Forced Catheterization Used In DUI Case

[Bob Hubbard]

Interesting. Guy gets pulled over for suspected DWI. Passes a breathalyzer, ends up hauled into a hospital and has a tube rammed up his tackle, and blood taken, both which prove he's under legal limit. Gets charged with obstruction.

Forced Catheterization Used In DUI Case

Suit Claims Police, Hospital Acted Improperly

POSTED: 8:59 am EDT September 3, 2009
LAWRENCEBURG, Ind. -- An Indiana man has filed a lawsuit claiming that police forcibly withdrew blood and urine from his body during a drunken driving arrest, WLWT-TV reported.According to the suit, police arrested Jamie Lockard, 53, on suspicion of drunken driving in March.A Breathalyzer test showed he was under the legal limit, but Officer Brian Miller doubted the findings.

http://www.wpbf.com/health/20703731/detail.html

 

[arnisador]

Ugh. Why would a hospital cooperate in performing this nonmedical, unwanted procedure?

 

[celtic_crippler]

I hadn't realized we'd converted to a Nazi state as of yet...

Unacceptable
Unacceptable
Unacceptable
Unacceptable

They'd have charged me with more than obstruction had they tried to shove a hose up my hose.

This is :BSmeter: to the power of 10!

I hope he's successful in his lawsuit and it bankrupts the department so that jerk-cop loses his job. I know that sounds hateful but I can't help it at the moment 'cause my blood pressure is sky-rocketing right now. :angry:

 

[KELLYG]

So a Breathalyzer and blood test confirm that the guy was below the limit. How would they have been able to prosecute him anyway. I was just in Indiana and they have warning signs up everywhere that speeding Max 1000.00 fine reckless driving up to 8 years in jail. I wonder what the fine and jail time would be for drunk driving? It would have to be massive for a judge to sign off on the search warrant!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Ugh. Why would a hospital cooperate in performing this nonmedical, unwanted procedure?

Police said they obtained a warrant, but Lockard's attorney said his client was shackled to a gurney and had a catheter inserted against his will."It has to be executed reasonably," said attorney Doug Garner. "No one would say this is reasonable behavior. It's reprehensible that anyone could think that this is appropriate."

My understanding is that with the right court order, you can be forced to comply. I know if I'm pulled over and refuse a sobriety test I lose my license.

I suspect there's more to this that hasn't come out yet.

 

[arnisador]

I hope he's successful in his lawsuit and it bankrupts the department so that jerk-cop loses his job. I know that sounds hateful

Nope--this is one of the reasons why lawsuits can be helpful. A significant punishment in a case like this discourages others.

I want drunk driving stopped...but I'm not willing to pay the price of forced catheterization of people (especially those who have already passed one test!). This is unacceptable. It would have been so even if he had been guilty.

 

[celtic_crippler]

The line has to be drawn somewhere... forced catheterization is BS. What's next? Forced spinal taps?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

How reliable is a breathalyzer test?
What recourse does a LEO legally have should a suspect pass it yet the LEO honestly thinks something is amiss?

Note I say legally here. Not the "Disrespect of Cop" charge usually used by guys who think a uniform, badge and gun makes them above everyone else.

I'm expecting the guy got belligerent, refused or was driving erratically, slurred speech, etc.

 

[Archangel M]

You dont typically get a court order for blood draw unless it's involved with something like a very serious or fatal car accident.

Many times when someone is acting "drunk" but there is .00% BAC on a prescreen it is drug use that is causing it (and sometimes diabetes). To make a DWI-Drugs stick you need blood+urine samples.

I have never heard of forced urine draw for DWI. All you usually need is blood if they wont give a breath sample.

The only way this makes sense to me (forced catherization) would be if there was a serious/fatal car accident and the LEO had reason to believe that the offender was DWI-Drugs. Judge could then give a court order for the draw.

 

[Archangel M]

How reliable is a breathalyzer test?

Very..regardless of what a defense attny. may argue. I have never seen an attny successfully argue that the machine was inaccurate. They typically try to go after the operator or the calibration records.

 

[Carol]

So a Breathalyzer and blood test confirm that the guy was below the limit. How would they have been able to prosecute him anyway.

Drugs.

 

[Carol]

How reliable is a breathalyzer test?
What recourse does a LEO legally have should a suspect pass it yet the LEO honestly thinks something is amiss?

Note I say legally here. Not the "Disrespect of Cop" charge usually used by guys who think a uniform, badge and gun makes them above everyone else.

I'm expecting the guy got belligerent, refused or was driving erratically, slurred speech, etc.

Props, Bob, for asking this question.

I did some googling around. The story has been picked up by a few legit news outlets and a bunch of blogs...all are running with the "outrage" part of the story.

And maybe it is an outrage. We don't know. However, you are the first person that I have read to actually ask WHY, and Arch is the first response that I have seen to provide one possibility for the "why".

I think the posted news article showed very poor journalism by describing this as a "drunken driving" arrest. DUI/OUI means "under the influence". It can apply to alcohol, street drugs, legally prescribed Rx meds, or OTC meds such as Nyquil.

 

[Cryozombie]

In Illinois, if you refuse to take the Breathalyzer, they can do an Immediate Blood draw, no court order neccessary.

In fact, its become SOP to have a Doctor on hand at Roadside checkpoints to do these draws on the scene.

 

[Cryozombie]

Very..regardless of what a defense attny. may argue. I have never seen an attny successfully argue that the machine was inaccurate. They typically try to go after the operator or the calibration records.

True. The arguments I've often seen have been either they waited too long to administer the test, or that the station had older equipment and the officers radios interfered with the readings.

As far as #1, I can kinda see the point. It DOES take time to metabolize the alcohol and become impared... I mean, If I slam 3 shots and hop in my car and drive 1/2 mile home, chances are I'm still sober... but 45 minutes later I may not be.

As for #2, I dunno how realistic that is... but I know someone who got popped, and that was the argument her lawyer made, and he had documentation to "prove" it was an issue with that machine...

 

[Archangel M]

In Illinois, if you refuse to take the Breathalyzer, they can do an Immediate Blood draw, no court order neccessary.

In fact, its become SOP to have a Doctor on hand at Roadside checkpoints to do these draws on the scene.

Here, you can ALWAYS refuse (unless it involves a serious/fatal accident) but it will result in the revocation of your license.

Most states have, as part of their vehicle and traffic law, a section that states that your license comes with the provision that you WILL submit to a chemical test if a police officer has reason to believe that you were operating under the influence. If you refuse they can (and do) take the license back. But that is your CHOICE (short of a court order) and the officer typically has to read you a rights warning telling you "take it or loose it" (in essence).

I would hope that the law there was similar.

 

[MJS]

Well...thats a new one. Never heard of that method before. Me thinks someone has alot of explaining to do.

How accurate are the machines they use? Don't know, but I'd imagine they have to be calibrated, checked, etc. on a regular basis, as I'm sure more often than not, the results are constantly challenged.

 

[Carol]

Well...thats a new one. Never heard of that method before. Me thinks someone has alot of explaining to do.

How accurate are the machines they use? Don't know, but I'd imagine they have to be calibrated, checked, etc. on a regular basis, as I'm sure more often than not, the results are constantly challenged.

Problem is, they only check for alcohol.

The newspaper states that the driver was pulled over for "drunken driving", but my understanding is that the actual charge was "DUI", which as far as I know is not restricted to just alcohol.

A driver under the influence of street drugs, legally prescribed Rx drugs, or even OTC meds such as nyquil could possibly be just as dangerous as a driver with a BAC of .08 or above.

 

[Joab]

Oooww! The very first day at the beginning of the shift of my clinicals at a nursing home a man was attempted to be catheterized by his permission after a long time of not being able to urinate. The pain was so intense they stopped, the blood was unsettling, the entire procedure bothered me so much I couldn't talk to my wife about it for months, and even now, years later, I cringe while I type. They took him to the hospital and he urinated without a catheter with no problem, thankfully. They explained what they were going to do to him in detail, and he said "is that all?" but I don't think he really understood it until they began to put it up his "tackle" as Bob put it.

What they did to this man is truly barbaric, I hope whoever is responsible for this pays for it big time. I don't think a catheter should ever be put up someone's "tackle" unless they agree to it and unless they are anesthesized big time. It upset me so much that I have decided nursing is not for me, although I completed my program and worked as a Caregiver for over a year, no catheterizing...planning to go paralegal, less blood and pain.

 

[Archangel M]

If the guy killed someone in a wreck and there is RS to believe he was on drugs..and he refused to give a urine+blood sample...I would have no problem with a court order for this.

Anything less and I would need to know why....

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Different states have different rules concerning forced blood draw for DUI. Many states have an 'implied consent' (remember this from the organ donation thread?) law that says if you refuse to participate in a roadside sobriety test or refuse to cooperate with the Breathalyzer, you can be taken to a hospital, strapped down, and have blood taken against your will - no court order necessary. In other states, as others have mentioned, if you refuse to cooperate, you just lose your license automatically.

Driving is not a right, it's a privilege.

As to how a person can fake a Breathalyzer test, they're hard to fake, but the legends are many, and lots of drunks attempt them while taking the test.

http://www.azduiatty.com/how-to-fool-the-breathalyzer.htm

If the police officer suspected this happened, I could see where he would require a blood test - if the state he's in allows that. The forced urine test, not so much. Sounds like a bit of 'Felony Contempt of Cop' to me, but you never know. I don't think we've heard the entire story.