TexasCHLforum.com

MedicMan218 wrote:Any word on what happened to the RN's case?

I am also curious, but most of the time we never hear the outcome of such cases. Unless something about the story is sensational, they usually disappear after the original story. There was probably much more discussion on this forum than was ever in the news.

gigag04 wrote:Man that's 2.5 years of resurrecting.

You're welcome!

I am curious also.

I googled on this as many ways as I could think of, and didn't even find references to the original event. I suspect it would take someone going through the court records to find out.

I would also like to know.

My bet would be that it was either dropped, or plead out to something lower.

If they were convicted, I think we would have heard about it, as IIRC Charles once mentioning, I think he said that no one has ever been convicted under 30.06.
I could be wrong, however.

I'm not sure if its mentioned in this thread or not, didn't read the 8 pages but...

We spent a week in this hospital when my son was born 2 months ago, and this place is now 30.06 posted. Every entrance that I used were posted with correctly sized and worded stickers. Even the adjoining buildings (lactation consultant office) were posted.

They look to be relatively new, less than a year or so old. Might have some relation to this event, or it might just be since Texas Health Recources took over the hospital and remodeled recently.

WildBill wrote:

MedicMan218 wrote:Any word on what happened to the RN's case?

I am also curious, but most of the time we never hear the outcome of such cases. Unless something about the story is sensational, they usually disappear after the original story. There was probably much more discussion on this forum than was ever in the news.

I just received an email from the Bedford Police Chief. He stated that the DA declined to prosecute, based on the wording (not being exactly as it states in the statute) of, not only the sign posted outside the building, but also the wording in the hospital employee policy manual.

WildBill wrote:

WildBill wrote:

MedicMan218 wrote:Any word on what happened to the RN's case?

I am also curious, but most of the time we never hear the outcome of such cases. Unless something about the story is sensational, they usually disappear after the original story. There was probably much more discussion on this forum than was ever in the news.

I just received an email from the Bedford Police Chief. He stated that the DA declined to prosecute, based on the wording (not being exactly as it states in the statute) of, not only the sign posted outside the building, but also the wording in the hospital employee policy manual.

Thanks for this update. This is very good to hear.

Chas.

jiggerachi wrote:I'm not sure if its mentioned in this thread or not, didn't read the 8 pages but...

We spent a week in this hospital when my son was born 2 months ago, and this place is now 30.06 posted. Every entrance that I used were posted with correctly sized and worded stickers. Even the adjoining buildings (lactation consultant office) were posted.

They look to be relatively new, less than a year or so old. Might have some relation to this event, or it might just be since Texas Health Recources took over the hospital and remodeled recently.

Based upon the information in Wildbill's update, you can bet the new signs are the result of the DA's correct refusal to prosecute.

Chas.

WildBill wrote:

WildBill wrote:

MedicMan218 wrote:Any word on what happened to the RN's case?

I am also curious, but most of the time we never hear the outcome of such cases. Unless something about the story is sensational, they usually disappear after the original story. There was probably much more discussion on this forum than was ever in the news.

I just received an email from the Bedford Police Chief. He stated that the DA declined to prosecute, based on the wording (not being exactly as it states in the statute) of, not only the sign posted outside the building, but also the wording in the hospital employee policy manual.

Glad to hear they followed the letter of the law. However, this whole incident is the reason they are now posted with 30.06 signs. I will be willing to bet the manual now meets 30.06 wording too.

And Charle's beat me to posting.

Dang it, I read through several pages before I realized this was that old.

Glad to hear she wasn't prosecuted. Sounds like what would happen to me if I carried at work and someone tattled. I would be fired, but likely nothing else.

The only comment I could think of about her behavior is that I think she should have had some way of securing her purse or at least the holster portion to prevent unauthorized access when it was unattended.

I know Chief Flory personally, and I missed this issue when it originally came up. I can tell you that he is a reasonable and responsible man. . . definitely more likely to line up with us than with the "stereotypical" police chiefs of the world. I have not spoken to him about this specific incident.

It sounds like the initial arrest was made due to either 1) this was assumed to be a correctional facility due to the presence of detainees, or 2) the police had to assume that the RN had been given proper written notice when her employer told them she had been. The police would / should know if the signs are posted legally or not, but they would have to take somebody's word on the personal written notification until they could investigate it.

It sounds like things worked out here, with the unfortunate consequence of the hospital learning about proper posting. Although, I didn't see proper posting on the maternity ward doors when I visited a friend there in March, 2010.

Plano Medical center emergency entrance is posted but the sign is impossible to see if you walk in through the revolving doors. I won't say anything more about it than oops! I had no desire to be a test case in that situation but it seems if the sign is not visable from the entrance, it would be invalid.

I read every single post, and it even made me pause Alton Brown! But I must say, it's the best outcome we can hope for given the situation, of course the hospital is going to post correct signs now that they know.

Wow, good to hear it was dropped. But wouldnt this be a wrongful arrest?

What evidence did they have she actually "BROKE" the law, some supervisors/managers word that she was given "notice?

Doesnt a police officer have to have proof, or is heresay, word of mouth, proof enough?

Im no cop, but if i were, i would surely want to see this "written notice" for myself before i violated someones freedom.

This brings me to my initial conclusion that she was arrested under a misunderstanding of the law. The Lt's initial interview and error of the law is what im going by.

Keith B wrote: Glad to hear they followed the letter of the law. However, this whole incident is the reason they are now posted with 30.06 signs. I will be willing to bet the manual now meets 30.06 wording too.

And Charle's beat me to posting.

Don't bang your head to hard. I have it on very good authority that all the hospitals in the network are now properly posted. Including some of the parking lots. Just not all of them. However don't mention this too loud. The "Manual" has not been changed since 2007. That's all I'm sayin.

dihappy wrote:Wow, good to hear it was dropped. But wouldnt this be a wrongful arrest?

What evidence did they have she actually "BROKE" the law, some supervisors/managers word that she was given "notice?

Doesnt a police officer have to have proof, or is heresay, word of mouth, proof enough?

Im no cop, but if i were, i would surely want to see this "written notice" for myself before i violated someones freedom.

This brings me to my initial conclusion that she was arrested under a misunderstanding of the law. The Lt's initial interview and error of the law is what im going by.

Every employee is suppose to sign a little paper that they have received, read, and understand the "Manual." So letter of the law wise there nothing broken. Business wise there is. Certain people like to get the two confused.