Questions About Unjust Police Conduct
- Thread starter Tom Pitt
- Start date
Thriller and I don't agree on much but this is spot on. Cops were fishing at this point. That cop had no business drawing blood without a warrant or consent. He was just pissed that the nurse didn't do what he wanted.
There is a difference between a search and drawing blood - which is an invasive medical procedure. Not sure if that's been mentioned already. If it's that important see a judge and get a court order - jurisdictions have someone available 24/7.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Nah. Sounds like too much work. And a little risky too, since someone might not sign off on that. Let's just hurry, rush into a hospital and bully some chick, and be home early for dinner. Blonde Nurses are real pushovers, especially when you accuse them of obstruction of justice.
Right? How many times are people gonna get stabbed while the officer is filling out all that paperwork?
Sent from my SM-J700P using JazzFanz mobile app
As long as it is three times or less it is all good.
Yeah i reckon what the cops did in this case is wrong, what i am saying is that in some circumstances illegal searches are justifiable.
Justifiable how? Legally? Justifiable as in ethical? I'll assume what you mean is that you can do something illegal and be able to concoct a "justifiable" reason that clears you. Yeah, that happens a lot, but I'd clarify what you mean by justified.
In Australia these are state not federal laws, in a bunch of circumstances, consent is not required for blood to be taken or any other form of search to be performed. In this very instant, all drivers in a motor vehicle accident where someone is injured have to have a blood test, whether they consent to it or not.
The idea is to intervene before the weapon is produced, to maintain initiative and control the situation, you should aim to prevent a situation which is life threatening if it is foreseeable.
Pretty much exactly what i mean, massaging the law to cover yourself after an incident, almost any action i take for example is covered as legal if i act under the direction of a senior clinician, I understand this to mean a doctor, (proper one, registrar and above.) However in some circumstances a nurse will pass as a senior clinician and the senior consultant will cover for us later if need be.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Why the **** is this pos still allowed to post?
[MENTION=4944]Rubashov[/MENTION]
If there are times when searches need to be conducted that are not currently legal, then those situations should be made to be legal. If, there are reasons why that can't happen then maybe those searches should not be legalized and are not justified?
I don't really get the assertion that illegal searches sometimes ought to be done. In the U.S. if you have a good reason to search you can usually get a judge to sign off on it, making it legal. If the law isn't covering all situations where "good" searches should be done then the law can and should be changed.
If there are times when searches need to be conducted that are not currently legal, then those situations should be made to be legal. If, there are reasons why that can't happen then maybe those searches should not be legalized and are not justified?
I don't really get the assertion that illegal searches sometimes ought to be done. In the U.S. if you have a good reason to search you can usually get a judge to sign off on it, making it legal. If the law isn't covering all situations where "good" searches should be done then the law can and should be changed.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
There are already stipulations that enable police to perform searches without warrants, probable cause.
https://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/probable-cause/
I'm not sure why we (I'm not talking about you specifically, bullet. I'm just talking in general to the forum here) are arguing about this. The person who the police were trying to steal blood from wasn't a suspect, but a victim. Furthermore, the SLPD had a written agreement (showed by the nurse) of the SLPD and the hospital agreeing upon the policy she stated before them.
The officers involved didn't give a damn about a policy that their own department agreed to. They were merely pissed that some blonde woman denied them. They were desperate, hoping to blame this accident on the long shot that the semi truck driver had been inebriated. And were pissed that some woman they could easily push over with a sneeze was standing up to them.
Sadly this is an all too common trend.
In my own experience, I've seen about 50 percent of cops being intelligent, hard working, and caring people doing a noble and courageous service. The other 50 percent are gun obsessed adrenaline seeking bullies who just want to control people. 2/3 of those officers were the latter while the 1 was clearly the former (but didn't have the balls to stand up to the other 2 officers)
There are times when its not feasible, as a hypothetical example from earlier in the week... Voluntary psychiatric patient goes nuts just before midnight attacks other patients and staff with a pool cue, patient has access to a range of other weapons. Now as the law should work once patient is disarmed they should be arrested and charged with a number of criminal assaults, however they will go to court and be found to be incompetent and police and the courts time will be wasted.
In effect what happens is the patient on commencing to assault people becomes involuntary (the paperwork and legal recommendations will be done at a later point in order to make all that happens next legal.) The patient is then disarmed, forcibly searched, strip searched if need be, transferred to a secure ward, medicated and normally locked into a room until a treatment plan is made the next morning. The time between the assault commencing and the seclusion room door locking is normally well under 10 minutes, however until the paper work is completed by a doctor this person should have full legal rights like you an me, we are in effect breaking the law and violating their legal rights. But its also a gray area because it would be argued that a verbal instruction from a "qualified person" is justifiable cause for our action. A lot of what is done is common sense, plus if you are able to argue that your actions were driven by a well founded belief that it is to protect the public or the person from themselves you would be very unlucky to face any consequences for your actions.
I think the law here works well enough without having a bunch of more specific prescribed laws, there are a bunch of common sense protections for your actions, I'm not a fan of having too many documented laws, I rather have jurists interpret the spirit of the law and come to a common sense outcome. Interestingly searches for blood and genetic material which are broadly covered under normal search powers are being broadly prescribed legally and as I've said earlier under a whole bunch of circumstances taking police bloods has become mandatory without much resistance from the civil libertarians and others.
Last edited:
In the U.S. that would be a no-brainer legal search without having to get a warrant. Cops can search without a warrant all the time. Maybe that's part of our objection to what you're saying. In the U.S. the cops have to be as crazy as the **** in the video this thread is based on to ever have an issue with a search.
As a guard in a hospital i have no search powers at all, until the patient is recommended, (There is talk of this changing but i doubt it will happen, there have been a bunch of recommendations made to parliament recently on the back of a doctor dying from being assaulted by a visitor and another one getting stabbed a bunch of times in the foyer of his hospital by the husband of a patient he refused to treat.) Police have I think broader search powers here than in the United States, for instance if i tell a cop i saw you put drugs in your pocket, that is justification for a search. You can basically be searched because a police officer doesn't like the look of you. i can't remember the specific wording, well founded reason of something.
In this case why didn't the cop just get a warrant? wasn't like the bloke was going anywhere?
bingo
**** Australia
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I've worked in a mental health facility. What the hell does searching a resident or anyone else that enters a secure facility have to do with illegal searches?
Good lord if I go to a club I will likely have to submit to some form of a search for entry. If I assault someone and get arrested I will be searched including having to show off my undercarriage. Non of that is illegal. It's also something that I shouldn't have to deal with just because some prick felt like it or was trying to cover his ***.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
I'm curious. How are the State Police in Utah? In Jersey, they're generally speaking, excellent. Obviously there can be the occasional loose cannon but those are very few and far between and dudes are really effing good. They are para-military trained essentially and have high standards in most ways. So I'm curious how they are in Utah and compare to regular ol' municipality cops.