I don't understand a word of this. Are you trying to say the specific cop on the video is innocent because of other times when he hasn't done the same thing? You know OJ just did that the one time, right? Is it the cop is just a pawn in this? A really angry pawn?

Baffling item: Your capitalization of "VICTIM"; why are you doing that? What does the capitalization mean?

The truck driver is the victim. Why do they even need to test him, especially when he is unconscious and a nurse is saying it isn't permitted.

You think every time a drunk driver plows into cars they test everyone who was hit for drugs/alcohol? These cops knew that a judge would not issue a warrant or they would have easily got one.

Why do you think this officer AND his boss were so adamant about getting an illegal blood draw?

Pretty obvious there was a concern this truck drive can and will sue. A good lawyer will find a fault in the pursuit and the city will settle. Him having drugs/alcohol in his system would hurt his case. I think this is the reason nobody was disciplined. In fact, this morning he still wasn't taken off duty. It was the public outcry that forced their hand.

That truck driver has a major lawsuit ahead. They will settle with him though for millions. A lawyer's dream that they tried to pin this on his client. City can't afford depositions where the truth may came out.

This was all tied to a police pursuit and was not a random accident. Just because a suspect flees a traffic citation doesn't necessarily mean you can stop them at all costs. The police have to take into account public safety concerns which is their responsibility. Cities have paid out millions of dollars in pursuit-related accidents. Virtually every agency has been forced to revise their pursuit policies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grand jury investigating LAPD. I don't know SLC, but end result is one person dead and one person severely burned. The burned truck driver will sue SLC saying the police increased the risk to other motorists...probably true. And if the driver wasn't violent and he was just fleeing a minor citation, he will have more of a case. If you or a loved one is killed because of a pursuit, I don't you will think that is ok because the police were placing a bad guy. You will wonder why they just couldn't try to capture him later vs. engaging him at 100MPH+ with innocent drivers where a collision is super-high. As in that is how many high-speed chases end.

http://www.scpr.org/news/2017/07/11/...erous-says-la/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who doesn't think there was a concern here? There is case history of a person they were pursuing being killed and they sued the agency and the officer and the Supreme Court allowed it. Here you have a person killed and another person severely burned. Of course they are scared. The pursuing officers are in an impossible bind. They can say whatever they want, but the result was catastrophic. Of course his family will sue and the truck driver. And win. Which is why the officers went to the hospital to try to gather any evidence to save them...at any cost.


***A Utah Supreme Court decision could have a "chilling effect" on law enforcement's ability to chase down wrongdoers, according to an attorney who worked on the case.

In a decision issued Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that police have a "duty of care," or a responsibility, to the people they chase down. The decision ruled in favor of the family of Wayne Torrie, 16, who died in 2010 when he crashed in Weber County after a high speed police chase. Torrie's family sued the officer that chased him, as well as the Weber County Sheriff's Office.***

http://archive.sltrib.com/article.ph...22&itype=CMSID

I wonder how much money the nurse is going to get.

The scary thing is that this **** still happens with cameras everywhere and even then the punishment is super weak unless the video goes viral.

It's absolutely gross that police get away with ****ting all over people's 4th amendment rights all the time. If only people actually cared about the constitution other than the 2nd amendment.

Even when the hospital boss on the phone says that the nurse is just following their rules(and the law) and it's not even her decision, the half mind of a police officer can't come up with anything better than "but she's the one telling me no!!". I guess his fragile mind couldn't handle being told no.

And lol @ golfnutt. That's some seriously awful posting in this thread.

A lot of money from the tax payers while the offenders get a few weeks vacation with pay. Justice the American way.

Your post is full of contradictions. Are you sure what indeed you are arguing for?

At first it seems you defend the police in their actions because they were trying to glean information (a juiced blood sample) that would exonerate their actions in a car chase.

By the end it seems as if an outside force; perhaps an alter personality has taken over and you have a feeling the nurse might have been wronged by being subjected to the animalistic behavior the cop displayed.

This is an ethereal conclusion though as your last sentence seems to project a duty to protect the corrupt police after all. Maybe you can represent them as it seems you have a way with the English language that no other can grasp.

Edit: I wrote this without reading the rest of the thread where our esteemed golf nut goes off on tangents that haven't been witnessed since Lewinsky was in the White House. I wish I had time this morning to dissect it all but alas I do not. I will leave that to someone else. I do apologize if my lengthy response looks to be convoluted. It is difficult to express clear thoughts about an argument that at least 2 or 3 individuals collaborated on.

For extra fun, google the cases where the drunk driver is a cop and suddenly nobody cares about getting blood samples, preserving evidence, reading rights...

Golfnut, I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/loca...170916047.html

I found this article just now after writing my last post in this thread.

Anyone notice the part where this cop/medic says he's going to divert patients away from this hospital for non-medical reasons to punish this hospital? If I was a fake lawyer I'd be seeing $$$$$.

In before golfnutt tells us that he isn't advocating or arguing for anything in particular, but that he simply knows all the laws related to this and he gets paid based on it.

In the video that cop looks like he's amped up on something. Acts like a roid rager.

Did they take a blood test from him?

Actually not sure why golfnutt is getting slammed so hard, I understood what he was saying in all of the posts before he started coming under attack.

I'm about as white as anybody can be (in appearance, at least), but seriously my response to the outrage over this is lol white people.

I'm guessing because his first post seems to offer a rationale or explanation in defense of the officer followed by subsequent posts which seem to contradict that defense followed by subsequent posts which again seem to defend the officers.

I just reread his posts and think that's a misread. I read them all as attacking the officers- his rationale for their behavior makes them more blameworthy.

He does all of the above in his first post alone.

I don't know for sure.

Simple explanation:
Bad cop who couldn't handle being told the law.

Complex:
There was a reason that the officer and his boss were going to do whatever it took to get that sample and they knew time was of the essence. As the other office states, that would let the courts determine the merits. Hopefully there were drugs in trucker's system which would muddy up any lawsuits against the police.

In SLC, the suspects and any victims can sue the police, and the officers personally if the pursuit itself (vs. the reason the driver was stopped) caused incremental harm. It is pretty obvious here with a 100MPH+ chase with the driver even going the wrong way on the freeway, the definition was met.

You have a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the police and all officers involved. Big time.

Your hope is to show that the truck driver was responsible and shouldn't be driving.

Which, I believe is the reason that the officers beelined to get his blood.

That is the only rational explanation why they would arrest a courteous nurse in a matter of moments. Why the officer's boss told him to arrest the nurse if she caused any problem. Why, even though officer knew the laws (his job) that he was laser focused on getting blood.

I don't think the officers would act like this is any other situation. If two citizens got into a random car accident on the streets, the police would not be at the hospital demanding blood from an innocent victim and arresting a nurse. They wouldn't care. It also makes sense in why he and his boss weren't even disciplined or put on administrative leave to review. Just reassigned.

This was an officer-involved accident where they were (are) in big-time trouble for commencing a pursuit with horrific outcomes. Police protect each other. The police were protecting the highway patrol.

Doesn't even seem that complex really. Not even that surprising. It does explain the heavy handed response and urgency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

golfnutt,

I sent you a pm about an hour ago letting you know you are contained to the bad posting thread.

I'm not reading that wall of what is sure to be incomprehensible garbage, but it seems like taking a day to reflect and then containing yourself is the play.

I don't get it either, while I might not agree with his position, I can see why he's bringing up various points and theory.



Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

I honestly have no idea what's going on, he is not posting incomprehensible garbage.

Context clues are telling me this guy must be a terrible poster but I think you guys are being pretty harsh here.

Imagine if this thread went on for a thousand posts and he had half of them. An intervention was clearly needed.

We're going to see a lot of white QBs kneeling during the anthem opening week over this.