Comments:Oklahoma trooper on leave after altercation with ambulance personnel
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
What are your thoughts on the actions of the Oklahoma police trooper?
not only should he be fired, but should be charged with obstructing the duties of the paramedic and the health of the patient. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs)
The excuse the trooper provides (that he was unaware there was a patient in the ambulance) can be dismissed quite easily by simply watching the video. I believe I counted 2-3 separate occasions where he is informed of that very fact. This trooper should be fired, and I believe charged for interfering with the ambulance. Imagine if it were your wife/sister/mother in the back of that ambulance. Ridiculous! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs)
I don't believe the trooper should have stopped the ambulance in the first place. However, things were made worse by a number of bystanders (were they following in another vehicle?) One of them appeared to enter the unattended squad car while others gathered threateningly around the cop, driver and medic. At the end it seems someone in a red shirt (which is not what the original driver was wearing) entered the ambulance and drove it off. Others entered and exited the rear. Very chaotic indeed. --SVTCobra 23:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Actually the person in the red shirt was in fact the original driver. If you were watching the police car video then it was difficult to tell since the video quality was very poor and it doesn't seem to distinguish the color red very well. When the driver is coming out of the ambulance his shirt looks black, but as the video progresses his shirt looks red. You have to watch the video very carefully to tell this. Its even more clearer that this was in fact the driver if you compare this video to the youtube video since in the youtube video it can clearly distinguish the color red much better. At one point in the youtube video you can see the cop pulling the driver aside who is a bald white man in a red shirt and yelling at him. Curiously the black ambulance man whom the cop assaulted was wearing the same exact red shirt. But you wouldn't know it from only watching the police car video. As far as the bystanders making things worse, I have to say I simply didn't get that impression at all. The youtube video gave me the impression that the only reason the black ambulance man wasn't arrested was due to the bystanders protests and the man's resistance to being arrested. Good thing too since who knows how their patient's health would have been affected had she been deprived of her paramedic and been taken to the hospital with any more delay.Chhe (talk) 23:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have since watched the other video and I can't fathom what was going through the mind of the trooper initially or later. All I can suppose is that he got frightened by the number of people there and went into some kind of paranoid turf war over who had authority over the situation. Truly ugly. --SVTCobra 00:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm surprised the officer has not been sued by the patient. As a new EMT i know a little bit about this. Lights and Sirens are not necessarily required, at least not in my state. Especially if it would make the patients condition worse potentially. This officer was endangering not only the paramedic but the patient as well. If this was off duty or with no patient in the mix, i would suggest both of them being fired. But that wasn't the case. Unfortunately we live in a world of office and departmental politics, not right or wrong. I hope this officer is charged with something. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs)
Some people are ridiculous. It's common sense and the law. You must always obey a police officer when pulled over. It doesn't matter if you're an EMT, an iraq veteran or police officer yourself . Maurice White clearly flaunted the authority of the police officer and should have charges brought against him. If a police officer tells you to get back in the vehicle, you do it. THEN you tell them you have an emergency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs)
- I completely disagree with the comment above! The EMT had every right to question this sad excuse for a police officer. The officer was clearly in the wrong in every single imaginable way. It's people like you that give these scumbags the idea that they are GOD and that they have the authority to trample all over us citizens. I respect all police officers that I come in contact with, but this guy gets no respect! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:7:9c80:ef:72cd:60ff:fea9:71b4 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 7 February 2014
United States Department of Justice
If the local authorities won't protect their citizens, I hope the USDOJ steps in and conducts an investigation. This officer needs to be removed from the force. USDOJ should keep a database of such firings so that this person can not get a similar job in another jurisdiction. I wouldn't want him on the police force where my family and I live. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
I think that trooper should be charged and jailed, it's not fair he had to pull over an ambulance just because it didn't pull over before, i mean, it's an ambulance, when it's out on the road it's because of an emergency, what would have happened if that patient needed to be treated immediately for some kind of condition?, that UNJUSTIFIED AND ABUSIVE delay may have hindered her chances of survival, everything because the trooper was annoyed they didn't stop, who does he think he is? don't MS have special privileges on the road? and what about assaulting that guy?, i think that trooper should be fired without any kind of liquidation or something, it "to Protect and Serve" not "to Punish and Detain"... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Der Feniks (talk • contribs)
he should apologise
take his pay away and put him in jail.
The Reason for the Pull-over:
After reviewing all the footage, a clear view of what was most likely in the minds of each driver is clear.
1. Trooper was going at a very high rate of Speed with lights and sirens(code three)on a county road with curves and small hills. 2. Ambulance driver was traveling code one with a patient, on the same country road. 3. Ambulance driver had a vehicle in front of it, following within about 3 seconds behind the car in front. 4. Ambulance drivers view of the mirrors provided some view of the road behind, and if mirrors are scanned every ten seconds, this would provide safety while keeping an eye on the car infront whose actions can be unpredictable with an ambulance following it. 5. Troopers only care was what was in front of him, due to his high rate of speed. 6. Ambulance driver was keeping an eye on front, the safety of the patient, and scanning mirrors for upcoming cars. 7. The time between the first visual of ambulance and riding the ambulance bumber was about 7 seconds. 8. The Ambulance driver was dealing with a car slowing down in front of it, and keeping his eyes's on front. Even if he scanned his mirrors 8 seconds prior, he would not have seen the Trooper. The Vehcile in Front could have been slowing down for many reasons, the siren, the ambulance or both...but the fact remains the car was slowing down, and the ambulance was focusing on his most immediate safety issue, the car in front slowing down. 9.The Trooper had the Visual, the time, and ability to adjust his vehicles speed and position for saftey, having all the information of what was in front of him. 10. Troopers actions gave little time for human reaction to his Code Three. Given the Road conditions, and situation, perhaps three seconds max after the physical factors could be heard or seen behind him. 11. The NUMBER ONE RULE OF THE ROAD IS SAFETY! Not code three or yielding.
12, The trooper should not follow to close, tailgating is not safe. The Trooper had control of this and choose to tailgate. 13. The Trooper mindset was simple: "I'm code three, get out of My way" 14. The Ambulance driver was simple: "I was focusing on the slowing car in front of me, and I did not see you till you were tailgating my bumper, and I was in the middle of avoiding the car in front of my as I was passing it.
15. The Code Three run by back-up on a situation that did not even require the Trooper to get out of his vehicle or radio for a situation update is suspect. The Fact the the Trooper did not get communicate with the emergency situation that he was running code three, but rather his focus was the ambulance was clear becuase of the fact he did not even communicate with officers on site. The alleged hand motion does not negate the fact that if the emergency was code three, if should at least communicate and make sure it is o.k. to leave and go after the offending ambulance. This did not happen..Why?
The Troopers attitude and words and actions all point to rage due to the Failure to Yield. But was their a failure to yield? In the troopers mind, yes, upon review all the facts and situation, the troopers assessment for a Failure yield was unreasonable, and put the public at risk for personal reasons. I would want a EMT like Mr. White when in need of medical assistance. I would be in fear of my life if pulled over by Trooper Martin. The Da decision to sweep this under the rug, is not protecting the public safety, but protecting the trooper from accountability.
what a complete douchebag
Like the saying that "All the hypocrites are in church", "every cop is a criminal" is equally (more so?) true.
TROOPER AND THE AMBULANCE ATTEDENTS
I THINK THE TROOPER HAS ISSUES AND ANGER AND YOU SEE MORE AND MORE POLICE BULLYING THERE WEIGHT AROUND.
JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE THE LAW DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT OR THINK YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO PEOPLE. THAT IS WHY PEOPLE ARE GETTING SICK AND TIRED OF ABUSE OF POLICE OFFICERS AND SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE. BE AN OFFICER FOR THE RIGHT REASONS, NOT TO BULLY PEOPLE AROUND.
WHY DO POLICE THINK THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT!!!!!! IN MOST CASES THEY JUST LIKE TO THROW THEIR AUTHORITY AROUND. THIS BEHAVIOR HAS TO BE STOPPED. NO WONDER WHY PEOPLE HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THE LAW.
Welcome to the New Police State
Get used to it, buddy - it ain't changing anytime soon. You can thank the Patriot (or is it Paranoid) Act for that!
Welcome to the New Police State
A whole mess of charges
Assalt, obstruction, civil rights of emt and patient. We all know he and his buddies are guilty. But, will he be found guilty? Why are the courts not serving our interests? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Arrest the Trooper
Out of all the people there no one dared arrest that trooper for assaulting Mr. White. That's sad. As soon as he pushed White against the ambulance, I would have thrown him to the ground, ground my knee into his back and drawn my pistol to hold him there until law enforcement arrived. If he touched his weapon I would have shot him to eliminate the threat of violence (which would be a legally authorized killing under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act). If a law enforcement officer is acting unlawfully, he does not have the force of law and should be treated as if he is any other person attacking someone.
People need to start standing up to bad cops. It's not very practical unless we are equally armed though, so people need to start carrying firearms.
Brings up a philosophical issue about the strict adherence to policies and how they can be very rational but misapplied for an irrational outcome. The policy of being able to pull over any vehicle for driving infractions is rational, but the application of it in this case is ludicrous. I notice he didn't use "I was just following policy" as his defense, rather "I didn't know there was a patient in there" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 22 October 2017 (UTC)