Police Officer arrests Nurse.

[Chris0nllyn]

http://rightalerts.com/remember-the...ting-a-patient-well-theres-more-to-the-story/

His buddy and boys in blue support him. Shocker.

 

[itsbob]

His buddy and boys in blue support him. Shocker.

Yeah, because he "assaulted" a Nurse that was resisting arrest after arguing with the several officers for two hours..

If she wasn't a Nurse do you really think they would have put up with her #### for 2 hours??


BUT not a big surprise that you don't understand the sacrifice the officer has made for at least the last 30 years supporting the public, and caring for those most in need.. at the scene.

And how ludicrous it is to ask for his head for making ONE mistake.. a mistake that he was ORDERED to make. Yelling for him to be fired, to lose his ability to support himself and his family after the many sacrifices he made.

BUT propaganda works... just package it in a way that they want you to see it, and you'll take it hook line and sinker.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Yeah, because he "assaulted" a Nurse that was resisting arrest after arguing with the several officers for two hours..

If she wasn't a Nurse do you really think they would have put up with her #### for 2 hours??

Did you watch the video? Do you consider that arguing? She was on the phone, simply playing middle man, and the person on the phone said "no, you're not getting it", while at the same time showing the officers the hospital policy (which the Sheriff's office agreed to more than a year prior) which aligns with case law surrounding these incidents.

Now you want us to believe this poor officer simply didn't know the law. How about finding out the law instead of arresting or detaining someone? But why do that when, as an officer, you're given wide latitude to misunderstand or be completely ignorant of the laws you enforce. Don't worry about the person being arrested though. Not like they have to worry about taking off of work, finding a lawyer, attending court, etc.

It was very, very clear in the videos provided that the officer simply didn't like the answer he was getting. They're used to people caving at any little request, however unlawful, and this woman didn't and that pissed him off. Not only Payne, but his CO, which is even more troubling that the supervisor backed Payne up.

 

[glhs837]

Yeah, because he "assaulted" a Nurse that was resisting arrest after arguing with the several officers for two hours..

If she wasn't a Nurse do you really think they would have put up with her #### for 2 hours??

You mean she rightfully resisted an unlawful arrest, don't you? That linked site is pretty low on facts and pretty high on appeals to emotion.

"As it turns out, he knows Payne personally and says the video doesn’t reflect who Payne is as a person" Like I give an eff. Nice guy, gives the shirt off his back, yaddayadda. He was only following orders, yadda yadda. Unless I recall incorrectly, the LT never said " arrest her". What he said was "We might need to be aggressive in getting that sample", and Detective Chucklehead himself chose how aggressive to get, the video makes it quite clear, she was reasonably explaining the requirements, and he lost it. She wasn't arguing, she presented them quite calmly with the three ways they had to legally obtain a sample. I didn't see her argue, I saw her explaining, which is not the same. Citizens have no legal obligation to give the officer his way if the officer is acting illegally. The cop was arguing that his law was more important than the law.

 

[itsbob]

Did you watch the video? Do you consider that arguing? She was on the phone, simply playing middle man, and the person on the phone said "no, you're not getting it", while at the same time showing the officers the hospital policy (which the Sheriff's office agreed to more than a year prior) which aligns with case law surrounding these incidents.

Now you want us to believe this poor officer simply didn't know the law. How about finding out the law instead of arresting or detaining someone? But why do that when, as an officer, you're given wide latitude to misunderstand or be completely ignorant of the laws you enforce. Don't worry about the person being arrested though. Not like they have to worry about taking off of work, finding a lawyer, attending court, etc.

It was very, very clear in the videos provided that the officer simply didn't like the answer he was getting. They're used to people caving at any little request, however unlawful, and this woman didn't and that pissed him off. Not only Payne, but his CO, which is even more troubling that the supervisor backed Payne up.

And when he said "Ok Enough, you're under arrest!" did she willfully comply, or did she resist? She didn't pull away and run?? She didn't continue to scream and resist his efforts to handcuff her??

Again, the video was a 30 second long snippet of a 2 hour long encounter.. yet you've mad your mind up and convicted him, and let her off the hook..

Again.. Hospital Policy trumps Law when exactly??

And your dumbass posts things you agree with like.. "RapeMobile"?

Seriously??

So she was raped too, I didn't see that on the video..

 

[black dog]

So cops just don't like being told NO... Bob you seem to forget that she was released from the back of that cruiser 20 minutes after they arrested her...
Do you not think a few "Awe $hit he did WHAT " weren't said after she was arrested?

 

[itsbob]

You mean she rightfully resisted an unlawful arrest, don't you? That linked site is pretty low on facts and pretty high on appeals to emotion.

"As it turns out, he knows Payne personally and says the video doesn’t reflect who Payne is as a person" Like I give an eff. Nice guy, gives the shirt off his back, yaddayadda. He was only following orders, yadda yadda. Unless I recall incorrectly, the LT never said " arrest her". What he said was "We might need to be aggressive in getting that sample", and Detective Chucklehead himself chose how aggressive to get, the video makes it quite clear, she was reasonably explaining the requirements, and he lost it. She wasn't arguing, she presented them quite calmly with the three ways they had to legally obtain a sample. I didn't see her argue, I saw her explaining, which is not the same. Citizens have no legal obligation to give the officer his way if the officer is acting illegally. The cop was arguing that his law was more important than the law.

What made it an unlawful arrest??

Because you said so, or some ####house internet lawyer said so?

He plainly said, "That's enough, you're under arrest!" and she did what?? Complied?

I don't know if everyone else's googler is broke.. but maybe take 10 seconds and look up Utah law, and the Utah annotated code..

As far as the cop in the Hospital knowing or not knowing what happened prior is PURE speculation.. YOU believe he knew ALL the details of the chase, of the accident, who was in the ER.. who the person in the ER was and who at fault at the accident..

When in reality all we know for sure is the truck driver was flown from the scene of the accident and the officer Payne was NOT at the scene of the accident and was NOT involved in the pursuit or chase.. which we could surmise at the time of the video, he hadn't seen the video of the chase or the accident for him to determine who was at fault or not.. and more than likely (an assumption) all he knew is he had an unconscious victim who had a CDL that was involved in a fatal accident.

 

[glhs837]

And when he said "Ok Enough, you're under arrest!" did she willfully comply, or did she resist? She didn't pull away and run?? She didn't continue to scream and resist his efforts to handcuff her??

Again, the video was a 30 second long snippet of a 2 hour long encounter.. yet you've mad your mind up and convicted him, and let her off the hook..

Again.. Hospital Policy trumps Law when exactly??

And your dumbass posts things you agree with like.. "RapeMobile"?

Seriously??

So she was raped too, I didn't see that on the video..

What part of "You are not legally required to comply with an unlawful arrest" isn't sinking in, Bob? The officer had no legal right to arrest her, so she had every right to resist that arrest. Rights, they matter. And the policy in question was one that the department in question had agreed to as the best way to comply with the law. So no, policy doesn't trump law, it helps folks on the ground level understand how to comply with the law.

 

[itsbob]

So cops just don't like being told NO... Bob you seem to forget that she was released from the back of that cruiser 20 minutes after they arrested her...
Do you not think a few "Awe $hit he did WHAT " weren't said after she was arrested?

Are you convinced it wasn't politics or political correctness that got her released??

Seems like something a Judge should have determined, not a mayor.

 

[glhs837]

What made it an unlawful arrest??

Because you said so, or some ####house internet lawyer said so?

He plainly said, "That's enough, you're under arrest!" and she did what?? Complied?

I don't know if everyone else's googler is broke.. but maybe take 10 seconds and look up Utah law, and the Utah annotated code..

As far as the cop in the Hospital knowing or not knowing what happened prior is PURE speculation.. YOU believe he knew ALL the details of the chase, of the accident, who was in the ER.. who the person in the ER was and who at fault at the accident..

When in reality all we know for sure is the truck driver was flown from the scene of the accident and the officer Payne was NOT at the scene of the accident and was NOT involved in the pursuit or chase.. which we could surmise at the time of the video, he hadn't seen the video of the chase or the accident for him to determine who was at fault or not.. and more than likely (an assumption) all he knew is he had an unconscious victim who had a CDL that was involved in a fatal accident.

Well, since you arrest people for breaking the law, and she wasn't breaking the law, then it seems pretty simple. Him declaring "You are under arrest" doesn't magically make the law shift in his favor. And at the end of it, it doesn't really matter what he knew. If the law didn't allow him to draw the sample, then it didn't, no matter what he knew or didn't know. Law says "No sample unless you have one of these three things". He had none of them. No sample, no matter how bad his temper is.

 

[itsbob]

What part of "You are not legally required to comply with an unlawful arrest" isn't sinking in, Bob? The officer had no legal right to arrest her, so she had every right to resist that arrest. Rights, they matter. And the policy in question was one that the department in question had agreed to as the best way to comply with the law. So no, policy doesn't trump law, it helps folks on the ground level understand how to comply with the law.

So a cop mistakes you for a suspect, he tries to arrest you.. you go hands on with the cop.. you're not guilty of a crime because it was an "unlawful" arrest??

Again, what makes this particular arrest unlawful?? Yet, makes her resisting arrest allowable??

 

[glhs837]

Are you convinced it wasn't politics or political correctness that got her released??

Seems like something a Judge should have determined, not a mayor.

Was it the Mayor who got her released? Who did decide to release her?

 

[itsbob]

Well, since you arrest people for breaking the law, and she wasn't breaking the law, then it seems pretty simple. Him declaring "You are under arrest" doesn't magically make the law shift in his favor. And at the end of it, it doesn't really matter what he knew. If the law didn't allow him to draw the sample, then it didn't, no matter what he knew or didn't know. Law says "No sample unless you have one of these three things". He had none of them. No sample, no matter how bad his temper is.

You should read the law before you pass judgement

Oh, and by the way, Utah law removes ALL liability from a Nurse or Dr when drawing blood when ordered to do so by a police officer.. so she wouldn't/ couldn't have lost her job, her license.. been fired.. or been sued.. for doing what she was told/asked to do.. so remove that from her heroic write up..

 

[itsbob]

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/Chapter6A/41-6a-S522.html

Utah Annotated Code.. Revisited and revised after the SCOTUS ruling in 2016 regarding blood draws of people incapable of refusing consent.

 

[itsbob]

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.

Utah Annotated Code.. Revisited and revised after the SCOTUS ruling in 2016 regarding blood draws of people incapable of refusing consent.

And MAYBE, just MAYBE the evidence they collect after the fact can support the Truck Drivers family if they choose to sue the person that hit him.. he was in bad shape.. he may have died. In a lawsuit the bloodtest may not have been key, but maybe could have sped up the process for them to maybe settle out of court.. proving he had NOTHING in his system could be as important as proving he did..

 

[Chris0nllyn]

And when he said "Ok Enough, you're under arrest!" did she willfully comply, or did she resist? She didn't pull away and run?? She didn't continue to scream and resist his efforts to handcuff her??

By the letter of the law (and it's broad), she did resist. I think you're going down a deep, dark, rabbit hole. If an officer is having a bad day and decides to arrest someone simply for looking at them the wrong way (legally, an unlawful arrest, same as in this case) and that person, rightfully, decides to pull away and do what she did, the officer could likely get away with shooting that person. Is that how you want law enforcement to be? A heavy hand of the state that envokes so much fear into people that they aren't even allowed to express frustration? That if and when an officer makes a mistake, for whatever reason, and regardless if the person being arrested is right, they could be shot simply for the loose "resisting" charge?

I'm sorry. I don't believe that. I believe the police have a job to protect and serve the people, not use their position of power to get what they, then figure out the legality of it later on. But people shouldn't be surprised about this. Rarely does anything happen to bad officers.

Again, the video was a 30 second long snippet of a 2 hour long encounter.. yet you've mad your mind up and convicted him, and let her off the hook..

Damn right. He made it through 2 hours without arresting her. 2 hours he could have used to get a warrant instead of swinging his dick around.

Again.. Hospital Policy trumps Law when exactly??

What law? The law that numerous people have shown you that says they can't take blood from an unconscience person without consent? That hospital policy just happens to line up with that. The same policy the sheriff's office agreed to. Because Officer Payne felt the need to sleep through that training doesn't mean the policy is bad.

And your dumbass posts things you agree with like.. "RapeMobile"?

WTF are you talking about? I never said such a thing, and you should know that before making such statements. I'd ask you to provide proof, and as easy as that is to do on this site, it's like pulling teeth for most people.

Seriously??

So she was raped too, I didn't see that on the video..

I don't know anything about a rape accusation. Just going off what I saw.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

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/Chapter6A/41-6a-S522.html

Utah Annotated Code.. Revisited and revised after the SCOTUS ruling in 2016 regarding blood draws of people incapable of refusing consent.

That's for someone suspected of a DUI (Part 5 of chapter 6a is DUI and Reckless driving under Utah code). The driver of the truck, and subject of the blood draw in this case, was under no suspicion of being impaired.

 

[itsbob]

I don't know anything about a rape accusation. Just going off what I saw.

Look up.. I actually took the time to quote the law that doesn't exist and even provided a link..

 

[Weems]

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.

Utah Annotated Code.. Revisited and revised after the SCOTUS ruling in 2016 regarding blood draws of people incapable of refusing consent.

Read the whole law. Probable cause is a prerequisite. By law enforcement's own words, the truck driver wasn't under any sort of suspicion. You cherry picked a subsection.

 

[itsbob]

That's for someone suspected of a DUI (Part 5 of chapter 6a is DUI and Reckless driving under Utah code). The driver of the truck, and subject of the blood draw in this case, was under no suspicion of being impaired.

Can you highlight where in that paragraph it says that??