medicTHREE - Latest Comments

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 22:16:09 -0000

Again I never claimed to be giving legal advise. That is the last time I will say that you should have gotten that point by now.
I speak with common sense.
I also never stated that leaving to retrieve equipment was abandonment. That is a patient care issue. This was not. This was nothing more than a D*** measuring contest between two hard heads. If the patient needed to be expedited to the ED, why were they running with out lights and sirens? If the patient was stable, why try to expedite the traffic stop when the patient could have waited the 5 minutes. Trooper Martin was not past the point of no return. He clearly takes the driver aside after Mr. White returns to the ambulance and speaks to him in a calm yet assertive manner, common on most traffic stops. A person who is past the breaking point the way you describe it, would not be able to do that, so quickly. The trooper is then ready to let the ambulance leave, when Mr. White tries to have the other officer on scene take a report against Trooper Martin. This sets the trooper off again. Mr. White at that point should have completed the transport before trying to file any complaints.
The truth is that we don't know what the trooper would have done with the traffic stop since Mr. White immediately interfered.
Just because I see things differently doesn't mean that there isn't something to this. I am clearly not the only person who shares this viewpoint as evidenced by other posters on this and other articles about the incident. Including the post that started this thread.
I stated before that I am too busy right now to go play paralegal and dig through case histories.
I do question who was in a position during all of this to provide aid to the patient.
As far as taking Skip's legal advise, I have listened to it, and I would choose to seek a second opinion on this particular issue. I don't doubt he is very knowledgeable but I also know that legal matters are never as simple as they appear in the books, since there is always a human element to them, and humans are complicated. Perhaps he is right and it is not abandonment. But I see ordinary negligence at least. Because I don't believe a reasonable medic in the same situation would have acted in this manner.
As far as your claim that I think that ALS can not transfer to BLS I have to laugh. I work in a state with a 2 tier system. ALS transfers to BLS whenever ALS care is not needed. Many ALS units will do this multiple times a day. Why would I think that is wrong?
And despite what the number 1 issue with abandonment is. That has no bearing on what the definition of it is. The number one killer of smokers is lung cancer. That doesn't mean that all smokers die of lung cancer. The logic doesn't work.
Neither does the logic that no harm was done to the patient, yet the patient may still be able to claim harm from the trooper. Either she was harmed or she wasn't.
In any case. I will be away for the next few days. I look forward to seeing the responses I get.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 22:12:46 -0000

I think you don't understand the definition of not wasting your time...

You can't say you're not goin to waste your time and then type a 3 page dissertation on your opinion.

Internal investigations of officers rarely oppose the officer.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:42:14 -0000

First of all, I lead with that information, and the acknowledgement that it is not a definitive argument, nor will I waste my time doing research, just to prove a point on a blog. I have better things to do. And I suspect you do as well.

The Duty we all recognize is to provide adequate patient care.

The breach is in dispute. I see a possible breach, you do not. So be it.

The injury is also in dispute. I see, based just on the video, the potential for emotional suffering. If juries can award damages for "lack of service" to the wife of a man who got hurt in an accident, then any injury real or perceived is a possible point for litigation by some lawyer somewhere. In this case it was not, in another it might be.

The cause was the disruptive behavior of Mr. White. The Oklahoma State Police investigation determined that Officer Martin was justified in arresting Mr. White for obstructing the traffic stop. They also found that Officer Martin had probable cause to initiate the stop.

Now I ask you if you want me to stop referring to nurses, you should as well. You brought up the topic of nurses, and continue to use them as examples, yet I cannot?

I never said it was never ok to leave a patient's side for patient care issues. I questioned why he felt the need to get out in this instance. I questioned why he felt the need to leave his patient's side for something his driver could have and should have been able to handle on his own.

Also, I did not introduce the A word, Robbjsn did. Along with several other posters. Yet you have latched onto my thread for some reason.
And you may be an expert, and that is all well and good for you. But your expert advise to others thus far seems to be one sided. You seem to say that the Trooper was wrong and Mr. White was right, so don't worry about arguing with the cops kids, it will turn out in your favor. My point is, don't let yourself be put into a situation like this. If a cop stops you, just let him know you have a patient, and let him do what he is going to do. Arguing will only delay the transport at best, and land you on the news and in court, at worst. Is that bad advise? Is it bad advise to tell people to be extra cautious about patient care issues. Is it bad to want all patients to get the best care they can?
Is this abandonment? The expert says no. I say maybe. Remember that experts are human too and can be wrong. I leave it up to our fellow patient care providers to decide. What would you do in Mr. White's position when the ambulance got pulled over. Would you argue with the Trooper, or would you let the stop happen and report him to his superiors later, after the patient had been transferred to the hospital staff? Which is safer for your career?

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:11:13 -0000

1 I said that right off the bat.
2 So are the rest of you, and just because something isn't filed doesn't mean it didn't happen.
3 It's a blog not a journal article, or an essay
4 I highly doubt that every single aspect of this incident has be highly documented. Just like anything else, there are sides that never get heard.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Skip Kirkwood — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:28:18 -0000

So you've taken something that is not law, from another profession and another state, and decided that that particular document should be the definitive authority? Whomever wrote this and for whatever reason, it does not accurately state the law of torts (in any jurisdiction), nor do I see any part of it as applying to Paramedic White's actions. (The definitive book that guides and summarizes tort law is called Restatement of Torts, 2d.)

How about those basics of tort law that we all learned in EMT 101? The old duty-breach-injury-causation thing? Before there can be "abandonment" there must be all four - but let's focus on the "injury" or harm to the patient - none noted. If there was, then there has to be a cause and effect relationship between the breach of duty and the harm. I can't find any breach of duty here - any more than an ED nurse would breach her duty if she left a patient's bedside to get a drug, or even to urinate! There is no "duty of constant uninterrupted attendance" in the law of any state. White's actions were no different than if he had climbed out of the ambulance to fix a tire, or to get a supply out of an exterior cabinet.

Were they both not as smart as they could be? Sure. But you were the one who introduced the A word.

Feel free to attack my qualification to offer an opinion on the matter - I've been certified as an expert by enough courts, federal and state, that it bounces right off of me. You surely have a right to an opinion, and just as surely I have the right to categorize your opinion as incorrect. Enjoy.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:54:19 -0000

Further, not caring that he is an expert and qualified makes this really a pointless conversation. Why are you discussing it if you don't want to listen to the qualified expert on the matter?

Other than self importance I do not understand what leads you to think it is appropriate to disseminate incorrect advice.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:52:21 -0000

However you giving legal advice would be like skip giving engineering advice or me telling you how to insert a tampon. I might have a good idea how it works but I'm no expert.

It is not patient abandonment to have the patient out of eye-site for a moment or two. The fact is here that this patrolman crossed numerous lines and there was no deescalation possible with him. His drive cam audio makes that clear from he start.

Nothing in that law even relates to ems. Our place of employment is the field. Not just the ambulance. To be capable of providing definitive care(transport and hospital) mr white needed to expedite the situation. If he had waited, trooper Martin would likely have arrested the driver on the spot or gone further of the deep end.

If you think that is abandonment I'm curious how you would handle the many situations I encounter in the field. Often it requires my partner and I to leave bedside to retrieve equipment, move obstacles, and such. We would not be better suited to request fire or pd and wait an additional ten minutes. Another ambulance could be a longer wait yet.

You're grasping at a proverbial straw that doesn't exist.

The fact of the matter is I would take the legal advice of an EMS chief who happens to be a lawyer over someone who happens to work in ems.

Can you provide for case law that would show a medic being charged with abandonment for stepping outside the truck?

Abandonment is meant to apply in cases where patients are left in hospitals without nursing transfer, left at scene without aide, etc.

From "Paramedic practice today"
"Terminating care when it is still needed and desired by the patient and without ensuring that appropriate care continues to be provided by another qualified healthcare professional".

Ems often thinks they can't transfer to lower level of care without abandoning the patient, but that is also not true. If it were, we could never take a patient from a hospital or clinic. Medics can even transfer care to bls if appropriate. (Volume 1, p 71).

The number 1 issue in abandonment is patient consent. Next is the termination of care caused injury or death(Caroline p103).

I believe this case falls well within the standard of care: what a reasonable medic in the same situation would have done. Neither ordinary or gross negligence was committed here. Res ipsa loquitor doesn't apply either. Proximate cause is not present either.

Ultimately harm was not done to the patient. Although the patient may be able to claim the trooper caused emotional harm for inflicting the delay.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:28:22 -0000

You do realize that you 1) first use nursing and nursing laws as an example in a paramedic/ems situation.

2) are referring to a case that happened in 2009. The legal issues of this case are well decided already. You will notice at no point did the medic, his employer or the patient/family mention abandonment. Not once.

3) you Cited a link. Not sited.

4) patient condition has been publicly documented.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:15:49 -0000

I do disagree, and will continue to do so. I don't have a JD but I can site the Oklahoma Nursing Board's Abandonment Statement.

http://www.ok.gov/nursing/p...

Section I Purpose: To provide guidance to nurses (including LPN's, RN's, and APRN's) and Unlicensed Assistive Persons regarding situations that may constitute abandonment.

Section II Definitions:

Patient Abandonment:

Abandonment may occur when a licensed nurse fails to provide adequate patient care until the responsibility for care of the patient is assumed by another licensed nurse or an approved licensed health care provider. Patient safety is the key factor in determining the nurse's responsibility in a given situation.

Section III Guidelines to specific situations that may constitute abandonment.

Part 1.

Leaving the employment site during and assigned patient care shift after the nurse has come on duty for the shift without properly advising appropriate personnel.

Part 2.

Leaving an emergency patient care situation where that would be overtly dangerous to the patient, Based on the standard actions of a reasonable, prudent nurse.

Part 3.

Inattention to, or the leaving of a patient in acute distress, without proper notification of supervisor and appropriate arrangements for continuity of care.

Part 5.

Insufficient observation (frequency of contact) of a patient.

The general intent here is to show how abandonment laws are viewed in the state in question. Although this is intended for nurses, I do not foresee much difference for other healthcare providers in that state. And since this is an internet debate about a video online, and not litigation, I see no need to waste anyone's time (especially my own) by trying to research the case law and specific statutes.

What I am getting at here is that not everyone with a law degree is right about how the law will be interpreted in every case. In fact every case that goes to a verdict will have a least one lawyer who looses. Especially if a jury gets involved. But Skip, you said yourself that you don't have all the facts, and neither do I so we should state that both of our opinions are just that, opinions.

In the document I quoted above it the intent is fairly clear, that patient safety is the key factor determining responsibility. This is the key part where you and I disagree. I see the potential for harm while you do not. That is a tough question, not having the specifics on the patient's condition I don't believe either of us have enough facts to prove the case one way or the other. I tend to take the view that while transporting, the potential for harm is a constant. Your view I believe is toward Mr. White being innocent until proven guilty. Which is a valid point if he were on trial. Which he is not. I will submit that whether or not there is legal action taken, the patient was harmed emotionally by the situation. And placed into a state of duress as a direct result of the actions taken by Mr. White and Officer Martin.

Section III, the document lists several examples of what could be considered abandonment.

Part 1 talks about leaving the employment location.

In the field our employment location varies greatly and is hard to pin point. While the ambulance is traveling it is clear that the interior of the ambulance is our employment location, but when stopped how far away are we permitted to be before we are considered to have left? Is it based on where we need to be to treat our patients and perform our duties. If so the question returns, did Mr. White NEED to leave the back of the ambulance?

Part 2
"Leaving an emergency patient care situation where that would be overtly dangerous to the patient, based on the standard actions of a reasonable, prudent nurse."

This is a tricky one too. For this I go back to the patient's condition, our great unknown. It may have been or it may not have been. But the last part here is key. It speaks of whether the actions of a reasonable, prudent patient care provider would have been the same. I offer a resounding no. I don't know any medic that would think it a good idea to get out of an ambulance to yell at an already pissed off cop. Heck, I don't know any reasonable person who thinks yelling at a pissed off cop is a good idea in any situation. The truth is that there was a foreseeable outcome when Mr. White stepped out and started to argue, and that was that the officer was going to argue back and the situation was going to escalate. But, our trained professionals let emotions get in the way of common sense and an altercation occurred. Then when the situation did escalate it became an overtly dangerous situation to the patient with her family members climbing into and out of the ambulance at will, screaming, and physical altercations occurring. Mr. White's actions were part of the direct cause of those events. Which means Mr. White contributed to placing himself, his partner, and his patient into an unsafe scene, unnecessarily.

Part 3.

"Inattention to, or the leaving of a patient in acute distress, without proper notification of supervisor and appropriate arrangements for continuity of care."

I feel like a broken record that we don't know the condition of the patient at the start of the altercation. It is clear that the patient and her family members are severely distressed by the events that occurred. I have yet to find evidence of either member of the ambulance crew calling for or notifying a supervisor of any kind. It would have been prudent to have called one as soon as Officer Martin told Mr. White that he was under arrest, in case Officer Martin refused to let the ambulance continue to the hospital. Would it have been wrong of the officer to do so? Yes. Was it within the realm of possibility at that point. Yes.

Part 5.

"Insufficient observation (frequency of contact) of a patient."

This was my original point. Depending upon how critical a patient is at any given time determines how often they should be assessed. If the patient was critical enough it could be as often as every 5 minutes or less. Where I work our standard assessment time is 15 minutes. What did this patients condition warrant? And, did that change as the patient was placed into emotional stress from the events surrounding her?

Now having gone through all of that, I believe I have at least brought up some questions that if answered would make the issue of possible abandonment in this case clearer. Make whatever opinion you wish but I at least see the issue as being on the table. Maybe I haven't lost my mind after all?

Which brings me back to the beginning of this discussion. You stated that you disagreed with just about everything in my original post, yet all you have talked about was the definition of the word abandonment. My original post, and all those that followed, were primarily about how Mr. White should have handled himself differently. You have yet to tell me how you disagree with that. Nor have you answered any of the questions I posed to you earlier, aside from stating that you saw no potential harm to the patient.

Finally, I have never, and will never represent my self to provide legal advise of any kind and I take insult to the fact that you assumed I did. Neither, I should add are you, (to the best of my knowledge) a member of the Oklahoma State BAR Association, making you less than qualified to offer definitive legal advise in the State of Oklahoma, you are simply a more specifically educated consumer of the same information I and any other poster here are.

I do claim to offer common sense advise, which often gets lost on those who have spent too much time in a classroom or office. My advice is the same that a teacher would tell 2 5 year olds. "I don't care who started it, it ends now." Think carefully back to grammar school. If two kids were caught fighting, didn't they both get into trouble? Even the nerd who stands up to and punches the bully gets detention.

Look, I don't mean to be insulting but the facts are just that clear. They both messed up and both should be held accountable. I have never defended all of Officer Martin's actions, or Mr. White's. I do not believe either to be a villain, or a saint. They are both men who let their egos get in the way of common sense. Something we, as trained professional responders should learn from, so that we don't make the same mistakes ourselves.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:34:25 -0000

You have the right to agree or disagree with whatever point of view you choose. I will be replying to his last post but have not finished it since I just finished a double shift and have other commitments today. Look for it in the next day or so.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:05:27 -0000

But he isn't wrong here. He happens to be an expert in this field of discussion. Skip is an expert in ems law, and management.

I also happen to agree with him.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 12 Sep 2013 03:33:12 -0000

Honestly, I don't really care. There are plenty of people who have very advanced degrees, hold high titles, and are still wrong sometimes. So I will continue to stand by my statements, and despite the fact that I don't have the same qualifications, I am still an intelligent individual who has a right to an opinion, especially in an online forum.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:33:37 -0000

Thanks for taking the time to reply here skip. This discussion deserves more discussion.

I have a post about ems privacy laws and blogging, could I pick your brain?

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

medicthree — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:32:33 -0000

I think maybe you should google the name of the man you're replying to. Skip isn't some joe blow off the streets.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub...

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Skip Kirkwood — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 21:19:14 -0000

So, I'm probably not the guy you want to argue with about what is and is not abandonment. There was no abandonment here. No, I do not see any potential for harm to the patient.

The rest - I wasn't there, and I don't know the dynamics between these crew members. So, I can't make an informed comment about White's action. I can make a comment about the trooper's action. He put his hands on an on-duty paramedic. Not OK. End of my analysis, unless he intended to place White in to custody and transport him to jail. In terms of the use of force analysis, the trooper was the aggressor, starting with his act of pulling over the ambulance, and continuing on. I'd be happy to litigate the civil suit that could come from this on behalf of Paramedic White.

Just my view - feel free to disagree, but please don't offer legal advice to our colleagues unless you are qualified to do so.

Thanks.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 15:01:26 -0000

So you disagree that they are both wrong?
You disagree that Mr. White should have tried to approach a hostile individual in a calm manner to try to deescalate the situation instead of making the situation worse by yelling right away?
You disagree that this situation was potentially harmful to the patient?

The issue of abandonment is very different pre hospital vs in the ED, as are many other aspects of patient care. The easiest way to think of it is this. On an MCI (defined as more patients than rescuers) it is not abandonment to leave one patient for another that is in more need of care, and since there are almost always more patients than nurses in an ED the same basic rules apply. I know that is a dumbed down version of things, but to the layperson it should help to make sense of things. The real answer is that RN's are governed by the nursing board of the state they are in, while EMT's and Paramedics are governed by their state's office of emergency medical services, which has different rules and laws. Besides, often the most critically ill in the ED are not left alone until they are stabilized. Mr. White claimed that their patient was critically ill. If that was the case why leave that patient alone? And in what way does getting out and yelling at a cop ameliorate the situation in any way? Besides, if they were that worried about how fast they had to get this patient to the ED they would have been using lights themselves. The simple fact is that by letting the argument escalate they caused further delay to the transport.

Yes in most cases the senior medic is in charge of the ambulance, but the driver is still charged with the safe operation of the vehicle. If the driver crashes the medic in the back is not, and can not be, given a ticket. Besides, it is entirely possible to oversee someone while letting them deal with an issue on their own. Mr. White didn't even give his driver a chance to handle the situation with the cop before getting out of the back of the ambulance and making it a 2 against 1 scenario. Mr. White then proceeded to immediately start puffing out his chest and yelling at the cop, when he had no way of knowing why they had even been pulled over. For all Mr. White knew they could have had a tire on fire, but he didn't do anything but jump out and start yelling at the cop. Which again tells me that there was a history here, or that he knew exactly why they had been pulled over in the first place. But the point is, Mr. White and Officer Martin both handled themselves poorly. However; I put more blame on Mr. White because he had no business getting out of the ambulance when, and in the manner that he did.

Mr. White may have been in charge of the ambulance by protocol from his agency, but that does not supersede the state law. The state law states that the driver is responsible for the operation of the vehicle. If I wanted to I could say that my stuffed frog on my dashboard is the crew chief of my personal car and that he is responsible for what happens with my truck, but if I crashed into you, I'd still get the ticket and you would still sue me. In fact in most EMS agencies the senior medic is in charge of all patient care issues, and in charge of the ambulance as a supervisor to the driver. What that means is that if they feel the driver is doing something unsafe or improper the senior medic can reprimand and/or pull the drivers privilege to drive. The same way that a field supervisor can pull a driver off the road. What that does not mean is that the senior medic is responsible for dealing with the police when the ambulance gets pulled over. The senior medic is responsible for dealing with outside agencies, on emergency scenes. For example, if this ambulance had pulled up on an accident scene that Officer Martin was at, then Mr. White is responsible as the senior medic for dealing with Officer Martin on an interagency level. That does not include times when the ambulance is being pulled over, because, at that point, the ambulance is legally just another car on the road, the same as any other.

By law in most states an ambulance, (or for that matter police car and fire apparatus) are only legally considered emergency vehicles when using lights and sirens. So when this ambulance was pulled over what legally happened was this. "A vehicle was pulled over, the rear passenger got out and started confronting the office in a hostile manner. The officer attempted several times to give the passenger a lawful order to return to the vehicle, while at the same time attempting to talk to the driver. When the passenger physically blocked the driver from complying with an order from the officer, the officer reacted with force to subdue the passenger." The fact that the vehicle was an ambulance and that it had a patient have no bearing legally. Was it stupid for him to pull over an ambulance? Yes. Would his superior have taken issue with it? Yes. Did he have a leg to stand on by saying they failed to yield? No. If Mr. White had just let Officer Martin write the ticket would it have been held up in court? No. Were Mr. White's actions unprofessional? Yes. Was the force used by Officer Martin excessive and improper? Probably. Did these 2 hard headed individuals cause harm to the reputations, and working relationships of their 2 agencies? Definitely.

I agree that Officer Martin should have never pulled the ambulance over, and that if the stop had gone smoothly he would have been reprimanded for it. But, Mr. White's actions took all of that away. Officer Martin was unprofessional and disrespectful but so was Mr. White. I do agree that Officer Martin should be disciplined for a lack of professionalism and his excessive and improper use of force. But, I also agree that Mr. White should be disciplined for his failure to properly care for his patient, and his severe lack of professionalism. Trying to put the blame wholly on either of these two men is a juvenile way of thinking about this. As the old adage says, it takes two to tango. And either of these two men could have stopped this from happening.

Finally, I in no way support any type of retaliation by either party. The best way to handle this situation now is to let it drop and try to get back to a healthy working relationship between these two agencies.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Skip Kirkwood — Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:16:52 -0000

Your definition of "abandonment" is wholly incorrect. Part of the ambulance crew's responsibility is the safe conveyance of the patient to the hospital - if something interrupts that it is perfectly appropriate for the crew to try to ameliorate the interruption. Otherwise, every time the ED nurse left the patient's room, that would be "abandonment" - and it is not.

In most EMS organizations, the senior paramedic on the unit is the crew chief and is responsible for everything that happens on the unit - particularly dealing with outside agencies.

And, having been on both sides of this game, a cop who stops an ambulance for anything other than endangering the public (like impaired driving or reckless operation, not "contempt of cop") is acting foolishly, and in a professional law enforcement organization would be disciplined seriously - because rational supervisors would realize that "we are all on the same team" and we don't arrest each other, or use larger-than-necessary needles, etc., because we feel that our "authority" has been disrespected. We treat each other professionally and with respect - which was not Trooper Martin's demeanor on this video.

More succinctly stated, I fully disagree with almost everything you said.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 05 Sep 2013 10:58:37 -0000

How so? Do you have an argument or do you just want to question my sanity ambiguously?

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Skip Kirkwood — Thu, 05 Sep 2013 05:58:57 -0000

I think that you've lost your mind, Russ.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:38:47 -0000

True but the officer still has to drive with due regard for the safety of other drivers. He was moving very fast, and not allowing traffic to safely clear in front of him. The ambulance did pull over but apperantly it wasn't fast enough for the officer. Who then took it upon himself to make a comment on the radio to the ambulance while still responding "Code." Which is unnecessary and provocative. He is clearly passing the ambulace in the oncoming lanes even while the ambulance is yeilding to him. He then gets to a scene that he is no longer needed at. (Why wasn't he cancelled before he arrived if he wasn't needed?) Which means that his driving put others at risk needlessly, although it is not his fault because he could not have known that at the time. He then manages to somehow see from 10 feet off the side of the road, through a closed passenger side window on a sunny day, the driver of the ambulance doing about 30 mph, give him the finger. Even though the dark interior of the cab and the bright light shinning outside the cab would make it just about impossible to destinguish that much detail inside the ambulance. Amazingly none of this is on the the video from the patrol car. He then decides that this must mean that they purposfully blocked his path, not that they could in any way be responding to his radio transmission. Then he makes the connection that this must be a challenge to all law enforcement officer's authority. So he pulls them over and begins the traffic stop in a confrontational manner. Then when he recieves a reaction in kind he decides that he will physically restrain the medic, who has posed no physical threat to the officer. In fact the only thing he should have told the medic when he didn't comply with the request to get back in the ambulance was that the medic should turn arround because he is under arrest for failure to comply with a lawful order. Then and only then if the medic didn't do as requested is physical restraint called for. Never, is it called for to strangle someone who is not being violent. This is a really good example of excessive force. A simple arm hold would have done better than a grab to the throat.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:08:06 -0000

Just FYI Officer Martin is the cop, the Medic is named White.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:54:24 -0000

No a paramedic's job is to treat the patient. The driver's job is to get the patient to the hospital safely. Then ask your self how could the trooper have know that a patient was in the back before pulling them over. Expediting the process would have involved a single calm request that this be delt with at the hospital. Not getting out with a confrontational attitude. You abandon a patient if you are no longer able to provide an ongoing assesment. I don't care how good a medic you are you can not assess through a closed door. What would have happened if the patient went into cardiac arrest while they argued? Mr White would have been responsible, because he is supposed to be taking care of the patient not fighting with a cop. Mr White should have known enough to keep calm. Imagine this senario. Cop pulls ambulance over, Medic sticks head out and says "Excuse me officer just so you know we do have a patient on board, could this be done at the emergency room after we drop off the patient." Then the medic goes back to treating the patient. Wether or not the officer lets them go the patient's outcome is now at lea0ts partially the officer's responsibility. Most officers I've delt with don't want that additional liability. So unless they are too hot headed at the time they will do the right thing and follow the ambulance to the hospital and deal with the issue there. I also suspect there is a history between these two given how quickly things escalate.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Russ Prokop — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:36:23 -0000

They "swerved" to the left clearly because they were trying not to hit the car that had been in front of them and it was not sudden. Anyone who has driven with lights and sirens knows that sometimes the car in front pulls over and the car behind goes around and pulls over after. Also, I have seen people pull over for ambulances that did not have their lights and sirens on just because they get confused. It is also very hard to see a police car run up behind an ambulance that quickly. In fact it is also harder to hear a siren from behind since you have medical devices making noise as well as a loud diesel engine blaring at you. You may also be getting information from your partner or using the 2 way radio. That being said mindset of the trooper or not or not he still assaulted a medic. Espically since police officers are supposed to be trained to keep calm in stressful situations. So the arguement that the trooper had a certin mindset is basically admitting that he let his emotions get in the way of his professionalism. However the medic was wrong too, because while this was going on he abandoned his patient in the back of the ambulance. And he also started off with a bad attitude and lack of professionalism. He too should be trained to stay calm in stressful situations. So I call this a failure on both parties but I put more of the balme on the trooper because he is the one that escalated it to a physical confrontation. And in no police manual that I have ever seen is it an appropriate manuver to grab someone around the throat and pin them against a vehicle. It opens you up to a wrongful death case if the person should die from a hypoxia. Or on the other extreme, it is a poor method of controling someone, since it would be easy for them to counter this with a swift knee to the groin.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

Avram Hammer — Tue, 04 Jun 2013 12:34:49 -0000

In my state, or should I say commonwealth [Commonwealth of Pennsylvania], ambulances are still considered emergency vehicles and other vehicles are required to yield to them as long as they have the red lights activated. All other response vehicles (police, fire trucks, fire police [yes, we have firefighters with certain traffic-related law enforcement duties], and officers responding in POV's) are not considered emergency vehicles and are not afforded the requirement of other drivers to yield to them unless they are operating with both lights and sirens.

Re: Daniel Martin, Oklahoma Highway Patrol Moron of the year

eddy — Fri, 31 May 2013 22:28:41 -0000

I got pulled over in the middle of a critical care transfer. My EMT partner had the nerve to pass a trooper going 1 MPH over the limit. We weren't running code, but pt was on a vent, pregnant, and had multiple lines going. He stormed up to the drivers window and like most arrogant asshole troopers, proceeded to berate her about speeding, his authority, bla bla bla. I'll remember that when your attitude gets you shot.