pee or else...

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by mora
I have a hard time believing this. Someone actually mentioned in another thread that you cannot be convicted from a DWI based on a urine sample.

I don't see the point of urine testing a person who seems intoxicated. Depending on the drug it might take some time before  it's even visible in urine. Besides you couln't even know if the person was driving while intoxicated when he took those drugs.

Traffic tests should be done from blood, not from urine.

One more time....

The article is unclear WHY he was told to provide a urine sample.  He might not have been driving at all.  It was the HOSPITAL that wanted it for whatever reason.  The cop tazered him to get him under control and it worked.

If he is a danger to himself or a danger to other people the police could have then been called.

FROM THE ARTICLE

Earlier, another hospital spokeswoman, Samantha O'Lenick, said she could not speak specifically about the Wheeler case but said hospital protocol calls for urine samples whenever patients say they have taken drugs or alcohol.

[Shamus]

Well I dont think that because a hospital has a protocol that legal rights go by the wayside.

But I dont doubt that there may very well be a law out there that will protect the hospital and police from repercusions.

shamus

[Suave]

In germany the cops can take a blood sample to test for alchohol, from your nose.

[DoctorYO]

Oh i forgot to add ....   Florida has the "Florida Patient Bill of Rights on the Books"

http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/Profiling/billofrights.htm

Under Rights of Patients

Section A - Individual Dignity

1.  The individual dignity of a patient must be respected at all times and upon all occasions.

Hence jamming something up your noodle saddled cuffed and strapped down then tasered would not fit under Section A #1

Note:  "Upon all occasions"


heres some more:

"A patient has the right to refuse any treatment, except as otherwise provided by law."  (mental health is the main reason the provided by law portion not drug investigations..)

Now does the admission of cocaine use (its a bloody confession what more do you need for a conviction here case should be closed..) constitute a strapping , handcuffing , saddling/beating, then tasering.. twice i might add... well let the florida courts decide this one..  IMO they will say hell no considering no vehicular manslaughter / murder investigation etc...

Were not even talking what bill of rights violations yet..  shall I continue?


DoctorYo

[TweetyBird]

Gunslinger, I can think of nothing that would possibly give the hospital the right to taser someone as part of "treatment."

[SunTracker]

So the guy did a little bit of cocaine, big deal.

[hyena426]

I have a hard time believing this. Someone actually mentioned in another thread that you cannot be convicted from a DWI based on a urine sample.

who said they were lookin for dwi? .i never did..... they can get a breathalizer for dwi..need urine or blood or spinal tap{spinals are illegal anymore to force}..to prove you are higher than a kite while driving

I don't see the point of urine testing a person who seems intoxicated. Depending on the drug it might take some time before it's even visible in urine.  

because blood test are not cheap or free...needs to go to a lab and wait a day or 2 before they get results.urine test are cheap and get faster results

Besides you couln't even know if the person was driving while intoxicated when he took those drugs.

they can tell if your high on crack coke or meth when pulled over..because your eyes will allmost look black because your pupils get really wide..it is very easy to tell some one is messed up on meth..why do you think cops point there flash light in your eyes? to watch your pupils diolate..and if they dont..they know your high as hell...and most drugs like meth are visible right away in your system.. alot of truck drivers use meth to stay up late..and its only in your system for 2 or 3 days...thats why its the fav of truck drivers...long as they dont do somthing stupid they wont get pulled over before they have to take a pee test..but!! if they do get pulled over and a cop thinks he is high on meth..he gots all the right to give him a pee test


as for this case..he allready said he was high..i dont think they needed to tazer him

[lasersailor184]

Sandman brought up an EXCELLENT point.  It applies for Pennsylvania too.


At any time you refuse a urine test or blood test when they are testing for drugs or alcohol, you get your license revoked.

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by bigsky
Antonio Wheeler
The police document said Wheeler was handcuffed to a hospital bed and then secured with leather straps after he refused to urinate in a cup. When medical staff tried to insert a catheter to get the sample, Wheeler refused and began thrashing around, the affidavit said.

At one point, police officer Peter Linnenkamp reported, he jumped on the bed with his knees on Wheeler's chest to restrain him. When Wheeler still refused to let the catheter be inserted, Linnenkamp said he twice used his Taser, which sends 50,000 volts into a target.
[/url]

Our tax dollars at work.  I hope that cop never works again.

[Manedew]

one main point about pee tests and the goverment .....


What the hell ever happend to the 5th amendment......  ?


and don't give me that protecting criminals crap ..

it's a balance of power just like guns, the press, the legislative, judical and executive branches.... it's a balance aginst the power of the court and police for the private citizen .. and the fact the think they can require such a test defies the 5th amendment in my eyes......

They are running right over our rights, yet even the media doesn't see them running over the 5th.... seems like it must be standard practise to try to require pee tests on drug suspects ....

HE has the RIGHT to decline and to plead the 5th ....... this is to protect him from such things as this torture....... this is a wise balance like the other balances setup in our consistituition......

cops can ask all the questions they want .... you don't have to say crap till you are sworn into a court of law or subpoened.....

I don't see why the 5th can't protect you from such pee tests.... Identifcation test's to compare with evidance (such as DNA) are diffrant IMHO .. and this was NOT that,  this was to test for drugs.... not identify him

Guess some legal types would argue it only applies to the spoken word ... but I disagree.

[Elfie]

If a guy walked into a hospital all cracked up and the hospital tried to treat him and then he caused harm to himself or somone else the hospital is liable.

The guy was strapped down, he was in no postion to hurt himself or anyone else.

[Nash]

There's one thing that's already been talked about but I can't figure out if it's been settled conclusively or not.

My understanding is.... Cops can request a urine test. If the testee refuses, then he gets charged as having failed the urine test.

No problem with that.

But what I'm confused about is... why did the cops pursue the urine test if the testee already plead guilty, as it were, by refusing one. Why did they need to even bother?

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Nash


But what I'm confused about is... why did the cops pursue the urine test if the testee already plead guilty, as it were, by refusing one. Why did they need to even bother?

Because a urine test might have resulted in more charges being filed.

What the cop should have done was taser him in the balls- that would have gotten  him the urine sample he wanted.

[Nash]

OMG, Hi Airhead!

Because a urine test might have resulted in more charges being filed.

Is that right? Lotsa drugs stay in yer system for quite a while, so, it's possible. But is that what they were attempting to do?

Surely that's over the top.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by TweetyBird
Gunslinger, I can think of nothing that would possibly give the hospital the right to taser someone as part of "treatment."

Me neither....but the hospital didn't taser him the police did.  The article is very unclear about the cicumstances of this case.  

1.  If the guy was in the care of the hospital in the police ward they have officers there to keep criminals in check

I havn't read the patients bill of rights for florida but I would venture to GUESS that somone who is wacked up on drugs does not have the frame of mind to give consent or refuse treatment.  Again that's only a guess here.

A cathider (SP) is not a rape it is a standard medical practice.  This guy was not tortured nor was he beat.  All the dramatics aside he was ordered to do something right or wrong and he refused.