The head of the Salt Lake Police Association has watched the country's outrage over the videos showing a nurse getting arrested for refusing to draw a man's blood without a warrant and has decided the correct response is to complain that the public got to see what its officers did.
Union head Stephen Hartney sent a letter to the city's mayor and police chief to complain video of the brief arrest of nurse Alex Wubbels has made "pariahs" of Det. Jeff Payne and his watch commander at the time of the incident, Lt. James Tracy.
Wubbels became an insta-celebrity on Labor Day weekend after she released police body camera footage showing Payne very forcefully arresting her at University of Utah Hospital because she refused his demand that she draw blood from an unconscious victim of a nasty high-speed car crash. The patient, William Gray, was not a suspect, nor involved in the chase, and Payne didn't have a warrant. Wubbels, surrounded by staff at the hospital, explained that she was not permitted to draw the man's blood. Payne arrested her, in what appeared on video to be sheer frustration at having been defied.
Payne and Tracy have been placed on leave while the case was investigated. A couple of weeks ago the city revealed an internal investigation and a civilian review board determined the two officers violated department policies.
Hartney this week complained the police body camera footage should not have been publicly released until the investigation was completed. From the Salt Lake Tribune:
The letter said the union was, at this point, not arguing or even discussing the merits of the allegations raised against the officers. "Rather we are solely concerned... with the 'investigatory process' which we believe has been corrupted."
The letter claims the city has not followed an "agreed upon and carefully scripted process" for investigating the conduct of police officers. At the news conference, Hartney focused on if the city should have released the footage so soon under the state's Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA), considering the release could have interfered with the internal affairs investigation.
The release of the body cam footage and information from the disciplinary investigation "has created a public furor which makes reasoned determinations difficult, if not impossible," the letter states.
The city, however, didn't release the videos. It agreed to a request by Wubbels to release the footage to her, following the law Hartney referenced. The city said it had no good reason to deny the video footage to Wubbels.
The two officers weren't even put on administrative leave until after Wubbels went public with the video footage.
What might have been forgotten in all of this is Wubbels released the video because she believed she was exposing a widespread problem of police bullying nurses into drawing blood without consent or a warrant.
And while Wubbels was pleased the Salt Lake City Police had been responsive to her claims of abuse, she and other hospital staff were concerned about other law enforcement agencies, including university police. Campus police did absolutely nothing during the arrest, and since then the hospital has implemented new policies to limit police access to parts of the hospital.
Public pressure and response is important to holding police officers accountable. They are public servants, and Hartney's responses, like we've seen from other police union leaders, misuse the concept of due process to try to conceal information from the people to whom the police are supposed to answer.
Yesterday we saw that a North Carolina law exempting body camera footage from public records requests was very clearly being used to try to shield police from exposure of conduct that might expose them to public criticism.
Gray, the car crash victim unable to consent to Payne's demand for a blood draw, died Monday while still in the hospital.
Poster Comment:
Gray, the car crash victim unable to consent to Payne's demand for a blood draw, died Monday while still in the hospital.
Will the cops who killed him be charged with manslaughter?
#1: Tooconservative To: Deckard (#0)
So he suffered terribly for a couple of months and died. Sad.
No. They have a no-pursuit policy in high speed chases. But if all they did was flip on their lights and pursue for a moment, they'll probably get away with it.
If they continued the pursuit at very high speed against a visibly reckless driver then a jury may make some big punitive award in a civil lawsuit by the widow. Chances are if that is the case that they will choose to settle the lawsuit before it goes to court.
What they oppose is the public routinely knowing what they do. They'd prefer to keep it under wraps and have the PD settle out of court before the public ever finds out anything, using non-disclosure settlements.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 09:39:19 Reply Private Reply
#2: misterwhite To: Tooconservative (#1)
The video was inflammatory and added nothing to the investigation. It was released by the nurse solely to garner sympathy for the nurse who brought this on herself by resisting arrest.
This is no different than all the other videos presented here and elsewhere in the Internet -- aggrieved "victims" who go against law enforcement then record the aftermath, hoping for sympathy and maybe a couple of thousand dollars. I have zero sympathy for them. As my dad would say, "they got what they deserved".
misterwhite posted on 2017-09-28 10:17:33 Reply Private Reply
#3: Tooconservative To: misterwhite (#2)
The only news, such as it is, is the police union trying to complain that the video was released at all, that the public can see how the cops try to intimidate and strongarm nurses and others even if they have no legal basis to do so (and in an accident case in which the SLCPD had absolutely no involvement or jurisdiction whatsoever).
But isn't that the whole point of body cams and recording cops? So that things just don't get swept under the rug and abusive and illegal practices continue?
We're in the court of public opinion here and you've chosen the losing side.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 10:29:32 Reply Private Reply
#4: misterwhite To: Tooconservative (#3)
IF the cop had no legal basis to do so, is that for the nurse to decide? Is the ER the place to decide it? The law, if applicable in this case, would only prevent the blood being used as evidence in a court of law. The judge decides that, not a nurse.
Now, she may have believed she had the moral basis. She may have believed it was hospital policy. She may have believed there was an agreement between the hospital and law enforcement.
And she WAS allowed to express all those beliefs. But, in the end, she was told (correctly or not) that a blood draw was legal and was gonna happen, that she was interfering, and that she was under arrest ("temporary forced detention", but that's not a category).
She then chose to start screaming and screeching and running away and resisting -- all the time she knew she was being recorded. What a performance, huh? How much do you think that was worth? $1 million?
misterwhite posted on 2017-09-28 11:04:55 Reply Private Reply
#5: A K A Stone To: misterwhite (#2)
Yes the pigs actions were reprehensible and inflammatory. The asshole should never have been a cop. He should have his ass kicked and be locked up for 15 years minimum.
He needs to be in a cell with the biggest black faggot in the prison.
A K A Stone posted on 2017-09-28 11:11:31 Reply Private Reply
#6: A K A Stone To: misterwhite (#4)
You're a fucking idiot. I hope someone kicks your ass. We all know you deserve it.
What a pathetic person you are.
If you were drowning I would throw you a life preserver only because I don't know what you look like.
A K A Stone posted on 2017-09-28 11:13:44 Reply Private Reply
#7: A K A Stone To: misterwhite (#4)
50 million taken from piggy boy directly. Not the tax payers. That would be just.
It would teach assholes like this prick to quit breaking the law and harassing people.
I sincerely hope the pig ends up with a very loose asshole.
A K A Stone posted on 2017-09-28 11:15:33 Reply Private Reply
#8: Tooconservative To: misterwhite (#4)
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 11:25:08 Reply Private Reply
#9: Tooconservative To: A K A Stone (#5)
The most they could get him for is a false arrest and violation of her civil rights. He'll blame his supervisor (because he did on video at the time). The supervisor will say that the detective took his remarks too literally and it was a misunderstanding. And that no real harm was done because the nurse was released after 20 minutes, about 10 minutes after the supervisor arrived.
No way they get prison or jail time. Reprimands, fines, possibly forced to retire or booted from the force at most. And unlikely to lose their pensions.
But it is likely the nurse will get many millions in any civil lawsuit against the SLCPD.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 11:30:00 Reply Private Reply
#10: misterwhite To: Tooconservative (#8)
And it still hasn't sunk in to your thick skull.
misterwhite posted on 2017-09-28 12:07:40 Reply Private Reply
#11: Tooconservative To: misterwhite (#10)
Maybe if you insult my thick skull, that will finally convince me. Yeah, sure.
And you probably wonder why you can't convince anyone, even here on a tiny forum. Gee, what a mystery.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 12:11:32 Reply Private Reply
#12: nolu chan To: misterwhite, Tooconservative (#2)
The nurse was right, the cop was wrong, and there is no argument to be made about it.
She can sue and collect.
The union is upset because SLC said they acted outside the job, and that leaves them with no qualified immunity. Nurse Wubbels can, and should, sue the cops directly.
nolu chan posted on 2017-09-28 16:54:08 Reply Private Reply
#13: Tooconservative To: nolu chan (#12)
Hung them out to dry, eh? Maybe they were not acting in any official capacity as authorized agents of the Logan PD or the Utah highway patrol after all.
After they got refused the first time and Logan PD said, "that's okay, we can get it elsewhere", I don't see how they had any authority to do anything at all, let alone arrest a nurse. And that scenario would leave them without a shield from SLCPD against a lawsuit.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 16:57:29 Reply Private Reply
#14: nolu chan To: Tooconservative (#13)
They were an SLC Detective and Lieutenant. SLC disowned them and the enormous civil suit looming. The Logan PD could not authorize the SLC police to do anything in SLC. They could ask, but they had no authority to delegate. It is a certainty they did not ask to get the nurse arrested.
The couldn't have had authority to do anything. Even a polite request was a request for the nurse to violate HIIPA law. A demand to stick a needle in the guy's arm was a demand to violate constitutional law.
The way this was done, I very seriously suspect this was not an isolated incident. There may be more cases that can be brought. SLC would have an idea about how big this might grow.
nolu chan posted on 2017-09-28 18:29:19 Reply Private Reply
#15: Tooconservative To: nolu chan (#14)
If they lose their houses to the nurse they falsely arrested, most people would be satisfied.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 21:36:15 Reply Private Reply
#16: goldilucky To: Tooconservative (#1)
No what they have is a reason called "totality of circumstances" which gives them carte blanche to proceed to pursue in hot pursuit cases.
goldilucky posted on 2017-09-28 21:52:49 Reply Private Reply
#17: Tooconservative To: goldilucky (#16)
I read that the Utah highway patrol has the policy I described. I read this in several Utah newspapers, posted about them here at LF.
Good4Utah: See How UHP Troopers Train for High Speed Driving and Pursuits
That's sounds a lot like no-pursuit to me. Every PD and state seem to have a different take.
Tooconservative posted on 2017-09-28 22:32:00 Reply Private Reply