How about the cop that arrested the nurse?

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
I was horrified to see on the news this nurse that was arrested in Salt Lake City. She refused to allow a blood draw. She was following the rules correctly the cop wasn't.

Utah officer who arrested nurse over blood test put on leave - ABC News - ABC News - Go.com
abcnews.go.com › Health › wireStory
23 hours ago - Wubbels told Payne that a patient had to allow a blood sample to determine intoxication or be under arrest. Otherwise, she said police needed a warrant. Police did not, but Payne insisted.

Another example of a cop that didn't do his job correctly. There are plenty of good police out there but the bad ones need to be weeded out.

Georgia officer who said 'We only kill black people' to retire - CNN - CNN.com
CNN.com › 2017/08/31 › georgia-cobb-...
1 day ago - (CNN)A police lieutenant in Georgia caught on dashcam telling a woman in a traffic stop that "we only kill black people" plans to retire. Cobb County police Lt. Greg Abbott stood to lose his job for the remarks. ... Cobb police Chief Mike Register addresses reporters Thursday.
 
Last edited:

howie105

Well-Known Member
The nurse stood her ground and did what she thought was right so good for her. On the other hand if the cop thought he was doing right thing then good for him, however if (as it looks) he was just being an ass fire his butt up.
 
Last edited:

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
The cop could have waited before he acted on hand cuffing the nurse and putting her in the squad car for 20 min. He used poor judgement and obviously doesn't know the law. She was the bigger person and accepted the police chief's apology. The two police officers are on leave pending an investigation.

The nurse was reading what the law said to the cop before he arrested her.

Some cops like to throw their authority around. Not all. A lot of good cops out there. This day where anyone can be filming you, you need to know what the fuck you are doing.
 

GreenHopper

20 going on 60
The cop was obviously a douche bag that showed zero concern for either the patient or the folk caring for them.

The nurse is a fucking hero in my books, she's not held to any oath yet fought for a principal that she was right on the money with.

I hope she sues the department just to keep the rest of the bunch in check.

Bullshit move arresting her, he should have called it in.
 

al bundy

Vaporist
She better sue on principal alone if she don't it keeps happening

Thank god it was caught on tape phone or whatever.
Otherwise he would have brought her in

And I LOVE how she was telling him the law as he was arresting her.
 

Trypsy Summers

Well-Known Member
Only in Amerika!! :cry::cry::cry:

Sad but true, very true...:evil:

But joking aside, this militarization of the 'enforcement agencies' has been gathering pace all over the world for some time. I suppose this, the latest (in a seemingly never ending long line of) incident(s), just serves to further demonstrate that *'those fucks' don't serve and protect us, they protect the CORPORATE INTEREST of the COSMOCRATS, first and foremost!! Why do you think that their called POLICE, POLIZIA, POLIC? That's right, they are just that; POLIC-Y Officers, 'protecting' the COMMERCIAL/ CORPORATE interest of their OVERLORDS, over that of the common interest of humanity, i.e. real 'flesh and blood' earth people....:mental:

Yeah, CORPORATE JUSTICE; = a freaking stomp in the face, :goon:

so how's that working?:suspicious:

It's working great......:tinfoil:


PS; *(those fucks,actually refers to every single polic(y) official who does not uphold the peace and protect the people as according to how they're supposed to)

- just for the avoidance of doubt!! If you are indeed a police officer (etc) who actually helps and protect, the people and also upholds the principles of fair and impartial justice, then I am certainly not referring to you!! :):wave:;)

Not even saying, just kinda saying, without actually saying....:hmm:

Pure Peace:leaf:
 
Last edited:

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
The cop could have waited before he acted on hand cuffing the nurse and putting her in the squad car for 20 min. He used poor judgement and obviously doesn't know the law. She was the bigger person and accepted the police chief's apology. The two police officers are on leave pending an investigation.

The nurse was reading what the law said to the cop before he arrested her.

Some cops like to throw their authority around. Not all. A lot of good cops out there. This day where anyone can be filming you, you need to know what the fuck you are doing.

This really is not focused on "the law" as much as a negotiated set of rules between the police and the hospital on blood draws. (aka hospital "policy") While I agree the officer was in the wrong, the part of the law where the problem lies is a specific iteration of informed consent and not the criminal law. For instance, if the officer DID happen to get the blood, it could possibly still be admissible in court. (If the person where the blood was sought was a suspect.) The law is not entirely clear on the matter of blood draw on an unconscious person who is suspected of a serious crime for rapidly dissipating evidence.

The recent Supreme Court holding differently is easily distinguishable as it holds the mere existence of alcohol dissipation in the blood is NOT allowed to be the sole determinant as to if there is an exigency in a DUI arrest seizure of the suspect's blood. Utah's supreme court already had a similar ruling so the law did not change there. In the Utah decision, it was supposed (So is not the "law". It would be called "dicta".) that a warrantless blood draw on a suspect, who is unconscious and who is about to enter surgery would be allowed.

5979d3871d6b0.image.jpg

utah-dashcam.jpg


This was a bad accident where a person (who was fleeing the police) died. If the person fleeing had conspired with another, this could very well be murder. (Technical reasons.) It was not a DUI investigation with no one hurt.

None of that is to dismiss the officer's errors. He was wrong and unprofessional. However, nurses and/or suspects shouldn't try to determine the legality of a complex situation from their interpretation of a memo sent out by admin. She should have told the officer that she was not going to draw blood and then go about her business.

The law on detention and arrest and search and seizure is amazingly complex. Until juries stop believing cop's Testilies as a default, this will continue. Well, and remove qualified immunity as a defense to bad state actors, but that ain't gonna happen soon.
 
Tranquility,

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
you can hand cuff someone or take someone into custody without shoving them up against a wall...nothing complex about that.
Have you ever handcuffed a woman who is screaming and pulling away?

The problem here is not the amount of force used. While not an expert, I suspect there will be no successful claim of excessive force used if there is some claim of crime (on the part of the officer) or civil rights violation related to it. The problem has to do with lack of probable cause to arrest for failure to comply with the orders of the police officer.

Once the nice people with guns start putting their hands on you, I promise things go down hill quickly if strict compliance does not result. The officer had the right to use the amount of force that would overcome resistance and she certainly resisted. Telling someone they are under arrest is not the beginning of some debate.
 
Tranquility,
  • Like
Reactions: howie105

crawdad

floatin
Have you ever handcuffed a woman who is screaming and pulling away?

no, but if i do it will be consensual.

curious though, what exactly was he going to do after arresting? start arresting everyone else in the hospital including the person on the phone? it made no sense. he seemed to be acting on anger or at least something other than what she was doing. he had proof of who was denying his request, she could be imprisoned later if the offense was great enough without requiring what he did at that time.

The problem here is not the amount of force used.

that is certainly part of the problem imho...if you are desensitized to the point that any law enforcement maneuver in this country should result in someone forcing you to a wall or the ground without a reasonable attempt to subdue peacefully then so be it, but im not.

if the officer feels she is breaking the law certainly arrest her, but he should not take his adrenaline and frustration out on her. if he had a cooler head he could of said "im now going to arrest you, put your hands behind your back..." not just reach out with a "we're done" and start the shoving and pushing.


i think this incident touches on how people feel about law enforcement in general (does with me at least), not just about blood work on the unconscious.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
i think this incident touches on how people feel about law enforcement in general (does with me at least), not just about blood work on the unconscious.
I agree this is all about feelings. People feel bad about this happening.

However, when you try to make rules based on those feelings to apply in the real world, things get much harder. They get far more complex. Use of Force rules are generally...general. What would you say the proper amount of force would be reasonable in the situation?

--Woman the officer believes is hindering his investigation is going to be placed under arrest.
--The investigation has to do with a death.
--Time is a concern because of the dissipation of evidence.
--Woman has all her friends and co-workers standing in the same area who are agitated about the situation.
--Woman pulls away and starts screaming when the officer attempts to make the physical arrest.

Now, let's change it to something else.
--Warrant is issued by the judge for the collection of the blood.
--Everything else is the same.

Would that change the amount of force that is appropriate for the situation? Why or why not?
 
Tranquility,

nosmoking

Just so Dab HAppy!
I agree this is all about feelings. People feel bad about this happening.

However, when you try to make rules based on those feelings to apply in the real world, things get much harder. They get far more complex. Use of Force rules are generally...general. What would you say the proper amount of force would be reasonable in the situation?

--Woman the officer believes is hindering his investigation is going to be placed under arrest.
--The investigation has to do with a death.
--Time is a concern because of the dissipation of evidence.
--Woman has all her friends and co-workers standing in the same area who are agitated about the situation.
--Woman pulls away and starts screaming when the officer attempts to make the physical arrest.

Now, let's change it to something else.
--Warrant is issued by the judge for the collection of the blood.
--Everything else is the same.

Would that change the amount of force that is appropriate for the situation? Why or why not?
From what I can see...the officer never put her under arrest until after he struggled with the nurse. Were done does not inform a citizen that they are under arrest. It wasn't until she was outside that he told her coworkers she was under arrest. That sounds like excessive force to me. She might have said, fine go ahead and arrest me. But instead he attacked her in a manner to take control over her because he didnt like her boss telling him he was making a mistake which he only made worse.

Edit: If the cop had a warrant, she would have given him the results.

Also, take notice how as soon as the cop explained to her coworkers that she was under arrest how she stopped resisting.

Another Edit: My wife is a nurse and you could never convince me that it is ok for a cop to use excessive force on her while she is in her line of work.
 
Last edited:

GreenHopper

20 going on 60
Poorly handled.

Treat people with more respect. Especially those who toil away their time knee deep in blood, vomit and shit.

Nurses get a raw deal. They are the front line for all the shit, get paid fuck all and are caught between a rock and a hard place.

This fucktard of an officer should have kicked it up the chain rather than throwing a hissy fit and tossing around an unarmed, completely non threatening member of society.

Right or wrong from a legal stance, all we see is violence justified because 'they said so'. I suppose it's OK to use violence against naughty kids breaking the rule because hey they broke that rule.

If ignorance is not an excuse then ignorance of ignorance is not a defence either. She obviously was out of her legal depth. She's a fucking nurse, following what she's been told by her employer. Take it up with them not out on her.

How was arresting her going to be a quicker resolution than calling a senior hospital admin to make the decision?

Why did the cop feel the arrest needed to be done in such an aggressive manner?

Did she pose an immediate threat to him? Was she going to mame him with her clipboard?

Poorly handled.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
From what I can see...the officer never put her under arrest until after he struggled with the nurse.
If we use the term "arrest" in a technical way, I might agree with you. A person is under arrest when a reasonable person in like circumstances would have felt they were not free to leave (detention) or greater (arrest/jail/citation). Depending on the purpose for defining the term, it might also include the person submitting to the authority. Precise timing of when a person is under arrest is important for any of a number of issues. But, there was an attempt at arrest as soon as the officer reached out to the woman and she pulled away so I'm not quite sure of the point as the police don't always tell a person they are going to arrest them before doing so. It tends towards violence when a suspect suddenly realizes whatever he though was going to happen is not going to happen any longer. Highway cops often take advantage of the jump-three-times-and-turn-around-then-touch-your-nose FSTs when they decide to arrest for DUI. They often add one more "test" that makes it easy to handcuff before informing them they are under arrest. ("Now, lean forward and maintain your balance while putting the backs of your hands together." sounds like just another test to a person just completing the panel.)

Were done does not inform a citizen that they are under arrest. It wasn't until she was outside that he told her coworkers she was under arrest. That sounds like excessive force to me. She might have said, fine go ahead and arrest me. But instead he attacked her in a manner to take control over her because he didnt like her boss telling him he was making a mistake which he only made worse.
Once the decision is made, the only purpose in talking is to convince the person to submit without fighting. Many use of force trainings have to do with three types of people. Compliant, maybe and no. The nurse was a no once she pulled away and started yelling that she didn't do anything. Verbal commands are no longer going to work.

Edit: If the cop had a warrant, she would have given him the results.
Because it is hospital policy or because it is required by law? Did the nurse know how to read a warrant? Would she know if it applied to her? The average nurse would have no idea as to if a warrant was legal or not in the situation.

Also, take notice how as soon as the cop explained to her coworkers that she was under arrest how she stopped resisting.
I disagree. She did not calm down until after she was handcuffed.

Another Edit: My wife is a nurse and you could never convince me that it is ok for a cop to use excessive force on her while she is in her line of work.
Again, what level of force do you think is excessive if you want to arrest a person who reacts as she did?

And, if it is just talking that is all the force that is necessary, how long must it be applied unsuccessfully before any level of force can be used?
 
Tranquility,

Buzzbomb Almighty

Well-Known Member
Now some of the focus is on why the hospital police didn't protect her from the detective. Salt Lake City has an independent police union, (at least not teamsters) so my guess is his career will take a hit but he won't become a mall cop. As detestable as lawyers are you have to cheer for those that are going to go after him.
 
Buzzbomb Almighty,

nosmoking

Just so Dab HAppy!
Again, what level of force do you think is excessive if you want to arrest a person who reacts as she did?

And, if it is just talking that is all the force that is necessary, how long must it be applied unsuccessfully before any level of force can be used?
No level of force should ever be used on someone that commited no crime. Your stuck on what amount of force and the answer is none. Cops should not be allowed to harrass people for any reason you try to come up with. What was her crime? Please tell me you wouldn't be ok with a cop grabbing you like that when your not commiting any crime or showing any reason to be suspect of violence or criminal behavior at all. She certainly showed none.

And the cop should stick with unsuccessful talk FOREVER if there is no crime committed.
 

GreenHopper

20 going on 60
No level of force should ever be used on someone that commited no crime. Your stuck on what amount of force and the answer is none. Cops should not be allowed to harrass people for any reason you try to come up with. What was her crime? Please tell me you wouldn't be ok with a cop grabbing you like that when your not commiting any crime or showing any reason to be suspect of violence or criminal behavior at all. She certainly showed none.

And the cop should stick with unsuccessful talk FOREVER if there is no crime committed.

I guess technically obstruction of justice but in this context the situation was so poorly handled by the officers that the whole thing just reads/appears like a fascist police force failing to show any respect for the general public let alone another public servant who is only trying to care for her patient.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
I guess technically obstruction of justice but in this context the situation was so poorly handled by the officers that the whole thing just reads/appears like a fascist police force failing to show any respect for the general public let alone another public servant who is only trying to care for her patient.
While I liked the post, I did have a disagreement with part.(Well, and the "fascist" part which gets thrown around far too often these days.)

The nurse was NOT only trying to care for her patient. She was trying to not get in trouble for failing to follow procedure. Caring for the patient does not include trying to shield them from the legal consequences of their actions. She was legally in the wrong--except for the fact there was some agreement between the department and the hospital. She was not refusing to take the blood, she was refusing to allow the officer/trained blood taker to do so.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6A/41-6a-S522.html
41-6a-522. Person incapable of refusal.
Any person who is dead, unconscious, or in any other condition rendering the person incapable of refusal to submit to any chemical test or tests is considered to not have withdrawn the consent provided for in Subsection 41-6a-520(1), and the test or tests may be administered whether the person has been arrested or not.​
 
Tranquility,

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
The guy they wanted to take the blood from wasn't even at fault in the accident. Not having a court order to get the blood seems to be the issue here. She was taking care of the patient as she should. The two cops are on suspension so the department felt there is something not right. Thank goodness for phone cameras.

I have a sister in law that is a RN she said that nurse did the right thing. The cop could have waited a half hour until he got clearification from his boss and all this stupid BS wouldn't have happened. This wasn't an emergency situation either, not that it would have made it ok. I don't understand why that cop decided that it was fine to to chase this nurse and handcuff her the way he did. Then put her in the squad car. I'm sure he's having second thoughts now.
 
Last edited:

howie105

Well-Known Member
We arrive at positions partially based on our beliefs and experiences which may or may not be relevant to a given situation. My take on the the nurse/cop situation is all I know is what has been presented to me and I just can't come down on either side based on such limited information. I know what the video clips makes me feel but feelings are not facts.
 

GreenHopper

20 going on 60
Firstly let me make the declaration that I respect your opinion @OldNewbie and I want to make it clear that I'm only interested in good discussion so when I offer up my responses it is not to incite rage or come across as disrespectful/arrogant.

I feel you already get this but I just wanted to be clear.

The nurse was NOT only trying to care for her patient. She was trying to not get in trouble for failing to follow procedure.

I 100% agree with this statement, any one in her situation is going to want to avoid getting into trouble for not following procedure.

I'm not saying the cop was legally wrong, I'm saying he handled the situation poorly. Opting for force when patience and understanding would have been the correct tools.

Caring for the patient does not include trying to shield them from the legal consequences of their actions.

I agree again, but as previously stated I believe she was trying to follow the procedure as directed to do so by her employers. She doesn't have a clue about what the actual law is, she's a nurse. Why shouldn't she be trying to protect her own interests, it's not like the cop has her best interest in mind. In this instance she was technically wrong but she should not have been the one to bear the brunt of the legal system. It should have been handled professionally and kicked up the food chain.

Hospital policy obviously can't trump national law but how that law is implemented and enforced makes a big difference. The officer should have sought out a more senior member of staff to consult with.

All too often the little guy is left holding the hot potato and where are those well paid bureaucrats and managers at?

She was not refusing to take the blood, she was refusing to allow the officer/trained blood taker to do so.

She thought she was following policy that was implemented by her seniors. When an employer pushes such a policy an employee doesn't really get to pick and choose which ones they are going to comply with. Her interpretation was obviously flawed but the manner in which it was handled has far outweighed her transgression.

Well, and the "fascist" part which gets thrown around far too often these days.

This is another discussion for another time.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
I 100% agree with this statement, any one in her situation is going to want to avoid getting into trouble for not following procedure.

I'm not saying the cop was legally wrong, I'm saying he handled the situation poorly. Opting for force when patience and understanding would have been the correct tools.
I don't know if the cop was legally wrong or not. There are a lot more facts that need to be known, and a bit of legal work, to know what he knew and what he should have known. Ex post facto, he was wrong. The burn patient was the victim and not the suspect. Implied consent is not implicated. However, we all acknowledge (I hope), the police cannot wait for all facts before taking action. We don't know what his superior told him when he was ordered to the hospital to take blood, but if it was something like, "We have a death on the highway following a pursuit. I need you to go to the hospital and get a blood sample from the person transported there from the accident.", we'd have to study case law in Utah to know if the collective knowledge doctrine (What THE POLICE know versus what the particular officer knows.) would be implicated.

I agree again, but as previously stated I believe she was trying to follow the procedure as directed to do so by her employers. She doesn't have a clue about what the actual law is, she's a nurse. Why shouldn't she be trying to protect her own interests, it's not like the cop has her best interest in mind. In this instance she was technically wrong but she should not have been the one to bear the brunt of the legal system. It should have been handled professionally and kicked up the food chain.
Completely agree as long as she did not physically attempt to stop the officer from doing what he thought correct. The hospital has apparently changed its policy as a result of this incident and the police are no longer allowed on treatment areas of the hospital and all police interaction is to be through a senior administrator.

Hospital policy obviously can't trump national law but how that law is implemented and enforced makes a big difference. The officer should have sought out a more senior member of staff to consult with.
The hospital agrees. The "policy" question is more difficult for me. It was a policy negotiated between the hospital and the police department. While I don't see how private entities can make new law, it certainly seems such a policy should have some legal meaning. I don't find an easy answer as to if it does or not. At the very least, it should be something to affect intent requirements on the law. Can a person be said to be acting willfully against the law if they are following such a policy?


All too often the little guy is left holding the hot potato and where are those well paid bureaucrats and managers at?
Yup.

She thought she was following policy that was implemented by her seniors. When an employer pushes such a policy an employee doesn't really get to pick and choose which ones they are going to comply with. Her interpretation was obviously flawed but the manner in which it was handled has far outweighed her transgression.
Yep, again.

I am still debating if I shall give a personal anecdote on this issue. We'll see. However, but for the fact this became national news, there is little here that does not happen day in and day out all over the country. Obstruction-type statutes are written quite broadly to implicate lots of situations. The only reason I think they are not unconstitutional is because of fancy dancing by the courts to say they are not. That's not the cops who are wrong, it is those high-priced legislators, judges and district attorney's who make and interpret the law who are.
 

Silver420Surfer

Downward spiral
Good Cop Exposes How Nurse Arrest Was Inevitable, SLC Police Forced to Make 5 Arrests a Day
A former SLC cop just blew the lid off the nurse assault by exposing how their officers are forced to make 5 arrests a day.



Salt Lake City, UT — Last week, the world was exposed to the face of tyranny as they watched the body camera video of Detective Jeff Payne arresting Nurse Alex Wubbels for refusing to violate the law and warrantlessly draw blood from an unconscious crash victim. Police apologists were speechless and were unable to justify this cop’s abusive behavior caught on video. Now, as news of the arrest continues to spread, even police are coming forward to expose what one whistleblower is referring to as “ongoing failure at the highest levels” of police.

When good cops sit back and do nothing as bad cops lay waste to the rights of innocent citizens, those good cops become bad ones. Those who remain silent in the face of tyranny are complicit in its growth. Eric Moutsos, a former Salt Lake City Police Officer, is now crossing the thin blue line and refusing to remain silent in the face of said tyranny.

In an epic rant on Facebook, Moutsos lays bare the corruption and problems boiling up through departments across the country.

Since the Nurse Wubbles incident/arrest in SLC, I feel it’s time to tell my stories. The real stories. This post is just one of them.

First, I love the American Police Officer. I was once one. In my opinion, the things they go through everyday are unparalleled to any profession in our country with the exception of the military. I know what their families go through daily; wives and kids especially. We need cops. We need good cops. More importantly, we need law and order in America.

With that said, I believe we need to have a real conversation about a giant elephant in the National Room regarding law enforcement and how some of these departments operate deep down; More importantly, from the top down. I believe it’s some administrations that put officers more in harms way than even a bad guy could.

Moutsos was publicly chastised for refusing to perform in a gay pride parade in 2014, which eventually cost him his badge and gun. To be clear, Moutsos did not refuse to act as protection for the parade, he only objected to performing acrobatics on his motorcycle as part of the parade, citing religious reasons.


However, as Moutsos points out, his choice to exercise his religious freedom was an easy way for the department to get rid of him for actually being a good cop and exposing the corruption within.

Moutsos writes:


What the public doesn’t know, is that I was passed up for two positions before ultimately joining the motorcycle squad in 2013. Why? I was ordered to arrest 5 people (misdemeanor arrests), per day, AS PART OF A QUOTA! Not just traffic tickets, but misdemeanor arrests. I told my sergeant, no. That night after only getting 3 arrests, I was ordered to stay after shift another hour – without pay- And was screamed at in front of my squad and ordered to arrest 2 more people that night; while the rest of the squad went home. I still would not do it. That was the beginning of the end.

What Moutsos is referring to here takes place in departments across the country. TFTP has exposed multiple quota systems just like this in which cops are not only told to write tickets but also make arrests.

As TFTP points out, good cops who expose these quota systems or refuse to participate are often, fired, threatened, or worse. This is what happened to Moutsos.

My name started to get tarnished in the PD among the upper brass. This was an order I actually refused. Not a parade. This is where it started for me and my family. It was unconstitutional – which I specifically told my sergeant and this was later conveyed to the administration. The current administration knows of this story (and many other scandals I am prepared to tell in the next several weeks) and has done nothing about them. This seems to be their M.O. Cover-up after cover-up. Only until it hits the press.

As TFTP pointed out, what Moutsos is referring to actually happened in the case of Nurse Wubbles. Despite the rights violations and the clear signs that the forced blood draw was an attempt to cover up police incompetence, the department never acted—until after the video went viral.

Today, the Department is embroiled in yet another scandal – and I’m tired of it. This one involving an arrest at the University of Utah Hospital. Which they knew about for weeks before and did nothing. Today they said “there’s no acceptable reason” why people weren’t placed on admin leave. I’ll tell you the reason; they didn’t want to take “acceptable” responsibility and do the right thing.

Moutsos goes on to say how he thinks racism in policing is not as big of a problem as forcing cops to make mandatory stops.

I never met a racist cop in my 7 years on the PD. I don’t believe it’s racism that runs rampant in police agencies, however quotaism does. Mandatory stops. Why? All for statistics that lead to Federal and local funding/revenue for some police agencies.

Even if an individual police officer isn’t racist, the system they support certainly is. As TFTP has noted, these ‘mandatory’ stops for drugs, seat belts, window tint, license plate lights, and other victimless ‘crimes’ hit black communities the hardest. Moutsos wants to change this and he intends to do so by exposing it. He’s also ready to face the backlash he is going to receive by doing so.

My ultimate goal is for leaders at the State, National and local levels to address policing at its roots – to include the eradication of administrative practices (driving stats and quotas) that work against the citizens we are sworn to protect by eliciting behavior in officers like what we saw at the hospital last week. The pressures on these officers are real. I felt them daily. They are born of a lack of effective leadership. I do not excuse what the officer in the video did – he is accountable for his own actions. But I am very suspicious of the environment created around him by those who supervise him – all the way up the chain of command. These are institutional problems and they need to be exposed – for the good of the officers and the good of the community they serve. I realize this will bring scrutiny from many; and on all sides. But I feel strongly it needs to come to light.

To show what a stand up former cop he was, Moutsos issued an apology to Nurse Wubbles and noted how—unlike the other two cops who watched and did nothing as Payne attacked an innocent nurse—he would not have stood by.


I also apologize to Nurse Wubbles. If someone knows her who reads this, please tell her that. I would have not let that happen if I were on scene. I can promise you that.

This is how change is fostered. Only when good people refuse to enforce bad policy will anything change. Thank you Eric Moutsos for refusing to be a part of that bad policy.
 
Top Bottom