police forces do not have that power. Unfortunately, the unions tend to do what all lobby groups do and that's back who they think is the strongest candidate that will support their interests and law enforcement in the US is heavily populated by right wing individuals.

Didn't law endorsements heavily favor Trump?

I'd say that's pretty telling about what most of our law enforcement community wants.

Yes. The FOP, the largest police union, endorsed Trump along with several other unions that represent between 40%-50% of all police in the United States. Though I am a member of the FOP and there was not a vote passed to the membership on who we should endorse for president so it's not necessarily pretty telling but it is probably a safe assumption to make since police in the US tend to be right wing.

[White Haven]

That would be liberating.

You're correct. Individual police forces do not have that power. Unfortunately, the unions tend to do what all lobby groups do and that's back who they think is the strongest candidate that will support their interests and law enforcement in the US is heavily populated by right wing individuals.

ARE they getting their interests supported? It seems to me that 'laws remaining on the books that are blatantly infeasible and run contrary to the interests of police forces' is a pretty good indication that they aren't. It's one thing to endorse a specific candidate to push your agenda, and quite another to just throw an endorsement one hallway with 'to whom it may concern' scribbled on a post-it note.

It seems to me that politicians are getting a lot out of this little arrangement and the police unions are getting sweet fuck-all.

[Flagg]

Police unions support Republicans because they are willing to ravage every other union (aside from maybe the firefighters) except for the police unions.

The better to oppress you with, my dear.

[White Haven]

That's nice, but I'm trying to have an actual discussion with someone a little less uselessly cynical. I may not agree with what KS has to say, but at least he articulates something other than bile.

[Flagg]

That's nice, but I'm trying to have an actual discussion with someone a little less uselessly cynical. I may not agree with what KS has to say, but at least he articulates something other than bile.

I actually wasn't being uselessly cynical. When that shithead Governor of Wisconsin busted all the public sector unions, the only ones spared were the cops and the firefighters. It actually makes sense. Because are the cops going to be as willing to clear out pro-union protestors if their union is being busted too? If a riot starts are the firefighters going to be as willing to put out the fires?

[TheFeniX]

I have to lean bit with Flagg on this one. Politicians are much more likely (and in Texas, in practice, they do) to take swings at teachers than cops. That said, you sure do hear a lot coming from the Police Unions such as calling out the mayor of New York stating that the blood of dead officers was on his hands.

Imagine a teachers union having that kind of leeway. You know, if your state doesn't outlaw teachers unions.

[Kamakazie Sith]

ARE they getting their interests supported? It seems to me that 'laws remaining on the books that are blatantly infeasible and run contrary to the interests of police forces' is a pretty good indication that they aren't. It's one thing to endorse a specific candidate to push your agenda, and quite another to just throw an endorsement one hallway with 'to whom it may concern' scribbled on a post-it note.

It seems to me that politicians are getting a lot out of this little arrangement and the police unions are getting sweet fuck-all.

In some cases, yes their interests are being served. However, I mostly agree with you here. For example, police unions continue to support the drug war, which in my opinion is a major contributor to the current opinion of police in the US. There are pockets of police opposition to the drug war but they don't have the power of say the FOP. The drug war is a heavily political issue and is very popular among powerful voting blocks.

Flagg isn't wrong either but I can't say what the norm is but I do know what he says does happen. However, I can tell you that in my state we were fortunate enough that all public employees were shafted good by the legislature.

[Flagg]

I really wasn't busting chops, it's the way it is in a lot of places. And I really don't think the interests of police in the mid to long term are being served. The interests of the prison-industrial complex are. As KS mentioned, the ones who rely on drug crime related forfeitures for fancy toys or to bolster their budget are. But it's all a house of cards.

[Dominus Atheos]

That would be liberating.

You're correct. Individual police forces do not have that power. Unfortunately, the unions tend to do what all lobby groups do and that's back who they think is the strongest candidate that will support their interests and law enforcement in the US is heavily populated by right wing individuals.

ARE they getting their interests supported? It seems to me that 'laws remaining on the books that are blatantly infeasible and run contrary to the interests of police forces' is a pretty good indication that they aren't. It's one thing to endorse a specific candidate to push your agenda, and quite another to just throw an endorsement one hallway with 'to whom it may concern' scribbled on a post-it note.

It seems to me that politicians are getting a lot out of this little arrangement and the police unions are getting sweet fuck-all.

There are many (many, many, many) small towns that only have their own police forces (instead of just using county or state police) in order to generate revenue for those towns through ticketing people driving through their jurisdictions. Like, the police dept actually generates a net profit for the local government.

What that means is that if traffic and ticketing laws were ever made actually sane, a whole lot of police officers would be laid off. So that's one reason that police unions don't agitate against ticket farming.

[White Haven]

While small-town ticket farming is an issue, this particular incident came straight from the Florida State Police. I don't think that's necessarily the most relevant of things in this particular case.

[White Haven]

Video shows Utah nurse screaming, being dragged into police car after refusing to let officer take blood from unconscious victim

Video shows Utah nurse screaming, being dragged into police car after refusing to let officer take blood from unconscious victim
Alex Wubbels, seen here in various images from police body cam video, was arrested after explaining to police that she couldn't draw a blood sample from an unconscious person at University Hospital. A Salt Lake City police detective asked for a blood sample. After explaining to the detective that the police needed a warrant, consent from the unconscious patient or that the patient needed to be under arrest before the blood sample could be drawn, she was arrested.

By Pamela Manson

A nurse says she was assaulted and illegally arrested by a Salt Lake City police detective for following a hospital policy that does not allow blood draws from unconscious patients.
Footage from University Hospital and officer body cameras shows Detective Jeff Payne and nurse Alex Wubbels in a standoff over whether the policeman should be allowed to get a blood sample from a patient who had been injured in a July 26 collision in northern Utah that left another driver dead.

Wubbels says 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. The detective 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.

At one point, Payne threatens to take Wubbels to jail if he doesn’t get the sample, and he accuses her of interfering with a criminal case.
“I either go away with blood in vials or body in tow,” Payne says.

After Wubbels consults with several hospital officials and repeats the policy, Payne tells her she is under arrest and grabs her, pulling her arms behind her back and handcuffing her. The footage shows the detective dragging Wubbels out of the hospital and putting her inside a patrol car as she screams, “Help! Help! Somebody help me! Stop! Stop! I did nothing wrong!”

A University of Utah police officer and Department of Public Safety officers, who provide security for the hospital, were present at time of the arrest and did not intervene.

As he stands in the hospital parking lot after the arrest, Payne says to another officer that he wonders how this event will affect an off-duty job transporting patients for an ambulance company.

“I’ll bring them all the transients and take good patients elsewhere,” Payne says.

Parts of the footage were shown Thursday at a news conference at the office of Karra Porter, a Salt Lake City attorney representing Wubbels.
Salt Lake police Sgt. Brandon Shearer said the department started an internal investigation, which is ongoing, in response to the incident.
Payne was suspended from the department’s blood-draw program — where officers are trained as phlebotomists so they can get blood samples — but he remains on duty with the Police Department, Shearer said. The department also has held training for the officers in the program as a result of the incident, he said.

In a written report, Payne said he was responding to a request from Logan police to get the blood sample, to determine whether the patient had illicit substances in his system at the time of the crash. Payne explained the “exigent circumstances and implied consent law” to Wubbels, but, according to his report, she said “her policies won’t allow me to obtain the blood sample without a warrant.”

Payne — who says he wanted the blood sample to protect the patient, not punish him — said he was advised by Lt. James Tracy, the watch commander on duty that night, to arrest Wubbels for interfering with a police investigation if she refused to let him get the sample, according to his report.

Tracy said in his report that he spoke on the phone with Wubbels and told her he believed that they had implied consent to get the sample, but she cut him off and said she would not allow the draw without a warrant. He then went to the hospital and tried to tell the nurse why she was in custody, but “she appeared to not want to hear my explanation,” Tracy wrote.

Porter, however, said “implied consent” has not been the law in Utah since 2007, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that the Constitution permits warrantless breath tests in drunken-driving arrests, but not warrantless blood tests. She stressed that the patient was always considered the victim in the case and never was suspected of wrongdoing.

No claim or lawsuit has been filed, Porter said, but she has had discussions with Salt Lake City police and she believes the department will educate its officers.

Wubbels said she has heard anecdotally of other health care workers being bullied and harassed by police, and that these videos prove that there is a problem.

“I can’t sit on this video and not attempt to speak out both to re-educate and inform,” she said. Police agencies “need to be having conversations about what is appropriate intervention.”

Wubbels, who was not charged, said she has watched the footage four or five times and said, “It hurts to relive it.”

She never said “no” when Payne asked to take a blood sample; she merely explained the blood draw policy to him, according to Wubbels, who also said she was trying to keep her patient safe and do things the right way.

Porter and Wubbels declined to release information about the patient, but Payne’s report identifies him as 43-year-old William Gray, a reserve officer in the Rigby, Idaho, Police Department, who suffered burns during a July 26 crash in Cache County.

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 crash caused an explosion and fire, Logan police have said. Gray was on fire when he exited the semi. The driver of the pickup truck, Marcos Torres, 26, died at the scene.

Police have said Torres was fleeing from the UHP after other drivers reported him driving recklessly.

On Thursday, Gray was in serious condition at University Hospital, officials there said.
Wubbels, an Alpine skier who competed in the Winter Olympics in 1998 and 2002, when her last name was Shaffer, has worked as a nurse at University Hospital since 2009.

Article video can be found here.

Related footage here and here.

I don't even know where to start with this one. The unconscious man wasn't even a suspect, he was the victim of a car crash caused by the Utah Highway Patrol in the first place. This, by the way, is why you need a damned good reason to engage in high-speed pursuit. The detective couldn't be bothered to get a warrant. The detective attempted to bully a nurse into violating medical ethics and federal law so he could get a blood sample without a warrant from a man unable to give consent. The detective then arrests the nurse for the crime of... I really, REALLY hate to use Flagg's vernacular here, but I don't have a choice: for the crime of contempt of cop. None of the other assorted police from either of the two departments present do a thing to stop this.

I...just...what? This isn't slivers-of-a-second-matters judgement call territory, where split-second bad calls can end a life. This is basic, basic procedure here. Get a warrant, or fuck off.

Get. A. Warrant. Or. Fuck. Off.

As an addendum, some of the shit from other officers is almost even more noxious. The general sentiment of 'Look, just let the illegal thing happen because it won't hold up in court if it's challenged' is toxic beyond belief.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I don't even know where to start with this one. The unconscious man wasn't even a suspect, he was the victim of a car crash caused by the Utah Highway Patrol in the first place.

The man fleeing from UHP caused the crash. UHP was after him because he was already driving erratically and people called in about him. UHP may have contributed but don't absolve that guy of his responsibility. He absolutely caused the crash.

Minutes before the crash police dispatch operators issued an “attempt to locate” for Torres’ vehicle after another motorist called 911, stating the truck was driving recklessly. The witness claimed the black Chevy Silverado was swerving all over the road near the American West Heritage Center. They also said Torres was seen throwing a beer can out the window.

Cache County is investigating this. The unconscious man was flown up the the University of Utah which is why they contacted SLCPD and requested one of the blood draw technicians be sent out there to collect his blood. Why Cache County felt they needed his blood is unknown at this time.

This, by the way, is why you need a damned good reason to engage in high-speed pursuit.

I personally go with violent felony but even then a result like this can have enormous consequences that nobody wants to pay.

The detective couldn't be bothered to get a warrant. The detective attempted to bully a nurse into violating medical ethics and federal law so he could get a blood sample without a warrant from a man unable to give consent. The detective then arrests the nurse for the crime of... I really, REALLY hate to use Flagg's vernacular here, but I don't have a choice: for the crime of contempt of cop. None of the other assorted police from either of the two departments present do a thing to stop this.

The detective was going off an out dated Utah implied consent law (that is still out dated on the Utah state government online code resource). Blood draw via implied consent was ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS in 2016. Even though the state code book is out of date every police officer is responsible as an individual to be up on case law and in this case individual officers failed, the state failed, and according to the article the department failed.

Contempt of cop isn't Flagg's vernacular. It's actually a term in police circles for this behavior. We see this nurse calmly explaining why he is making her decision and even printed out a copy of what they need in order to comply with a blood draw request from law enforcement on an unconscious individual. Instead of doing what he did he should have taken a step back, let go of his arrogance, and did a bit of research and even if he didn't dig deep enough for the SCOTUS ruling he still should not have held the nurse personally accountable for enforcing the policy at the UofU.

I've seen contempt of cop behavior and that wasn't it. She stuck me as someone attempting to do her job against an intimidating figure.

She was very brave.

I...just...what? This isn't slivers-of-a-second-matters judgement call territory, where split-second bad calls can end a life. This is basic, basic procedure here. Get a warrant, or fuck off.

Get. A. Warrant. Or. Fuck. Off.

As an addendum, some of the shit from other officers is almost even more noxious. The general sentiment of 'Look, just let the illegal thing happen because it won't hold up in court if it's challenged' is toxic beyond belief.

Every officer in the state of Utah was educated about implied consent and it's been that way for as long as I can remember. This certainly identified a significant issue with how information is updated via decisions from SCOTUS > State > LE Agencies. Here are the links and the language;

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapt ... 0118000101
41-6a-522. Person incapable of refusal.
Any person who is dead, unconscious, or in any other condition rendering the person incapable of refusal to submit to any chemical test or tests is considered to not have withdrawn the consent provided for in Subsection 41-6a-520(1), and the test or tests may be administered whether the person has been arrested or not.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapt ... -6a-520(1)
41-6a-520. Implied consent to chemical tests for alcohol or drug -- Number of tests -- Refusal -- Warning, report.
(1)
(a) A person operating a motor vehicle in this state is considered to have given the person's consent to a chemical test or tests of the person's breath, blood, urine, or oral fluids for the purpose of determining whether the person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while:(i) having a blood or breath alcohol content statutorily prohibited under Section 41-6a-502, 41-6a-530, or 53-3-231;
(ii) under the influence of alcohol, any drug, or combination of alcohol and any drug under Section 41-6a-502; or
(iii) having any measurable controlled substance or metabolite of a controlled substance in the person's body in violation of Section 41-6a-517.

[TheFeniX]

“I’ll bring them all the transients and take good patients elsewhere,” Payne says.

Cop conspires with supervisor to illegally arrest nurse if she doesn't assault a patient because they can't be bothered to Google "How to not be shitty cops" or maybe "Utah Laws for Dummies." Cops make good on threat and drag an innocent person out of her place of employment. Person is then released without charges.

Cops not charged with kidnapping.

If Payne ended up on an ER gurney and died, I don't care if somehow a case of hyper-tension ended up with a post-morterm of "Cause of death: massive cardiac tissue damage likely caused by wooden stake to the heart": I'd side with the hospital.

My mom was in a similar spot years ago. Did a blood draw for toxicology on a suspected drunk driver. Cops says "I'll need a copy of your report." "You'll need a warrant." Cop came back with warrant. You know, because he wasn't a shitty human being. But being the 80s and Houston PD, he probably could have pushed the issue. And if my mom had given it to him, she could have been sued, lost her job, been charged with whatever, while the cop sits safe behind his badge.

Even if this was still legal, not even (EDIT: because sometimes they HAVE to assault someone to save them, such as chopping off a limb without consent if it's necessary/EDIT) medical professionals should be required to choose between assaulting someone or face jail-time. If that cop wanted the blood so fucking bad, he should have drawn it himself.

[White Haven]

I don't even know where to start with this one. The unconscious man wasn't even a suspect, he was the victim of a car crash caused by the Utah Highway Patrol in the first place.

The man fleeing from UHP caused the crash. UHP was after him because he was already driving erratically and people called in about him. UHP may have contributed but don't absolve that guy of his responsibility. He absolutely caused the crash.

Fair point, I'll concede you that much. Pushing a pursuit when they clearly shouldn't have gives them some culpability, but responsibility still lies with the driver.

The detective couldn't be bothered to get a warrant. The detective attempted to bully a nurse into violating medical ethics and federal law so he could get a blood sample without a warrant from a man unable to give consent. The detective then arrests the nurse for the crime of... I really, REALLY hate to use Flagg's vernacular here, but I don't have a choice: for the crime of contempt of cop. None of the other assorted police from either of the two departments present do a thing to stop this.

The detective was going off an out dated Utah implied consent law (that is still out dated on the Utah state government online code resource). Blood draw via implied consent was ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS in 2016. Even though the state code book is out of date every police officer is responsible as an individual to be up on case law and in this case individual officers failed, the state failed, and according to the article the department failed.

Contempt of cop isn't Flagg's vernacular. It's actually a term in police circles for this behavior. We see this nurse calmly explaining why he is making her decision and even printed out a copy of what they need in order to comply with a blood draw request from law enforcement on an unconscious individual. Instead of doing what he did he should have taken a step back, let go of his arrogance, and did a bit of research and even if he didn't dig deep enough for the SCOTUS ruling he still should not have held the nurse personally accountable for enforcing the policy at the UofU.

I've seen contempt of cop behavior and that wasn't it. She stuck me as someone attempting to do her job against an intimidating figure.

She was very brave.

That's the rub with terms like that; I get the feeling we're using the same term in very different ways. I wasn't referring to her behavior, but rather to his: getting angry and threatening reprisals for the grand crime of disagreeing with his authority.

At work, so I don't have time to reply to the rest now. Will post more once comfortably pantsless.

[TheFeniX]

Due to the back-assward nature of what's left of "common law," he could have demanded other people help him arrest her and arrest THEM if they refused:

Title 76 - Utah Criminal Code
Chapter 8: Offenses Against the Administration of Government
76-8-307. Failure to aid peace officer.[57]

A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if, upon command by a peace officer identifiable or identified by him as such, he unreasonably fails or refuses to aid the peace officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing the commission of any offense by another person.

I love America at times, cops have no duty to protect and those who leave you to die are guilty of procedural errors and hold zero criminal or civil liability. But if a cop demands you help him arrest someone and you refuse, you can face jail-time. Up to 6 months in Utah.

Or wait, could he just tack this on because SHE didn't help arrest HERSELF? Ultimate catch-22. Arrest anyone, charge them for not assisting in the arrest. BRILLIANT!

NOTE: The link to the Utah law is dead. But the Texas one works. It's a bit better, all the cop can do is tattle on you to the DA and he/she decides whether or not to spank you.

[Flagg]

Hope no injured cops need life-saving medical attention and go to that hospital. Cunts.

[Simon_Jester]

Contempt of cop isn't Flagg's vernacular. It's actually a term in police circles for this behavior. We see this nurse calmly explaining why he is making her decision and even printed out a copy of what they need in order to comply with a blood draw request from law enforcement on an unconscious individual. Instead of doing what he did he should have taken a step back, let go of his arrogance, and did a bit of research and even if he didn't dig deep enough for the SCOTUS ruling he still should not have held the nurse personally accountable for enforcing the policy at the UofU.

I've seen contempt of cop behavior and that wasn't it. She stuck me as someone attempting to do her job against an intimidating figure.

She was very brave.

It sounds like the police are using the term to describe actual offenses against the police (i.e. suspects screaming expletives at them or people genuinely harassing them).

Whereas Flagg is using it as a pejorative. The reasoning being:
1) Failure to do what a court orders is "contempt of court" and a crime.
2) By parallel construction, failure to do what a police officer says is "contempt of cop."
3) Except that "contempt of cop" isn't actually a crime as such when the police are giving illegal orders.
4) Therefore, "contempt of cop" is used as a name for the (spurious) grounds on which an abusive officer (unjustly) arrests a person who is acting legally but is not doing what the abusive officer wishes.
5) In effect, the actual offense is "being uppity" or "not doing what I wanted just because it would be illegal to do that" or something like that.

So you two are using the term in different ways.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Every officer in the state of Utah was educated about implied consent and it's been that way for as long as I can remember. This certainly identified a significant issue with how information is updated via decisions from SCOTUS > State > LE Agencies. Here are the links and the language;

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapt ... 0118000101
41-6a-522. Person incapable of refusal.
Any person who is dead, unconscious, or in any other condition rendering the person incapable of refusal to submit to any chemical test or tests is considered to not have withdrawn the consent provided for in Subsection 41-6a-520(1), and the test or tests may be administered whether the person has been arrested or not.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapt ... -6a-520(1)
41-6a-520. Implied consent to chemical tests for alcohol or drug -- Number of tests -- Refusal -- Warning, report.
(1)
(a) A person operating a motor vehicle in this state is considered to have given the person's consent to a chemical test or tests of the person's breath, blood, urine, or oral fluids for the purpose of determining whether the person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while:(i) having a blood or breath alcohol content statutorily prohibited under Section 41-6a-502, 41-6a-530, or 53-3-231;
(ii) under the influence of alcohol, any drug, or combination of alcohol and any drug under Section 41-6a-502; or
(iii) having any measurable controlled substance or metabolite of a controlled substance in the person's body in violation of Section 41-6a-517.

Hey KS, I noticed a thing. It would be very easy for someone reading your post to mistake your meaning. Namely, that the law was so ridiculous that the SCOTUS struck it down in 2016 and training regarding that change was... cursory at best, and thus wont have any effect whatsoever on police behavior because they literally forget that the law changed.

“I’ll bring them all the transients and take good patients elsewhere,” Payne says.

Oh don't even get me started on that. That is going to violate the professional ethics of EMTs. The University of Utah is a Level 1 Trauma Center, which is why a car accident/burn victim was there in the first place. If Detective Payne actually does that, he is deliberately putting patients in danger and... that's not good

The code of ethics, italicized bits are the ones he is violating. In fact, he already violated them by insisting that a nurse participate in an illegal practice. This code of ethics is always on for EMS personnel. It does not end when they take the uniform off.

To conserve life, alleviate suffering, promote health, do no harm, and encourage the quality and equal availability of emergency medical care.

To provide services based on human need, with compassion and respect for human dignity, unrestricted by consideration of nationality, race, creed, color, or status; to not judge the merits of the patient’s request for service, nor allow the patient’s socioeconomic status to influence our demeanor or the care that we provide.

To not use professional knowledge and skills in any enterprise detrimental to the public well being.

To respect and hold in confidence all information of a confidential nature obtained in the course of professional service unless required by law to divulge such information.

To use social media in a responsible and professional manner that does not discredit, dishonor, or embarrass an EMS organization, co-workers, other health care practitioners, patients, individuals or the community at large.

To maintain professional competence, striving always for clinical excellence in the delivery of patient care.

To assume responsibility in upholding standards of professional practice and education.

To assume responsibility for individual professional actions and judgment, both in dependent and independent emergency functions, and to know and uphold the laws which affect the practice of EMS.

To be aware of and participate in matters of legislation and regulation affecting EMS.

To work cooperatively with EMS associates and other allied healthcare professionals in the best interest of our patients.

To refuse participation in unethical procedures, and assume the responsibility to expose incompetence or unethical conduct of others to the appropriate authority in a proper and professional manner.

So... this dude needs to be removed from both his jobs.

Even if this was still legal, not even (EDIT: because sometimes they HAVE to assault someone to save them, such as chopping off a limb without consent if it's necessary/EDIT) medical professionals should be required to choose between assaulting someone or face jail-time. If that cop wanted the blood so fucking bad, he should have drawn it himself.

Actually, the nurse would then have been ethically required to obstruct him in that instance.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Real quick while I am still wallowing in the insanity of insomnia. I actually meant to talk about what contempt of cop means among police.

Unfortunately I chose to post while very tired and mixed in my admiration for the nurse along with some brief talk about contempt of cop and I mentioned how she didn't have any contempt. I was attempting to point out that her calm and collected actions dont fit what we typically see in contempt of cop situations such as calling the officer a pig, etc. The poor way I typed that out caused some considerable confusion. I apologize.

What I meant to say is that contempt of cop in law enforcement circles is used to describe negative behavior on part of the officer in reaction to preceived disrespect.

[Lost Soal]

Forget looking for the SCOTUS ruling, according to the article the law was removed from the books in 2007. There's no excuse for thinking that is still the law after TEN YEARS.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Forget looking for the SCOTUS ruling, according to the article the law was removed from the books in 2007. There's no excuse for thinking that is still the law after TEN YEARS.

No, it wasn't. Someone misread the Utah Supreme Court case. Basically, Implied Consent was pretty omnibus in Utah, but the court limited its application. Then the Supreme Court struck it down almost in its entirety.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Forget looking for the SCOTUS ruling, according to the article the law was removed from the books in 2007. There's no excuse for thinking that is still the law after TEN YEARS.

Actually that's why I posted the links above. The state of Utah own website for their statutes had not been updated in the relevant sections since 2005.

[Flagg]

Doesn't HIPPA come into play here? If so that nurse would have committed a federal offense. This cop needs to be thrown in a cell for 20 years like any other fucking kidnapper and the shitweasels recorded talking about giving that hospital all of the "transients" should lose their jobs and have their license to practice that job permanently revoked.

But at least he didn't shoot her.