Alex Wubbels' Arresting Officer Jeff Payne Claims He Did Nothing Wrong - Plans to Sue
Former Detective Jeff Payne lost his job over his "confrontation" with Utah Nurse Alex Wubbels over a year ago as she was trying to protect the rights of her unconscious patient. Now he is saying he did nothing wrong and plans to sue the city that fired him.
Former Detective Jeff Payne lost his job over his "confrontation" with Nurse Alex Wubbels over a year ago. Now he is saying he did nothing wrong.
Quote
"She was doing her job," he said. "I was doing my job. And unfortunately, it conflicted. And I am the one who bears most of the burden for it."
Payne insisted he had implied consent to get the blood sample from a crash victim under Alex Wubbels' care. When she refused, Payne handcuffed her.
Quote
He insists he was only following orders that day - his boss, Lt. James Tracy, had ordered that he arrest Wubbels if she didn't let him draw the patient's blood.
When asked if he thought he used too much force, he said he was just following his training.
Quote
I couldn't believe this incident went worldwide
He plans to seek $1.5 million associated with lost wages and benefits, emotional distress and defamation of character.
What are your thoughts? Should he be awarded $1.5 million for simply "doing his job"?
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
Regarding the McDonald's coffee lawsuit: McDonald's had been cited several times prior to the incident by OSHA for keeping their coffee 20 to 30° hotter than OSHA recommendations. They knew that the temperature they served their coffee could cause third-degree burns in under 10 seconds of exposure, but they chose to serve it that way anyway because they thought it "tasted better".
Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).
"Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000."
she got burned because she did something stupid, why should McDonald's have to pay for her stupidity?
The very nature of a drive through means that it is foreseeable that some will spill. The same concept applies to many situations. That's why housekeeping puts signs when they mop, that's why swimming pools are required to have fences.
This thread was a, "two for the price of one" in terms of two contemporary issues. I appreciate the knowledge and critical thinking of all of you and this is why I find allnurses a great benefit. Thank you for taking the time to share!
In the US, some lawsuits are filed to punish the individuals or corporations that do something that they know they should not do, but do it anyway regardless of whether it is harmful to anyone. They can also be filed because an individual wants what happened to them to just be acknowledged or apologized for, especially when it is something that could have easily been prevented.
In this case, McDonald's was serving scalding hot coffee, and knew perfectly well that if it was spilled by someone, they would sustain substantial burns. They just didn't care, and the amounts sought in lawsuits wasn't large enough yet to make them care. The jury awarded the amount they did to punish McDonald's for their blatant disregard of this.
Also, the poor elderly lady spilled coffee on herself as she was trying to add cream and sugar while sitting in the passenger seat of a vehicle. Surely you have spilled something on yourself before, but that doesn't make you stupid, does it? It could make you clumsy, sure, but she was almost 80 years old. At that age, she could have had tremors that made it difficult to hold on to things or her gripping strength may not be very strong. In no way is that stupidity on her behalf, and that is a very callous thing to say.
Even if it was "stupidity" that caused her to spill coffee on herself, when McDonald's knowingly kept their coffee at such temperatures to cause third degree burns, yes, they should have to pay for the substantial medical bills. Surely you can agree that spilling a hot beverage on yourself should not result in burns severe enough to need skin grafts and cost $20,000+ in medical bills, especially in the 1990s, when hospital bills were less than they are now.
I am truly sorry that she was burned. But just as you say McD should have known better, shouldn't she have known better than to do what she did? In view of her grip strength and age, that is.
On the other hand, the statement McD released was outrageously stupid and callous beyond belief - almost.
As for Payne being in the ER for 3 hours - wow. But he and his Lt. should have taken the word of the hospital administrator when Alex got him or her on the phone.
I am truly sorry that she was burned. But just as you say McD should have known better, shouldn't she have known better than to do what she did? In view of her grip strength and age, that is.
On the other hand, the statement McD released was outrageously stupid and callous beyond belief - almost.
As for Payne being in the ER for 3 hours - wow. But he and his Lt. should have taken the word of the hospital administrator when Alex got him or her on the phone.
Alex was stupid to settle for 1/2 million.
Oh, I think there definitely could have been some comparative fault found against her for spilling the coffee, but it would be negligible because I think McDonald's only should be held liable for the third degree burns. They specifically had knowledge that their coffee would very quickly cause severe burns, and they just didn't care. I don't know if she would be expected to know that the coffee was so hot that it would have caused burns to that degree. Sure, you expect to be burned if you spill something hot on yourself, but not that badly, and apparently the jury agreed.
I apologize for highjacking this thread for these responses. I do not know anything about the Alex Wubbels arrest, so I cannot really comment on that, but I have previously spent time reading about the McDonald's case so wanted to comment on it.
I don't know a single person who hasn't spilled a drink on themselves. I also don't know a single person who has sustained third degree burns from spilling a drink on themselves. A lot of people don't know the truth behind that warning so I thought I'd share.
I have the fundamental belief that a restaurant meal should not be served in a way that puts the consumer at pointless risk for catastrophic injury. The court system shares that value, you do not, so I don't think anything I say could persuade you. I'll try not to derail the thread any further.
I don't put hot anything between my knees and take the cover off, that was stupid and her own fault.
In the US, some lawsuits are filed to punish the individuals or corporations that do something that they know they should not do, but do it anyway regardless of whether it is harmful to anyone. They can also be filed because an individual wants what happened to them to just be acknowledged or apologized for, especially when it is something that could have easily been prevented.
In this case, McDonald's was serving scalding hot coffee, and knew perfectly well that if it was spilled by someone, they would sustain substantial burns. They just didn't care, and the amounts sought in lawsuits wasn't large enough yet to make them care. The jury awarded the amount they did to punish McDonald's for their blatant disregard of this.
Also, the poor elderly lady spilled coffee on herself as she was trying to add cream and sugar while sitting in the passenger seat of a vehicle. Surely you have spilled something on yourself before, but that doesn't make you stupid, does it? It could make you clumsy, sure, but she was almost 80 years old. At that age, she could have had tremors that made it difficult to hold on to things or her gripping strength may not be very strong. In no way is that stupidity on her behalf, and that is a very callous thing to say.
Even if it was "stupidity" that caused her to spill coffee on herself, when McDonald's knowingly kept their coffee at such temperatures to cause third degree burns, yes, they should have to pay for the substantial medical bills. Surely you can agree that spilling a hot beverage on yourself should not result in burns severe enough to need skin grafts and cost $20,000+ in medical bills, especially in the 1990s, when hospital bills were less than they are now.
coffee is hot, unless you are ordering iced. yes she acted in a stupid manner, and paid the consequence for that, that is not, and should not, be McDonald's problem.
Regarding the McDonald's coffee lawsuit: McDonald's had been cited several times prior to the incident by OSHA for keeping their coffee 20 to 30° hotter than OSHA recommendations. They knew that the temperature they served their coffee could cause third-degree burns in under 10 seconds of exposure, but they chose to serve it that way anyway because they thought it "tasted better".
citations on OSHA regs, please. again, this case should never have gone to court, never mind her winning. personal accountability.
K9lover, ASN, RN
507 Posts
Did nothing wrong? He is suing for plan and simple not getting a pension due to being fired.
Glad I work in corrections; deputy close at hand and protects me if inmate becomes violent.