It is also ASSAULT. The officer has no right to break the
Sun Sep 3, 2017 11:58pm

law just because he's a cop. Plus, the hospital does NOT have to allow someone claiming to be a phlebotomist to use their equipment or facility simply because of their insurance. If a doctor without "privileges" at the hospital came in, they'd not let him do anything to a patient either. That is just the way it is.

She was also obligated to protect her patient and NOT allow someone without hospital privileges to treat a patient there.

  • One detail you missed. Sprout, Sun Sep 3 9:57am
    No one was asking her to do it. The officer is a phlebotomist and would do it himself. One could maybe make the case that be allowing it would make her an accessory, but per the articles it would not ... more
    • It is also ASSAULT. The officer has no right to break the — Sia☺giah, Sun Sep 3 11:58pm
      • The cops were doing an end run to protect their asses.PH👁👁EY, Sun Sep 10 11:27pm
        They were chasing some alledged criminal. The criminal plowed headfirst into this guys truck. Dead criminal and seriously injured truck driver. My guess is the cops wanted to see if the truck driver... more
      • HER being requested or required to draw the blood. IMO this is one of the common problems of many different articles covering a situation where some articles cover some aspects and other articles... more
    • To allow blood to be drawn from a patient without their consent unless you have a warrant. It doesn't matter who is doing it.
      • The hospital policy allows blood to be drawn under any one of THREE conditions. Having a warrant is only one of them. The officer was TRYING to apply one of the other two, (implied consent), but with ... more
      • a law just about everywhere that drawing blood from a patient without consent is considered assault, and no nurse will even force an 8 year old who says NO to let her take blood. It isn't done and... more
        • to force anyone to accept anything. IMO there are LOTS of examples of cases where medical professionals HAVE cooperated with police to force searches of various types ACTIVELY against the wishes of... more
      • ...according to reporting anyway, is cover for the officer. Certainly ignorance of the law is no excuse, but if his lieutenant said he had the authority, is that a defense? I don't know.
        • Obeying orders is not a legal defenseSprout, Mon Sep 4 4:51pm
          from a strictly legal standpoint. However, would a JURY be swayed by it? Probably. Would a DA (who is likely looking for ANY excuse to let the officer off the hook) be willing to accept it as an... more
        • No, it isn't Jeeves, Sun Sep 3 8:15pm
          A police lieutenant is not equal to a judge
          • I agree. However...HeavyHemi, Sun Sep 3 8:28pm
            purely as an thought exercise, why isn't relying upon the authority and knowledge of your superior a defense or at least, a mitigating factor? This is separate from his other actions regarding the... more
            • globally that just obeying orders is not a defense. The military has the same concept. Do you not remember being trained as to how to handle unlawful orders?
              • Cut him some slack.PH👁👁EY, Sun Sep 10 11:32pm
                It's been awfully smokey up in Oregon what with all those pot farms catching on fire.
              • How strange...HeavyHemi, Tue Sep 5 4:08pm
                Passive aggressive as per usual. It also recognized the mitigating factor of following the orders of a superior. I'm sorry you have such a difficult time processing anything even remotely outside on... more
                • Maybe in your day...Sprout, Tue Sep 5 4:29pm
                  Our training on how to handle unlawful orders quite clearly said that following orders was in NO WAY an excuse or a mitigating factor... AGAIN, as I said, a JURY might be more sympathetic, but the... more
                  • You're getting upset because?HeavyHemi, Tue Sep 5 4:48pm
                    And again, that you try to limit the discussion to ONLY what you consider is just another example of your limitations. We're not discussing crimes against humanity or war crimes kid. I realize that... more
                    • Thanks for so conclusively provingSprout, Tue Sep 5 6:33pm
                      my point.
                      • 'conclusively proving your point'? You either read my post and decided you had no argument or, you didn't read my post and just pitched a fit.
                        • If you read your own post you wouldSprout, Wed Sep 6 8:49am
                          realize that it conclusively supports the position I have been taking all along. But, as usual, you are done.
                          • Actually, NO, it proves you're mistaken.Sia☺giah, Sun Sep 10 11:44pm
                          • Clearly you think so.HeavyHemi, Wed Sep 6 9:12am
                            Clearly you can read where your claim of absolutely no defense is objectively false. The post proves you are fundamentally dishonest. It sure is alarming how Trump Troopers have adopted the style of... more
                            • Take Hawaii for example. Hawaii has only three species of native Lepidoptera- two butterflies and one moth. Hawaii has only three species of native orchid, and nothing to write home about. Colorado's ... more
                              • In what way does this conflict withSprout, Wed Sep 6 11:28am
                                Sprout His post in your opinion, with respect to the case we have been discussing? Obeying orders is not a legal defense Mon Sep 4, 2017 4:51pm from a strictly legal standpoint.... more
                                • said could be used. I even pinpointed your failure to address them in your tantrum. Your assertion there is never a legal defense is false. I cited them. STOP LYING.
                                  • And to FURTHER clarify for you...Sprout, Wed Sep 6 12:53pm
                                    The officer was presented ON THE SCENE with the documents showing he had no authority to force the blood draw. So, he cannot claim ignorance. I would think it wasn't that hard and didn't believe you... more
                                    • Once again, you try to change the argument to your own tiny specific example instead of the actual discussion. I cited examples using your standard provided exceptions. You are in fact wrong.
                                    • I described him as a student differently. Less politically correct. I believe I wrote a sneaky little runt. Some things don't change. Same with defenses. When JP was sixteen, he looked twelve, and... more
                                      • Hahaha😀. I have to guffaw.PH👁👁EY (JP), Sun Sep 10 11:39pm
                                        That describes me to a "T." Though I was never a runt. I was so immature my elementary school held me back a year in third grade. I did not have pubic hair until 17. And today at 72 I look 60.... more
                                      • I was asked a question about a LEGAL defense of "obeying orders", and addressed it utilizing the example of the Nuremburg trials clearly showing that obeying orders to commit violations was not... more
                                        • Your argument is sound.PH💉💉EY, Sun Sep 10 11:44pm
                                          So why is it so difficult for another to grasp the simplicity of your points?
                                        • I asked the question. You don't get to change it to what YOU decide. I cited examples where in theory a defense exists. You asserted it never does. You are in fact wrong and your concession they DO... more
                                          • Not so fast:PH🗣🗣EY, Sun Sep 10 11:48pm
                                            Your manner of discussion is more akin to a bum's rush ( or is it bum rush.). You cannot just dismiss a debator with the wave of an imperial finger wag or flippant hand gesture. The buzzer has... more
                                            • Contrarian, I have asked you nicely.HeavyHemi, Mon Sep 11 12:56am
                                              Stop it now.
                                              • Stop what?PH😵😵EY, Mon Sep 11 7:41pm
                                                You mystify me. I offer an opinion. It's not a particularly nice opinion. But I felt you were being haughty. Sorry if you are offended. Forgive me.
                                              • LOL....Sprout, Mon Sep 11 8:43am
                                                And what will you do if he doesn't? Wave your finger imperiously again? Or perhaps you will taunt someone as second time... LOL Whiner.
                                                • Are you 12?HeavyHemi, Tue Sep 12 3:35am
                                                  You posted your tantrum because you're upset that you you keep losing simple arguments. Grow up kid.
                                  • LOL... aparently you didn't read themSprout, Wed Sep 6 12:51pm
                                    because they clearly did not apply in this case. Or were you told to obey unlawful orders?
            • He is a policemanJeeves, Sun Sep 3 8:45pm
              He is expected to have been trained in legal procedures, requirements, etc. ESPECIALLY if he is a trained phlebotomist, he should know the legalities involved ,
              • Can hear police communicationsPikes, Mon Sep 4 1:58pm
                in the video, so JP was talking with people at the hospital and his department. Some sounds like radio communication, but it's hard to hear exactly what. When I read the article as saw the name, I... more