To more clarify a point, the hospital has rules on how staff will collect blood samples for cops. The must carefully follow those rules. But I don't think it's the hospital's place to enforce these guidelines on a third-party who is collecting blood for the cops.
Based on what I saw in the video, I agree with you. The cop was way out of line. Unless he has some priors I can't see him getting fired. Suspended yes.
My post was about the article. In the article was a statement that implied consent was no longer viable after 2006.
that's a fair statement, but so is this... the dude died, that means that he was in really bad shape...the nurse was the one person who was in the best position to know his current status. if she would have stepped away and not made an issue. she would have placed herself and the hospital in a bad position, because the argument could have been made that their job is to help the patient no matter what he did. There was an easier path that could have been taken. The cop did not need to escalate here, the dude wasn't going anywhere. common sense should have been applied. but as so often the case it didn't. It seems more and more that people feel that the situation is black or white when grey would work also.
Same as Virginia. In Maryland and Massachusetts you can't buy beer or liquor anywhere except a liquor store. I Oklahoma you can buy 3.2% beer at convenience and grocery stores but to buy either full flavored beer or hard liquor you have to go to a liquor store. Liquor stores have to sell the beer unchilled and they can't sell ice, cups or mixers like Coke or Sprite.
We can buy strong beer and wine at groceries. Oregon Liquor Control Commission stores are closed on Sundays and holidays.
There was a clear flashpoint where the officer lost his temper and I saw no cause for it. As a lay person, it's my opinion that doing her job means making sure that the agreement between the PD and her employer wasn't being violated and that she wasn't going to participate in an action that could result in punishment up to and including termination. I am quite sure that the staff received training on this issue and when placed in the situation, she did the right thing by calling her supervisor. The officer is the one who caused the disruption in the ER and acted as though she was actively refusing to cooperate with her own arrest. He literally rushed her and shoved her out the door. Why? Not necessary. As a side note, I think the hospital needs a new plan to more effectively communicate this policy to and with the PD and the role/expectation for the employee. If this is what's going to happen, they're going to get sued too. We disagree completely. Could he not have simply either informed her that she was being detained as opposed to arrested and asked her to step outside? Did he even give her the chance to resist? I don't think he did. To me it looked like he just lost it and tried to make a stupid point.
First off there was nothing excessive about that. Force is force. It's ugly. There's nothing pretty about it. However, I saw a dude be a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead. You're not allowed to resist an arrest. Even if you think it's unlawful, you can't resist. It is what it is. He didn't strike her, he didn't slam her to the ground and drop the people's elbow. He shouldn't have made the arrest. If it turns out to be an unlawful arrest, he'll get his. Keeping a working relationship with the hospital should've been his first goal, but there are cops who take it to the next level just because. But excessive? No. Unecessary? Yes.
What exactly, to you, makes this excessive? I'm not being a smart ass or a jerk. I really want to see it from your point of view.
