July 31 2017, guy fleeing police crosses median and slams into truck and dies. The truck catches fire severely burning the innocent driver, Mr. Gray, who was taken to SLC University. Police later showed up demanding to the UNCONSCIOUS innocent patient's blood. RN Alex shows them the policy requiring consent, arrest, or a warrant. Hospital administration back up RN Alex.
Police aggressively arrest RN Alex and removes her from the hospital. Officer body cam insanity released today:
In this video, the aggressive officer can be heard saying that he will ensure all the "transients" are brought to this hospitals ED since they won't cooperate after being told the administrators and privacy officer are on their way.
Original Crash (graphic):
Interesting note about Alex, she was a 2x Olympian, US Ski Team member, and national champion is Slalom and GS.
At work today I asked a police officer, who was accompanying an arrested person to the emergency room, what he thought of this case.
He said that he felt that both parties were wrong. He felt that the nurse should have complied with what the officer wanted, and then allowed the legal system to sort it out afterwards. He thought that the officer was out of line in how he went about his part of it. He said that he thought that the nurse became much too overly dramatic and should have been more cooperative.
One thing we both agreed on was that no matter who is at fault, because of the negative publicity the officer was toast. He also agreed that the officer was being very aggressive about obtaining the blood because of the hot pursuit, and the desire to protect the department legally
My husband, who is in law enforcement, agrees the officer is wrong. He felt that the blood draw was to perhaps protect the victim from the family of the person fleeing the police. He said as crazy as it sounds, they could be looking for a lawsuit against the patient Wubbles was protecting and looking for fault at him. Sounds crazy was I wouldnt be surprised in our litigious society.
I was embarrassed for how she screamed and cried. Man up! He was not taking you out back to execute you.
I am embarrassed for your tone-deafness. She was being assaulted, had no idea what this crazy man was going to do to her. He provoked every move she made.
At work today I asked a police officer, who was accompanying an arrested person to the emergency room, what he thought of this case.
He said that he felt that both parties were wrong. He felt that the nurse should have complied with what the officer wanted, and then allowed the legal system to sort it out afterwards. He thought that the officer was out of line in how he went about his part of it. He said that he thought that the nurse became much too overly dramatic and should have been more cooperative.
One thing we both agreed on was that no matter who is at fault, because of the negative publicity the officer was toast. He also agreed that the officer was being very aggressive about obtaining the blood because of the hot pursuit, and the desire to protect the department legally
your officer friend was wrong, did you correct him?
Note: I'm really not aiming this at you Emergent...unless you agree with him. Then we'll talk.
I just am reporting this officer's point of view, he was a very polite young man. As I've said in other posts here, in my department we have excellent relationships with law-enforcement.
I think it's important to get people's points of view without having it turn into a debate right at the nurses station. I was a perfect one to do that since I have an emotional detachment and a non-argumentative nature. I respect his opinion from his point of view.
His viewpoint is probably reflective of many in law enforcement. I'm sure this story is a hot topic of conversation amongst them.
My husband, who is in law enforcement, agrees the officer is wrong. He felt that the blood draw was to perhaps protect the victim from the family of the person fleeing the police. He said as crazy as it sounds, they could be looking for a lawsuit against the patient Wubbles was protecting and looking for fault at him. Sounds crazy was I wouldnt be surprised in our litigious society.
I wouldn't be surprised either because I'm sure the perp was a pillar of society who never did anything wrong. Still, even if the blood draw was meant to protect the victim (I have some swamp land in Florida to sell if you believe that) it needed to go through proper channels or it would have been thrown out in court.
I just am reporting this officer's point of view, he was a very polite young man. As I've said in other posts here, in my department we have excellent relationships with law-enforcement.
I think it's important to get people's points of view without having it turn into a debate right at the nurses station. I was a perfect one to do that since I have an emotional detachment and a non-argumentative nature. I respect his opinion from his point of view.
His viewpoint is probably reflective of many in law enforcement. I'm sure this story is a hot topic of conversation amongst them.
Did you correct him? If not, you have done him a disservice.
His viewpoint is probably reflective of many in law enforcement.
Emergent, I'm not trying to be flippant when I say that for their own public-relations sake and for the general good of the country IMVHO, LEOs probably should be very cautious about discussing this casually in any terms that could be taken as self-serving. This literally is their opportunity (person to person, in local communities) to either demonstrate to the public that they respect the law or that they "respect the law...BUT...". I believe times are such that people aren't going to accept the latter reasoning/commentary very easily. I am concerned for the innumerable LEOs who are not like Mr. Payne and his superior.
Online at least, your local guy's viewpoint doesn't seem to be prevailing last time I perused comments in which people self-identified as LEOs. Most I've come across seem to be eager to separate themselves from this "what you say doesn't matter because 'I'm the law'" mentality, and from the idea that it's reasonable for a LEO to be so ignorant of the laws that apply directly to his own hired position.
I haven't seen anyone mention that Mr. Payne actually could have called his own superior and stated, "Sir, I have received enough conflicting information at this point that I am not comfortable effecting this arrest. I need to ask you to come down here physically and participate in getting to the bottom of it." That is exactly what nurses are asked to do when such situations arise, and in fact that basic thing is what Alex Wubbels did.
See? When things get hairy/confusing/whatever, you don't get to blow through anyway just by virtue of being a cop. As I said earlier, he was in NO danger, so there is literally no reason he couldn't have made any one of several other choices.
Since they are being trained that way, when they say an officer is going to be investigated, he will be found to have followed protocol. Which is why cops get off, when they are clearly in the wrong. They are just following their training and protocol.
This guy has already been fired from his second job as a paramedic. The fact that this guy had a job in health care and still acted the way he did is downright scary. My sympathy goes out to the people of SLC if this guy manages to keep his LEO job.
Emergent, I'm not trying to be flippant when I say that for their own public-relations sake and for the general good of the country IMVHO, LEOs probably should be very cautious about discussing this casually in any terms that could be taken as self-serving. This literally is their opportunity (person to person, in local communities) to either demonstrate to the public that they respect the law or that they "respect the law...BUT...". I believe times are such that people aren't going to accept the latter reasoning/commentary very easily. I am concerned for the innumerable LEOs who are not like Mr. Payne and his superior.
Online at least, your local guy's viewpoint doesn't seem to be prevailing last time I perused comments in which people self-identified as LEOs. Most I've come across seem to be eager to separate themselves from this "what you say doesn't matter because 'I'm the law'" mentality, and from the idea that it's reasonable for a LEO to be so ignorant of the laws that apply directly to his own hired position.
I haven't seen anyone mention that Mr. Payne actually could have called his own superior and stated, "Sir, I have received enough conflicting information at this point that I am not comfortable effecting this arrest. I need to ask you to come down here physically and participate in getting to the bottom of it." That is exactly what nurses are asked to do when such situations arise, and in fact that basic thing is what Alex Wubbels did.
See? When things get hairy/confusing/whatever, you don't get to blow through anyway just by virtue of being a cop. As I said earlier, he was in NO danger, so there is literally no reason he couldn't have made any one of several other choices.
I wish I could like this post a million times over.
Did you correct him? If not, you have done him a disservice.
Of course I didn't correct him in the middle of a busy shift while he was standing by with someone who had been arrested. I was glad that he had been forthright in expressing his opinion, which is all I had asked. I don't think that was the time and place to get into an argument or debate.
RunnerNurse09, BSN, RN
185 Posts
My husband, who is in law enforcement, agrees the officer is wrong. He felt that the blood draw was to perhaps protect the victim from the family of the person fleeing the police. He said as crazy as it sounds, they could be looking for a lawsuit against the patient Wubbles was protecting and looking for fault at him. Sounds crazy was I wouldnt be surprised in our litigious society.