Cop Attacks, Kidnaps Nurse for Refusing to Break the Law for Him & Warrantlessly Draw Blood

[Joel]

WATCH: Cop Attacks, Kidnaps Nurse for Refusing to Break the Law for Him & Warrantlessly Draw Blood


For refusing to break the law for a bully cop, an innocent nurse was assaulted, kidnapped and arrested—in the land of the free.


Salt Lake City, UT — For refusing to do the illegal bidding of a Salt Lake City police detective, a University Hospital nurse was assaulted and arrested. Now, she is showing the public the video of the attack to let them know how untrained in the law some officers can be and how this can lead to innocent people having their rights violated.

The footage is from an incident on July 26. It is from University Hospital and officer body cameras and it shows Detective Jeff Payne attempting to convince nurse Alex Wubbels to get a blood sample from a patient who’d been injured in a fatal car accident.

In the video, Wubbels is attempting to explain to the officer that blood cannot be taken from an unconscious patient unless there is a warrant, the patient is under arrest, or the patient consents. None of these factors were present at the time Payne was demanding blood, so Wubbles was merely following the law.

This infuriated the detective, who at one point during the conversation resorted to making threats against Wubbles.

“I either go away with blood in vials or body in tow,” Payne says.

Wubbles confirms with several hospital officials and again tells Payne that it is against the law to draw the victim’s blood. Instead of simply obeying the law, Payne chose to assault and kidnap the nurse.

“Help! Help! Somebody help me! Stop! Stop! I did nothing wrong!” Wubbles screams as her assailant handcuffs her, drags her to his patrol car, and shoves her inside.

Naturally, neither of the other two officers who witnessed the illegal kidnapping and assault chose to intervene.

After Payne arrests Wubbles, he then begins planning his spiteful revenge on the rest of the hospital for refusing to break the law.

“I’ll bring them all the transients and take good patients elsewhere,” Payne says.

In spite of kidnapping an innocent woman on video for the sole act of refusing to break the law for a cop, Payne has yet to face any punishment. The only thing that happened to him was that he was temporarily suspended from the department’s blood-draw program that teaches cops how to get blood samples. However, he remains on regular duty.

As the Salt Lake City Tribune reports, in a written report, Payne said he was responding to a request from Logan police to get the blood sample, to determine whether the patient had illicit substances in his system at the time of the crash. Payne explained the “exigent circumstances and implied consent law” to Wubbels, but, according to his report, she said “her policies won’t allow me to obtain the blood sample without a warrant.”

Payne then passed the buck Lt. James Tracy, whom he blamed for telling him to get the blood sample. Tracy did not deny this either. In his report, Tracy explained that he spoke with Wubbels on the phone and attempted to convince her to take the blood too, noting that they had “implied consent.”

Kara Porter, an attorney representing Wubbels, told the Tribune, however, that “implied consent” has not been the law in Utah since 2007, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that the Constitution permits warrantless breath tests in drunken-driving arrests, but not warrantless blood tests. She stressed that the patient was always considered the victim in the case and never was suspected of wrongdoing.

What’s more, the aggressive attitude of police to take blood from the victim could’ve been to protect themselves from liability for potentially causing the fatal crash that put the victim in the hospital in the first place.

At 2 pm that day, the victim, William Gray, a truck driver and part time police officer, was driving his semi down Hwy 89. Suddenly, Marcos Torres, 26 came barrelling down the road, crashing into Gray’s truck head on. Torres died at the scene.

Police were in pursuit of Torres at that time. They gave chase after receiving reports of Torres driving recklessly. Perhaps, they wanted to find something in Gray’s system as a means of alleviating any potential liability for causing the deadly crash.

Sadly, according to Wubbels, this intimidation by police to health care workers is not uncommon. She told the Tribune that she’d heard of other health care workers being bullied by police and noted that her video proves there is a major problem.

In case after case, TFTP has reported on officers convincing hospital staff to commit unspeakable against otherwise entirely innocent people. TFTP has reported on numerous incidents in which police have made hospital staff conduct x-rays, forced sodomy, and even perform surgery in futile attempts to find drugs in innocent people.

For standing up to this bully cop, Wubbels, who competed on the 1998 and 2002 American Winter Olympics team and has no criminal record, deserves commendation. TFTP salutes nurse Wubbels for her bravery in the face of tyranny.

“I can’t sit on this video and not attempt to speak out both to re-educate and inform,” she said. Police agencies “need to be having conversations about what is appropriate intervention.”

[ebenezerarise]

If you are not outraged by this there is something sick and wrong with you.

[larsenb]

Unfortunately, the police attract too many control freaks. And Payne can't be very bright (along w/his supervisor) to not understand that arresting a charge nurse for following procedures could lead to job loss on his part and outrage from every other quarter.

He was angry because he was made to wait for the call on his demand. I.e., he's the police, and deserves extra special treatment, regardless.

This mornings Deseret News has excellent coverage on this story and an excellent lead editorial (yes, this can happen from time-to-time):

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... rrest.html

and

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... nurse.html

[inho]

This is in the newspapers even here in Europe.

[kittycat51]

This all boiled my hind end when I first watched it on the news!! (here in Utah) X( I do believe the "kidnaps nurse" is a bit extreme and a good example of media hype. The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

[larsenb]

. . . . . The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

Huh?? Wow.

Oh, I think I get it. I read it wrong. You're saying the cop's reasoning for arresting her were bogus. RIght. Couldn't agree more.

[Joel]

Why Police Can’t Just Take Someone’s Blood While They’re Unconscious



Reaction to the treatment of Alex Wubbels at the hands of Salt Lake City Detective Jeff Payne has resulted in the unthinkable: a brief moment of national unity.

Payne’s use of force and arrest of Wubbels–her terrified screams echoing against the refusal to give into a bullying authoritarian–have catapulted the video beyond viral fame into a collective moral indictment and how-to guide for modern heroics. A police officer was caught abusing a citizen and, as of now, there have been no apologetics issued to polish his boots or explain why the victim had it coming. Finally, Americans have found a cause of police brutality to revile as one.

Still, there’s always the potential of Fox and Friends learning about what happened. So just in case you’re forced to discuss that nurse in Utah or the political economy of blood draws with older relatives this Labor Day weekend, here’s why anyone sticking up for Detective Payne is completely wrong as a matter of law.

Hospital Policy

First, we consider the hospital policy and Wubbels’ obligations as a nurse operating under the auspices of that policy.

As she very patiently explained to Payne prior to her unwarranted–and likely unlawful–arrest, there are only three circumstances where blood draws are allowed from patients believed to be under the influence: (1) with a warrant; (2) with patient consent; or (3) if the patient is under arrest.

None of those criteria were satisfied. Payne did not have a warrant and told Wubbels this repeatedly.

Further, if not obviously, the patient in question could not consent that night in Utah, because he was not conscious. And he was not under arrest or apparently even facing the prospect of arrest. (Even if the patient had been under arrest, a warrantless blood test without a valid warrant would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment.)

As for any lingering confusion as to Wubbels’ responsibilities and interpretation of hospital policy, it should be noted that the University of Utah Hospital is standing by their nurse. In a statement issued September 1, the nursing department and hospital administration wrote:

During a stressful situation Nurse Wubbels chose to focus first and foremost on the care and well-being of her patient. She followed hospital procedures and protocols in this matter and was acting in her patient’s best interest.

Finally, it should be noted that the hospital’s policy was agreed upon mutually between the hospital and local police. Detective Payne either was aware of the policy or should have been aware of the policy and all exceptions. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse to flout them–especially for a cop.

Implied Consent

Second, let’s consider the concept of “implied consent”.

According to a report filed by Lt. James Tracy following Wubbels’ arrest, Payne was advised to arrest the nurse because she was interfering with a police investigation and Payne had the authority to draw the blood sample from the injured man due to Utah’s “implied consent” law. Tracy was completely in the wrong as a matter of law here because “implied consent” to draw blood was struck down by the Utah Supreme Court over 10 years ago.

In State v. Rodriguez, the court wrote:

It is difficult for us to imagine that the United States Supreme Court could muster the assurance that the consequences of alcohol dissipation are so great and the prospects for prompt warrant acquisition so remote that per se exigent circumstance status be awarded to seizures of blood for the purpose of gathering blood-alcohol evidence. Accordingly, we decline to grant per se exigent circumstance status to warrantless seizures of blood evidence.

The immediately above block of text is using slightly different language, but essentially states that blood draws are not granted an exception to the warrant requirement just because the state legislature (and police) think they should be. Tracy and Payne should have been well aware of the change in law seeing as how it occurred more than a decade prior.

The Fourth Amendment

Finally, let’s briefly consider the basic necessity of a warrant here.

Recall that Detective Payne did not have a warrant and could not get a warrant because there was–admittedly–no probable cause. Probable cause is a necessary component for a valid search and seizure warrant. And a search and seizure warrant is a constitutional requirement for the court room admissibility of blood removed from someone without their consent. In other words, cops cannot draw blood without a warrant and there was no warrant here.

This is the major holding in Birchfield v. North Dakota.

That case was decided just last year, however, it is incumbent on police officers, detectives and lieutenants to be well-versed in the constitutional rules governing their occupations. Nurse Wubbels was aware of the law on point. The police have absolutely no excuse.

[Rose Garden]

This all boiled my hind end when I first watched it on the news!! (here in Utah) X( I do believe the "kidnaps nurse" is a bit extreme and a good example of media hype. The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

I believe that we need to be careful not to give authority figures a free pass just because of their station. The fact that charges weren't even made against the nurse demonstrates that the propose of this man detaining the nurse is purely to physically restrain her so she can't prohibit him from performing an illegal act. What would it be called if it weren't a police officer that had done this? Whatever that is, that is how we ought to be treating this because the moment a police officer disregards the law, he is no longer acting as an officer of the law. If we don't expect those who uphold or laws to be held to our laws, we have no real law and order.

[Z2100]

Saw this yesterday on Apple News.

I assume she didn’t receive any charges and the police officer was suspended.

[Lizzy60]

Saw this yesterday on Apple News.

I assume she didn’t receive any charges and the police officer was suspended.

This happened July 26. She was not charged. However, the officer was not suspended until yesterday, after the video went public and viral. It appears they were sweeping the incident under the rug.

[larsenb]

This all boiled my hind end when I first watched it on the news!! (here in Utah) X( I do believe the "kidnaps nurse" is a bit extreme and a good example of media hype. The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

I believe that we need to be careful not to give authority figures a free pass just because of their station. The fact that charges weren't even made against the nurse demonstrates that the propose of this man detaining the nurse is purely to physically restrain her so she can't prohibit him from performing an illegal act. What would it be called if it weren't a police officer that had done this? Whatever that is, that is how we ought to be treating this because the moment a police officer disregards the law, he is no longer acting as an officer of the law. If we don't expect those who uphold or laws to be held to our laws, we have no real law and order.

Love that quote from Buffalo Girl. That's a keeper. Thanks to you and Buffalo Girl.

[kittycat51]

This all boiled my hind end when I first watched it on the news!! (here in Utah) X( I do believe the "kidnaps nurse" is a bit extreme and a good example of media hype. The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

I believe that we need to be careful not to give authority figures a free pass just because of their station. The fact that charges weren't even made against the nurse demonstrates that the propose of this man detaining the nurse is purely to physically restrain her so she can't prohibit him from performing an illegal act. What would it be called if it weren't a police officer that had done this? Whatever that is, that is how we ought to be treating this because the moment a police officer disregards the law, he is no longer acting as an officer of the law. If we don't expect those who uphold or laws to be held to our laws, we have no real law and order.

I think people are misconstruing my comment intent. I totally disagree with what happened. I can't stress that enough. I think the newspaper article went overboard saying she was "kidnapped" however. No she was just arrested unlawfully, and by THAT I mean by a cop who was grossly abusing his authority. (Or proper lack thereof) You stir the kettle more by adding in wording like "kidnapping".

[David13]

This all boiled my hind end when I first watched it on the news!! (here in Utah) X( I do believe the "kidnaps nurse" is a bit extreme and a good example of media hype. The cop simply arrested her for bogus reasoning's.

I believe that we need to be careful not to give authority figures a free pass just because of their station. The fact that charges weren't even made against the nurse demonstrates that the propose of this man detaining the nurse is purely to physically restrain her so she can't prohibit him from performing an illegal act. What would it be called if it weren't a police officer that had done this? Whatever that is, that is how we ought to be treating this because the moment a police officer disregards the law, he is no longer acting as an officer of the law. If we don't expect those who uphold or laws to be held to our laws, we have no real law and order.

I think people are misconstruing my comment intent. I totally disagree with what happened. I can't stress that enough. I think the newspaper article went overboard saying she was "kidnapped" however. No she was just arrested unlawfully, and by THAT I mean by a cop who was grossly abusing his authority. (Or proper lack thereof) You stir the kettle more by adding in wording like "kidnapping".

Quite right, my fellow cat. The term is basically 'false arrest'. Not "kidnapping". It's similar, but there are differences.
dc

[Rose Garden]

I'm not saying that any particular term is right or wrong. I'm saying, what would it be called if a regular person had done what the officer did? What would I be charged with if I handcuffed a nurse and detained her in my car for a while because she was legally upholding policy prohibiting me from performing a medical procedure on one of her patients? Whatever that charge would be is what the officer should be charged with.

[David13]

I'm not saying that any particular term is right or wrong. I'm saying, what would it be called if a regular person had done what the officer did? What would I be charged with if I handcuffed a nurse and detained her in my car for a while because she was legally upholding policy prohibiting me from performing a medical procedure on one of her patients? Whatever that charge would be is what the officer should be charged with.

It would also be called false arrest. False arrest is a tort in law where the arrest is without legal basis, without probable cause, or done by a security guard or guard company, or private citizens.
In California, there are statutory provisions for 'citizens arrest' whereby a citizen can arrest someone.
I cannot tell you about Utah law.
dc

[Rose Garden]

I'm not saying that any particular term is right or wrong. I'm saying, what would it be called if a regular person had done what the officer did? What would I be charged with if I handcuffed a nurse and detained her in my car for a while because she was legally upholding policy prohibiting me from performing a medical procedure on one of her patients? Whatever that charge would be is what the officer should be charged with.

It would also be called false arrest. False arrest is a tort in law where the arrest is without legal basis, without probable cause, or done by a security guard or guard company, or private citizens.
In California, there are statutory provisions for 'citizens arrest' whereby a citizen can arrest someone.
I cannot tell you about Utah law.
dc

I believe you might be right. I also think there might be additional charges for assault and for illegally performing the blood draw.

[Matchmaker]

The Lieutenant on the phone who told the Officer to arrest the nurse and take her in is ultimately where the buck should stop. The Officer at the hospital was just following orders, unfortunately.

[David13]

I'm not saying that any particular term is right or wrong. I'm saying, what would it be called if a regular person had done what the officer did? What would I be charged with if I handcuffed a nurse and detained her in my car for a while because she was legally upholding policy prohibiting me from performing a medical procedure on one of her patients? Whatever that charge would be is what the officer should be charged with.

It would also be called false arrest. False arrest is a tort in law where the arrest is without legal basis, without probable cause, or done by a security guard or guard company, or private citizens.
In California, there are statutory provisions for 'citizens arrest' whereby a citizen can arrest someone.
I cannot tell you about Utah law.
dc

I believe you might be right. I also think there might be additional charges for assault and for illegally performing the blood draw.

I agree there may be additional charges if the officer is charged with anything.
But I have to disagree about the blood draw. I'm am going to say I'm 99.999999% certain the officer did not get the blood sample. I cannot imagine in my wildest imagination that they took it upon themselves to draw the blood. I'm going to say only 2 cops in the entire USA would be crazy enough to draw their own blood sample, and no Lt would ever ask an officer to do so. They do some outrageous things, but never their own medical procedures.
dc

If nothing else the Lt would say "union regalations". (mispronunciation intended)

Except of course for deliverin' babies. We do know that many a cop has delivered a baby, well, not really delivered, the mother actually does that but assisted in a medical way in helping the mother at that delivery.

[buffalo_girl]

There is more to this story that surfaces only in snippets found in various reports. Right now, I'm too tired to go through my links for substantiation of what seems to be essential background.

The July 26 accident was the result of a Hwy Patrol chase of someone driving a pickup. I don't think I ever saw what the pickup driver did to warrant the chase.

The pickup driver lost control, slammed into the semi-truck causing an explosive fire which killed the pickup driver and severely burned and injured the semi-driver.

The semi-driver's injuries were so critical that on site EMS personnel administered IV meds to manage shock and pain. From one of the SLC articles linked above, this patient continues to be in a coma at the UofU burn unit.

The semi-driver has an excellent commercial driver record of several years, is married with children, and is a reserve police officer in the town where he lives in Idaho. He was NOT at fault in the accident. The pickup fleeing Hwy Patrol hit the semi.

As I recall, Officer Payne was actually 'trained' to draw blood from folks detained and suspected of being 'under the influence'. Perhaps, Officer Payne felt himself equal to a critical care RN.

WHY would LE think it necessary to draw blood from a critically injured victim of a cop chase accident? WHAT would the blood show? Well, for one thing, if morphine was administered in order to stabilize the patient, wouldn't that complicate any 'under the influence' findings? Certainly!

My cynical personal opinion has it that LE were hoping to shift the responsibility of this horrific accident away from their actions which more than likely precipitated it. It was a long shot they were willing to take.

If this aggressive behavior arose from a corrupt motivation, one has to wonder to what extent they might feel justified in bending the truth in other situations?

[David13]

I was unaware that the cop might have been trained or certified to draw blood.
But getting the blood might have impacted any number of liability issues.
dc

[ebenezerarise]

There is more to this story that surfaces only in snippets found in various reports. Right now, I'm too tired to go through my links for substantiation of what seems to be essential background.

I watched an hour and a half of videos related to this, I was so angry. I saw the cops approach her, conspire together to go around her if they needed to, and ultimately arrest her and then question themselves for what they did. The pressure on her was tremendous.

The July 26 accident was the result of a Hwy Patrol chase of someone driving a pickup. I don't think I ever saw what the pickup driver did to warrant the chase.

The pickup driver lost control, slammed into the semi-truck causing an explosive fire which killed the pickup driver and severely burned and injured the semi-driver.

The semi-driver's injuries were so critical that on site EMS personnel administered IV meds to manage shock and pain. From one of the SLC articles linked above, this patient continues to be in a coma at the UofU burn unit.

The semi-driver has an excellent commercial driver record of several years, is married with children, and is a reserve police officer in the town where he lives in Idaho. He was NOT at fault in the accident. The pickup fleeing Hwy Patrol hit the semi.

That accident happened near where I live and it was big news. Couple of important details to point out. The highway patrol wasn't chasing him. They frankly didn't have time. It was all over the news there was an erratic driver near the canyon and lots of people were trying to pinpoint his location. There were two highway patrol units near a called in sighting and they had less than 10-seconds to get behind the guy before he veered from the southbound lanes into the semi coming the other way. The trucker never had a chance.

The "accident" sent a fireball into the air and the trucker got out of his semi on fire and he had to be extinguished by one of the highway patrol men. The other was getting life flight moving and they likely saved that man's life with their timely action. The highway patrol was heroic given what little chance that had with this driver.

As I recall, Officer Payne was actually 'trained' to draw blood from folks detained and suspected of being 'under the influence'. Perhaps, Officer Payne felt himself equal to a critical care RN.

It's worse than that. This dude works as an EMT and during the video at the hospital he openly muses what his arrest meant for his job with the ambulance company. It also has him saying that he would only bring transients to that hospital in the future. This Payne guy is a real piece of work -- a dirt bag of the first order and his own words condemn him as such both before and after the arrest.

As for one cop trying to cover for a bad chase, that theory is floated around by a lot of folks but it has no basis in this case.

[Rose Garden]

The Lieutenant on the phone who told the Officer to arrest the nurse and take her in is ultimately where the buck should stop. The Officer at the hospital was just following orders, unfortunately.

The lieutenant certainly should face consequences as well. However, just following orders is not a good reason to do something you know is wrong. The most horrendous wrongs committed in this world have been done by people who felt they were not ultimately responsible for their own personal actions. When you believe that you aren't responsible for your actions, what is to stop you from doing terrible things? If you believe you can harm others because someone in authority over you told you so and would harm you for refusing to carry out their will, you will do things that you wouldn't do if you felt you were 100% responsible for your actions. The natural boundaries placed upon you to keep you from doing wrong are broken down. While it is certainly the responsibility of those placed in authority over others to see that they aren't placing pressure on their subordinates to do wrong, it's still ultimately each individual person's responsibility to make the right choices in their personal behavior.

[Rose Garden]

There is more to this story that surfaces only in snippets found in various reports. Right now, I'm too tired to go through my links for substantiation of what seems to be essential background.

The July 26 accident was the result of a Hwy Patrol chase of someone driving a pickup. I don't think I ever saw what the pickup driver did to warrant the chase.

The pickup driver lost control, slammed into the semi-truck causing an explosive fire which killed the pickup driver and severely burned and injured the semi-driver.

The semi-driver's injuries were so critical that on site EMS personnel administered IV meds to manage shock and pain. From one of the SLC articles linked above, this patient continues to be in a coma at the UofU burn unit.

The semi-driver has an excellent commercial driver record of several years, is married with children, and is a reserve police officer in the town where he lives in Idaho. He was NOT at fault in the accident. The pickup fleeing Hwy Patrol hit the semi.

As I recall, Officer Payne was actually 'trained' to draw blood from folks detained and suspected of being 'under the influence'. Perhaps, Officer Payne felt himself equal to a critical care RN.

WHY would LE think it necessary to draw blood from a critically injured victim of a cop chase accident? WHAT would the blood show? Well, for one thing, if morphine was administered in order to stabilize the patient, wouldn't that complicate any 'under the influence' findings? Certainly!

My cynical personal opinion has it that LE were hoping to shift the responsibility of this horrific accident away from their actions which more than likely precipitated it. It was a long shot they were willing to take.

If this aggressive behavior arose from a corrupt motivation, one has to wonder to what extent they might feel justified in bending the truth in other situations?

One of the stories states that it is procedure to try to draw blood from all persons involved in this sort of incident, though nothing indicates that it isn't optional. That is the extent of the explanation as far as I have found. I believe there likely was additional motives behind their insistence on drawing blood but what those are, I can only speculate. In many cases of police abuse, it seems to me that the motive is mainly an insistence that the police officers' decisions be honored based on their position of authority. I've come to realize just how jealously mortals will guard what little authority they have been given in this life. Many horrible things have been done for that purpose alone.

[Joel]

“I was scared to death… I feel betrayed,” says nurse who was arrested for refusing to allow an unconscious patient’s blood to be drawn http://cnn.it/2iUWTMq

[buffalo_girl]

As for one cop trying to cover for a bad chase, that theory is floated around by a lot of folks but it has no basis in this case.

I'm glad for that, but I'm having a hard time understanding the logic in drawing blood on a critically injured accident VICTIM who has already been IV'd and is in a 'critical care unit' fighting for his life. People with that little common sense and concern for the welfare of others probably shouldn't be responsible for the well being and safety of a community.