LAWYER: When Blood Draws Violate Your Rights 

All of this should be illegal. Crazy how much we as citizens allow government to get away with!

I can’t believe a hospital can bring out a liability waiver for a blood draw. A hospital should never be able to waive liability for any procedure.

Never answer any questions. "Will you consent to us drawing your blood?" "I don't answer questions."

You take my blood, I should be able to take yours…….. All seriousness, don’t give the State anything. Fight the fight.

Are you allowed to contact a lawyer during this whole process to find out what the law would be in your specific state? Because frankly I have no faith that the police would be honest with me on what the laws really are and would rather consult someone before agreeing or refusing to anything.

Here’s a bit different scenario: Let’s say the cops believe you may be the perpetrator of a murder, rape, or some other horrific crime. The cops collected some DNA from the crime scene. But… the cops do not have enough evidence to get a warrant for your DNA. So a crafty detective simply has a patrol car watch you. Next time they see you driving, they pull you over and claim they think your intoxicated. So the pull out the hand held breathalyzer. Or with no odor of alcohol they say you are on drugs. So they pull out the Field Drug Test. What happens if that cop saves the breathalyzer straw in an evidence bag? Or he saves the drug test swab in an evidence bag? Did the cop just legally obtain your DNA? Even tho it was a pretextual stop. Much the same as if you drink during a police interrogation and leave the cup behind. Even if you toss it in the trash (pay attention if you are in an interrogation room. The trash is empty and the room is recorded, so that proves chain of custody for the evidence. It could only be your cup.). Then there’s the less discreet where they take you to the PD for a blood draw. There’s DNA? And how can the cops keep your DNA results on file? See I’m of the opinion that it’s wrong for my fingerprints to be kept on file. I understand using them to identify me at arrest, court, and even while I’m incarcerated for that charge. But once I’ve ‘served my time’, why do cops get to keep my prints on file? An average Joe may be suspected of a crime but his prints aren’t on file. Why does Joe get to have a greater privacy than me? Presumed innocent until proven guilty.- but if I served my time… aren’t I now innocent again?

"Hello, judge? Yeah, we got another vampire warrant request."

A waiver is a contract right? Are contracts valid when you know the other person is intoxicated?

I have fainted several times during my blood being drawn - in clinical setup, reclined in a chair that wouldn't let me fall down. It's not that uncommon, especially if the phlebotomist is less than proficient.

Is there any excuse for medical conditions? I would hope there are. I do not do well at all when my blood is drawn, and I often refuse blood tests in regard to medical things specifically because of that. I'd almost rather be charged with something than submit to a blood test. I don't drink or use any mind altering substances, so I shouldn't run into this situation to begin with, but I've seen videos of people being arrested for DUI with no actual evidence except for what the officer "said".

What if drawing blood is against your religious beliefs? Wouldn't them forcing you or criminalizing your refusal be a violation of the 1st amendmant?

When you do have a blood draw, remind the person taking your blood to let the alcohol evaporate from your arm before the venipuncture starts. FAR FAR too many technicians just swipe your arm to get it wet and go right for the vein. This is NOT how it is supposed to be done. To make things worse, I've had an impatient tech start to BLOW on my arm (with their disgustingly infected mouth) on my arm to get it dry faster.

Really enjoy your videos, most informative and entertaining, especially Officer Andy! Take care, keep 'em coming!!

I was told by my lawyer to never give evidence against myself, this includes words, breath and blood. 4th and 5th amendment protects me again providing evidence against myself. We as citizens are under no obligations to help the police or courts gather evidence against ourselves. Meaning you do not have to help the cop investigate you by providing statements or DNA/Breath/Blood.

That is why officer daddy never came back home when he was supposed to get milk on the way back. Poor little Timmy will never get to see his statistically wife beating father again. This is a tragedy that must be stopped!

i cant wait till all these rules are burned to the ground

I think the 4th amendment covers this. The right to be secure in your person, papers, and effects. Your blood is your person.

Andrew, I thought "implied consent" is because you sign for a Driver's License, which the contract lists that you have to give up blood if told. Which is where the "free travel movement" is interesting...

Always refuse EVERYTHING.....more importantly dont drive drunk. But cops are handing out blood draws like candy several from people who turned out totally clean.

Question. So when a cop flashes his light and is behind you, you then must pull over right? My lovely wife thinks that it's ok to first call 911, to let them know that the area as to where you are being pulled over isn't safe. That way you can continue driving to a safer spot! Is that legal? I myself don't think so. Not stopping when police are behind you is breaking the law. Kind of like this situation with the black army guy. Thoughts please!!

But the police draw blood on the side of the road. I guess that's different since it's for fun.

Seems a close call on 4th & 5th amendment protection. 4th I say as warent and then5th as are using you as a witness to "prove" guilty. Just me on view of innocent until prove yourself guilty~

Some officers are getting EMT or phlebotomy certifications so they can draw blood on the roadside.

You can extract information that would violate HIPAA.

What if you have a religious belief that stops you from having blood drawn?

they try to draw my blood, i will draw theirs,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I’ve got a 12 Pack of Bud Lite to sell you. Too funny

No one without proper credentials in a sterile setting is taking my blood.

Can cops make someone take your blood? Think the crazed cop in Utah a few years back when they arrested the ER nurse.

Legal and moral are 2 very different ideas. It is amazing how lawyers (professional liars) seem to skip right over the idea of morality. It that part of their soul removed in law school or is it when they take their bar exam?

I've read of cases where blood was drawn at those sobriety checkpoints. However, the cop doesn't draw the blood, they have paramedics that ride along and draw the blood. I read this many years ago, so I don't think it was widespread and it probably no longer exists.

Would saying, "I don't want to sign this waver without my lawyer present so i know what im signing"

If your blood is taken, and you are found not under the influence, can you then demand your blood to be returned and removed from any database that it was entered into?

If a law enforcement officer is trained as a nurse or a phlebotomist, and he is authorized, by law, to draw blood. Is he drawing blood as a police officer with qualified immunity, or is he drawing blood as a nurse or a phlebotomist without qualified immunity?

You are my hero. Wondering if I should make the jump from MA to VA 😅

Implied consent is still consent, right? That means it can be withdrawn at any time.

Very simple. Just tell anyone coming at you with a needle that you do not consent. If they rirce the issue, you will charge them under Article Six of the Nuremberg Protocols, which prohibit uninformed/unconsented medical procedures (blood draw is a medical procedure). Violation of this International Law (yes, it applies inside the USA) can carry a sentence of death by hanging. There isn't a medical professional alive that will TOUCH you after you say "no" and "Nuremberg".

O.K. Here we go. I am an RN (registered nurse) with 30 years in the operating room. The legal consenting process is my LIFE! I am one of only about 50,000 nurses nationwide with this particular and rare skillset. One of my PRIMARY responsibilities is to scrutinize consenting documents. If I determine the consents do not contain the language required, I am going to postpone your surgery until the documents can be rectified. NEVER submit to testing done by law enforcement. Never answer health questions and use your right to remain SILENT! Let your lawyer sort it out. Let's talk about IMPLIED CONSENT. IMPLIED CONSENT: Any testing or procedures REQUIRE consent from the person undergoing the test or procedure. Howeverrrr.... If I find you unconscious, this provision of law permits me to assume you would, if you could, give me consent to take actions that will either improve your condition or save your life. (Law enforcement blood draws do NEITHER of these things). Since you are not able to fend for self or give consent, the fact you are unconscious allows me to declare IMPLIED CONSENT and I can take action. The problem facing law enforcement is they lack EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES. Sorry, Mr. Officer, your suspect is not dying...he's just drunk. There are ZERO exigent circumstances and therefore the officer cannot declare implied consent. There are many problems facing law enforcement when they don't stay in their lane. Another problem they face is that IMPLIED CONSENT can be withdrawn/revoked at any time for any reason. And since the government decided to attach implied consent to my driver's license, I decided turn about was fair play. So, taped to my license are the words, "IMPLIED CONSENT WITHDRAWN/REVOKED FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE ON THIS LICENSE". The reason implied consent is so important to law enforcement is because they learned the hard way that when dealing with an impaired person, any consent the person may give is INVALID due to the fact they are impaired/intoxicated. For example, If a nurse gives you 100mg of Demerol at 0900 and then an hour later has you sign or verbalize consent for a procedure, the consent is INVALID and I will postpone your surgery. The consent is invalid because you gave it under the influence. Another way officers manipulate a person is to use IMPLIED CONSENT in another way. That is when they tell you to stick out your arm for the needle...and you do. Simply following the directives they give to you may be deemed as consent is 'implied' because you offered them your arm. This guy is WRONG. I have a video of a roadside blood draw done by a law enforcement officer after the suspect blew zeroes. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-njPTtSp8Tac.html Another problem facing officers is that only MEDICAL DOCTORS have the credentials coupled with both the legal and medical authority to order INVASIVE PROCEDURES. A judge is NOT a medical doctor and has ZERO legal and medical authority to order invasive procedures. He can issue a warrant for an officer to obtain a blood sample but that is the extent of his authority. I consistently would refuse to draw blood for law enforcement. These are MY skills and I decide when, where, if and how my skills are applied. Doctors and nurses take oaths too which is why this is 'sticky'. We know we cannot FORCE a person to submit to anything. We also know citizens have a right against self-incrimination. Drawing blood on a warrant means the person is unwilling. When a warrant FORCES the person to submit, then you are forcing that person's body tissue to incriminate the body. This ain't rocket science folks...it's just that law enforcement will twist, contort, omit, throw shade or any other number of things to serve their purpose. NEVER SUBMIT TO QUESTIONS OR TESTING by law enforcement. The constitution protects you from self-incrimination which is why you have the right to REMAIN SILENT...that means you don't let your blood leave your body to do any talking either! EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES: As pointed out previously, exigent circumstances are DIRE for the person of interest. Officer's are missing the part about it isn't about THEIR circumstances...it's about the 'person'. But officer's will claim exigent circumstances because by the time they decide this is a DUI/DWI case and jump through all the department hoops, they transport the person to an ER and wait long periods of time because a blood draw is just not an emergency. So, by the time a nurse gets around to them...their suspect has sobered up and his blood alcohol level has been dropping back into the window of a 'legal' result. So, for law enforcement...time is the exigent circumstance. In reality, they do not have exigent circumstances and cannot declare implied consent. But they doin' it...ain't they? Like I've written other places...there are just a handful of people who understand these laws because there is only a handful of people who need to know them. Unless you often do invasive procedures on people, why would you need to know or understand these laws? You wouldn't. This makes it SOOOO easy for law enforcement to twist and contort them and no one is the wiser. Except...I am. Because they have been getting away with this, all 50 states have adopted the implied consent law. Since that time, they have been busy setting 'precedent'. This has opened the door to even more disturbing advancement and encroachment into the medical field. Having established implied consent has made the need for your consent or a warrant unnecessary. So, now, cops have no need for a judge. Then it dawns on them... So, they go to a community college Director of Laboratories and discover the school offers phlebotomy courses that teach laboratory technicians how to introduce a needle into a vein and extract blood. Eureka! Now...guess what else they no longer need? Doctors and nurses. It's a fool's paradise. Just a bunch of cops who attended six weeks at the police academy, a phlebotomy course and a pack of needles. Wonderful. Yeah. Now...with access to blood...they can frame anybody. Questions? Just ask. I'm on the war path to bring this insanity to an end. But every lawyer I talk to only says...well...case law is established. STFW (so the fuck what)? Case law only means some judge on a bench who knows nothing about medical law makes a ruling based off some other case law where that judge did the same damn thing. It doesn't mean shit when that case law is reeking FOUL play of the law! What do you guys think?

Is obstruction of justice a leaser charge than a DUI?

What if you were apart of a deadly vehicular accident that you were not at fault. Is it unlawful to refuse a blood test in this scenario?

Andrew great topic, your video struck a sore spot with me. My story: In California you have the right to choose a blood, breath or urine test. That being said I was arrested at a DUI checkpoint that had a trailer on site with a nurse in it to take your blood. I informed the officers that I had the right to choose the type of test and chose the breath test. They informed me that they would be taking my blood, and that they did not have a breath tester on site. I insisted on the breath test as was my right. The officer informed me that my only choice was to let the nurse take my blood or two officers would hold me down and the nurse would take my blood. I went with option B, they held me down and took my blood against my will. After that the nurse quit and walked out saying she didn't sign up for that. she was very upset. The results of the blood test was .08 the Ca limit was .08. my attorney informed me that several years prior the Ca supreme court ruled that failure to allow a DUI suspect to choose the test was not grounds to toss the test results. so I guess you only have the right to choose the test if the officer lets you choose. not much of a right. in the end after hearing my story in court the judge admonished the DA for bringing the case and the DA was shammed in to drop the charges. Phil C

I got a blood draw on side of road. I wasn't arrested. The cop drove my car (and me) home and walked back. And I had a 0.149 (just missing extreme DUI) January 2022.

Blood draw at roadside- yes! The one guy is dead because 7 cops piled on him, pinning him, to do a blood draw. He was right beside his vehicle.

Just as a point of mild correction. I'm guessing you found a state by state map of cannabis laws per state. But, I just wanted to point out that Minnesota is now legalized for recreational use of cannabis. Just know that I very much enjoy your videos and it has taught me much.

There is NO "implied Consent", at least not in the Texas penal code. section 45 of the Texas transportation code says a driver "MAY" consent, it doesn't say they "MUST" consent, nor does it say acceptance and signing for your DL is considered consent. I strongly urge anyone to literally read their state statute. One other point, what about medical laws, in Texas the only people allowed to legally draw blood are trained Phlebotomists.

As a layperson, here's how I would view the medical waiver signature question. If you consent to a blood draw for law enforcement you have complied. It's their responsibility to collect it. If they choose to farm it out to another entity that's their call, but THEY are the ones accepting liability. If THEY want to waive liability they can, but that's a liability to THEM, not the suspect. I have no obligation to give up my civil legal protections for a Government matter. That in and of itself should be a Fourth Amendment violation. Further, there's nothing stopping a law enforcement agency from having qualified medical staff on their payroll so the waiver is not needed.

Personally, I'd rather give blood than take a breathalyzer; far more accurate and impossible to throw out if it's done by a Professional, even with a simple medical technician with a few months/weeks of employment will do. Any defense attorney will tell you to pay for the blood draw, then call them and have the case handled...

OK. Yes. I'm a wuss. I must be lying down or I'm gonna make sure I grab that service provider lovingly as I start to fall. Lol.

i have the right to feel secure with in my own person, they took my finger prints and an x-ray of my whole body and photography, technology has violate my freedom and my right to feel secure, as a poor man a loner, and a biologist i am the perfect person they can set up as a escape goat for what ever crime the gov. wants to frame me for. i will never comply with any officer unless they sign MY paper work first that says i am not ruled under US laws their judges/agents ect..

Saw a good one on this today - nurse got $500k for after cop arrested her for refusing to draw blood without a warrant... question though - I see lots of videos on 'I don't consent to searches. am I being detained' but what if they say yes? what's the proper action between 'yes you're being detained' and actually being placed under arrest? Got any of those videos?

My answer: LAWYER. Then consult with my LAWYER, for 4 hours.

Question, are there laws about retention of the blood and what they can do with it? Drawing blood to do a drug test because of suspicions that you are driving under the influence rases some 4th and 5th amendment questions, but at least makes sense at least with a proper policy. But, can they just keep my blood on file and use it whenever they want to check my DNA against other crimes and such? That feels like it should violate the search warent.

What if you are one of those individuals with an absolute hatred/fear of needles? If you end up panicking when they approach you with the needle does that give the cops the right to beat you into unconsciousness (getting assaulted for attempting to fight off an assault)? Is there an argument to be made for self defense? A blood draw necessarily requires you to be stabbed. In most states if somebody stabs someone above the waist, it's attempted murder. Yet, on a magistrate's say-so the government's agents are free to stab you? I am not following the logic or reasoning...unless it's just a means for the government to assert dominance over its citizenry.

Perhaps signing as "under protest" may not indemnify the cops or the hospital, idk 😐

Honestly, it’s crazy that they can get a search warrant for your blood. If it could possibly end up with the suspect dying even if they comply then it shouldn’t be something they can do.

One thing you can do to protect yourself from this kind of intrusion, if you are drunk or high, do not get behind the wheel. Good content as always.

I am an expert. The venipuncture procedure video you showed is technically incorrect and exposes the pt. to infection. That's assuming that the puncture was actually completed.

On the one hand, I don't like having to give up my blood. On the other hand, since I know I'm innocent I prefer an objective chemical test rather than the subjective opinion of the arresting office.

The application of law against a DUI is getting unconstitutional. It’s a DUI not a serial killer. The prevention of future consequences is starting to outweigh the present consequences.

The Fourth Amendment starts "The right of the people to be secure in their persons...:. Is not blood part of the person and is suspicion adequate to replace Oath or Affirmation?

IN , drew my blood by waking up a judge , getting warrant, then drawing blood. issue lots.

As a medic, I have drawn blood multiple times on the side of the road.

IMO - blood draws should be as unconstitutional, as race based discrimination. It should be a no exceptions line the government cannot cross, that being, to steal a human's body parts/tissue away from them. If there is no inherent untouchable right to your own body where you have say so as to what goes in it or gets removed from it, then in reality, there are no rights at all, in that system. It should be a crime, to violate any human's body, against their will, warrant or not.

Phlebotomists are trained to draw blood safely and insure its integrity by using the proper equipment, ensuring proper labelling, storage, etc. The idea that some cop is going to do so at the roadside, even with training, is close to ludicrous.

They drew my blood on the side of the road after contacting the judge(at 3am) and getting a warrant. I was pretty shocked.

It seems to me that an involuntary blood draw violates the 5th Amendment. If on a jury, that's how I vote.

If they're not lying about the circumstances, it shouldn't be difficult to get a warrant for a blood draw.

How about covering that case where cops were forcibly sticking catheters into people up in South Dakota?

If the person is giving search warrants all willy-nilly, they’re probably a vampire.

So what would happen if you have a legitimate concern about infection from a police ordered blood draw. e.g. you are a transplant patient.

Tell them you are a Jehova's Witness and it is against your religion to give blood, then if they do take it anyway you can sue them for violating your religious practice

You consent to having your blood drawn by driving in a car you own on roads your tax dollars paid for by a cop who's salary is paid by your taxes!? Gotta love this country.

So if blood is taken to be used a evidence against you and the results come back negative can you demand that your blood, property, be returned? In other words you took it out of me you need to put it back.

without a warrant or with voluntary submission is unlawful... With a warrant is unconstutional.

I love your channel but had tell you. Here in Utah, they sometimes call a mobile blood draw van to come to you to draw your blood at the side of the road. I bet the same is true in other states but I am happy to hear yours is not one of them.

"A 12pk of bud light for sale?" No thanks.

What about signing the waiver with "as to form only" phrasing

If police officer was a vampire and he had a search warant could he enter my home uninvited or not

Blood draws should only be done at a hospital by medical personnel.

Can you just say me, my blood, my breathe and my piss plead the 5th

I'm baffled that this is ever legal in any capacity.

The hospital is doing something under state order and they want you to sign away your right to sue them if something goes wrong? That's insanity. Why would anybody do that? If the state needs to take your blood to make their case, then they assume all responsibly should anything go wrong. That includes their hospital's incompetence.

Thank you for this valuable information

i was framed for a dwi like this. can you point me to a good attorney in indiana?

I was pulled over in AZ. I passed a breathalizer, and field sobriety test. The officer said his instincts have never been wrong, so he took me to the station. I passed the breathalyzer at the station, so he asked if he could do a blood test. I refused. He called in a warrant for my blood. I had smoked weed the day before, so i knew the results wouldnt be in my favor. The results were going to take up to 8 weeks to come in. This was well past my arraignment date. I didnt have a lawyer, so i plead guilty even tho i wasn't. I was never arrested, but i was given a speeding ticket, and charged w suspicion of dui pending results. They impounded my car

how can you consent if intoxicated, to include a waiver?

Question: Is it reasonable to request your lawyer if faced with a blood draw? Seems that officers will often push things you are not legally required to do at times, and be less than transparent on what is.

Andrew is one of the 3 best on the net.

Can you address when a DUI suspect been forced to undergo a urine extraction via a catheter?

What if the driver is a resident from North Carolina and gets a DWI in Virginia. Can Virginia get a warrant to draw blood of a North Carolinian at a Virginia Hosptial?

The police can always just say "you smell drunk" or since they were exposed to train their dogs to act as if they smell drugs on command, thsy can use that, then lie under oath (which they justified in an aid and abet police newsletter in which they said that it's not hypocricy when a policeman has the powet to arrest criminals, yet is perfectly justified in lying under oath because it helps the system).

I live in Oregpm and the cops took my blood, stole 3,000 dollars and. a go pro. The released me from Jail too late to get my purse that the cops left at the other station. I was released with no way to get to the other station and it was too late because they were closed.

Do you end up paying for the blood draw?

Demand to talk to an Attorney first.

I see a lot of people saying "Don't give them anything!" I get it. Consider this though. I get arrested for DWI/DUI and they demand I take a breathalyzer or blood draw under implied consent. Scenario 1: I consent, am drunk, and come to a plea deal that allows me to keep my license, stay out of jail, and be on probation. Scenario 2: I refuse, have my license taken away civically under implied consent. The first option gives me a conviction. The second one costs me my good job because I require a license to drive. Plot twist: Same scenario, but I'm not drunk. Sometimes it's a lesser of two evils.

Draw blood? It'll be mutual, pal.

I simply don't care what the consequences are. I am never going to consent to a blood draw from the police. That is highly messed up and we need to protest against this now. I don't even get how a warrant is relevant to the situation. How can a warrant be issued for part of my body?

Are there consequences for the police if your blood comes back clean?

I have a question for you, Andrew. If the police want to take your blood and you say no and they tell you that you should be charged with obstruction, should you always request that a warrant be issued for your blood? The reason I ask, is because I live in Texas. I’ve never been given a breathalyzer or committed any crimes my entire life. I have one speeding ticket that I was issued and I was 19 when that happened. I’m currently 41 now.

How did he die of resisting blood draw?