PDA

View Full Version : Cops Put Bag On Woman’s Head, Strap Her To Chair And Choke Her To Draw Blood For DUI



Ares
9th February 2015, 08:32 PM
Cops Put Bag On Woman’s Head, Strap Her To Chair And Choke Her To Draw Blood For DUI Test

“Officers used choke hold pressure points on her neck, until her body went limp”

A woman is suing a host of parties after it emerged that cops in Austin, Texas, forcably took her blood for a DUI test, in a scene that sounds more like something that would occur at a Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

Caroline Callaway was arrested by a police officer after she refused to take a breath test during a routine traffic stop. Ms Callaway was taken directly to the Travis County jail where the shocking events unfolded.

Callaway’s attorney told reporters with Courthouse News that despite only “passive and verbal resistance” she was taken “to a small padded room, where she was surrounded by officers and strapped into ‘the chair,’ with her legs, wrists and shoulders restrained.”

Callaway, who had informed the police that she suffers from anxiety disorder and uses medications for the ailment, then “began to involuntarily tremble from anxiety and fear.” This prompted the cops to put a bag, known as a “Tranzport Hood,” over her head to deprive the senses, in some backwards notion that this would have a calming effect.

All the hood did was cause Callaway to panic further as she could not see what was happening and had further difficulty breathing.

A contracted nurse was on hand to perform the blood draw, but according to the complaint, “the needle popped out because of Ms. Callaway’s shaking and blood spewed onto one of the officers.”

“(D)efendants continued the abuse determined to take Ms. Callaway’s blood. In order to stop Ms. Callaway from trembling, one of the officers used choke hold pressure points on her neck, until her body went limp.” the complaint further notes.

“Defendant Ramsey-Graham stabbed Ms. Callaway again while Ms. Callaway was limp.” It continues. “When the officer released her neck, Ms. Callaway gasped for air. She could not see because there was a bag over her head, but she felt the weight of a boot in the crook of her arm, which, along with the rest of her body, was still tied to the chair.”

Injuries sustained by Callaway during the ordeal included nerve damage and severe bruising, most prominently on her neck as a result of the choking at the hands of the cops. She says that she is also suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Callaway was charged with DWI based on the blood test results, but the lawsuit outlines that the results are liekly innaccurate owing to the circumstances.

She is suing the city of Austin, Travis County, Austin police officers, county sheriff’s officers, Pro-touch Nurses and one of its employees, on the grounds of unlawful search and seizure, excessive force, assault and battery, negligence and medical malpractice.

Callaway is seeking punitive damages for emotional injuries, pain and suffering, embarrassment, humiliation, indignity, medical bills, lost wages and legal fees.

Callaway says she is pursuing the case in order to “change a government policy here and nationwide for the betterment of all citizens.”

As Infowars has previously noted, breathalyzer tests have been proven to be inaccurate in a high percentage of cases, with many factors rendering the results “little more than scientific guesswork”. Further research has shown that police officers often influence the results of breathalyzer tests, resulting in inaccurately high readings. Drivers are well within their rights to refuse to engage in such tests. Blood tests can also produce false high readings of alcohol levels if they are not conducted quickly and properly.

This information is important, many argue, because it means that enforced tests could provide police with self-incriminating evidence.

In previous examples of police conducting the practice, horror stories have emerged of Americans being forcibly restrained and having their blood extracted.

The following footage filmed in 2013 in Georgia shows cops strapping down citizens to gurneys, before using a needle to forcibly draw blood as the victim screams, “WHAT COUNTRY IS THIS?”

Even those who show no resistance whatsoever are forcibly restrained and have their heads pressed down by an officer using his elbow.

“We all are American citizens and you guys have me strapped to a table like I’m in Guantanamo f***ing Bay,” complains another victim of the blood draw.

Attorneys have argued that the forced blood draws are an unreasonable search, and constitute a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Georgia and Orgeon are two of numerous states that enforce the federally sponsored ‘no refusal’ checkpoints. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not unconstitutional to hold down Americans and forcefully withdraw blood. A January 2013 ruling affirmed that a warrant must be obtained for the process, although police could dispense with the warrant requirement in an “emergency”.

In some states, decades old implied consent law, which allowed drivers to say no to blood or urine tests, has been overturned to allow the process to take place in so called ‘no-refusal’ blood-draw checkpoints.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/lawsuit-cops-put-bag-on-womans-head-strap-her-to-chair-and-choke-her-to-draw-blood-for-dui-test.html

madfranks
9th February 2015, 08:50 PM
"You have nothing to fear, if you have nothing to hide."

midnight rambler
9th February 2015, 09:16 PM
They were protecting her from herself.

Oh, and fwiw she consented to the terms and conditions of the DRIVER LICENSE when she applied for it.

Ares
10th February 2015, 06:43 AM
They were protecting her from herself.

Oh, and fwiw she consented to the terms and conditions of the DRIVER LICENSE when she applied for it.

That agreement never states you will be subject to bodily injury at the hands of the state.

I have yet to see a single drivers license agreement state I forfeit all rights by requesting a drivers license.

Ponce
10th February 2015, 06:55 AM
I am really surprised that they didn't killed her in order to protect her against herself..........

V

SWRichmond
10th February 2015, 06:57 AM
Blood begets blood, and harm begets harm.

midnight rambler
10th February 2015, 07:32 AM
That agreement never states you will be subject to bodily injury at the hands of the state.

I have yet to see a single drivers license agreement state I forfeit all rights by requesting a drivers license.

Those terms and conditions are implied, not expressed, and can be modified or amended without prior notice. You seem to conveniently forget that a DRIVER LICENSE is regarded as a privilege (benefit) NOT a right by the actors of the corporate state. Additionally, one does not 'request' a DRIVER LICENSE, one makes an APPLICATION for a DRIVER LICENSE.

Gotta remember that a *license* is a permit to do something which would otherwise be illegal, so by making an application for same one is agreeing that the act of operating a motor vehicle* which is a state sanctioned activity.

*operating in commerce (as in operating a business on public property) vs. merely traveling

7th trump
10th February 2015, 08:43 AM
That agreement never states you will be subject to bodily injury at the hands of the state.

I have yet to see a single drivers license agreement state I forfeit all rights by requesting a drivers license.

You forfiet your Bill of Rights when applying for a ssn or signing under penalty of perjury of being a "US citizen".
I remember reading a document that came with the ssn application for my daughter when she was born. In that document it stated that some of the Bill of Rights were basically not accessible (forfeited) for thebenefits of Social Security.
I never signed my daughter up for the ssn...my now exwife did behind my back 2 months afterwards....and her reason was to claim her for her taxes....(greedy bitch).
Driver license dont need to say you forfeit rights when you have to disclose the ssn, which took your rights away before hand, to get a drivers license.

Ares
10th February 2015, 09:22 AM
Those terms and conditions are implied, not expressed, and can be modified or amended without prior notice. You seem to conveniently forget that a DRIVER LICENSE is regarded as a privilege (benefit) NOT a right by the actors of the corporate state. Additionally, one does not 'request' a DRIVER LICENSE, one makes an APPLICATION for a DRIVER LICENSE.

Gotta remember that a *license* is a permit to do something which would otherwise be illegal, so by making an application for same one is agreeing that the act of operating a motor vehicle* which is a state sanctioned activity.

*operating in commerce (as in operating a business on public property) vs. merely traveling

Didn't forget at all. Have actually been helping my brother with his court case with his speeding ticket. He challenged jurisdiction right out of the gate by claiming he wasn't driving and was in fact traveling. The deputy prosecutor used the "well you have a drivers license." To which I prepared my brother before hand to say, "Well yes sometimes I drive when I'm on the clock for my employer. But at the time of the incident I was not on the clock and that this is my private automobile."
I made him rehearse several times to never, EVER refer to his automobile as a motor vehicle and to change driving to traveling when speaking with the prosecutor or judge.

The deputy prosecutor was PISSED to say the least. She even said "I have a law degree, I know law, you don't." To which my brother just smiled and said okay that's nice, but you still haven't provided evidence of jurisdiction. Your law degree doesn't change that fact.

She stormed out of the room and gave him another court date. He still has yet to plead, he hasn't even gotten that far yet. He just got a letter in the mail last week letting him know that they've put in for a change of venue.. LOL Guess thats what happens when you express your rights.

Now I agree that there is absolutely no contract anywhere when applying for a drivers license that explicitly states that you forfeit your rights. But you are also correct in that it is implied. HOWEVER, that goes without saying you can make their life / jobs extremely difficult when you DO express your rights.

madfranks
10th February 2015, 10:06 AM
Didn't forget at all. Have actually been helping my brother with his court case with his speeding ticket. He challenged jurisdiction right out of the gate by claiming he wasn't driving and was in fact traveling. The deputy prosecutor used the "well you have a drivers license." To which I prepared my brother before hand to say, "Well yes sometimes I drive when I'm on the clock for my employer. But at the time of the incident I was not on the clock and that this is my private automobile."
I made him rehearse several times to never, EVER refer to his automobile as a motor vehicle and to change driving to traveling when speaking with the prosecutor or judge.

The deputy prosecutor was PISSED to say the least. She even said "I have a law degree, I know law, you don't." To which my brother just smiled and said okay that's nice, but you still haven't provided evidence of jurisdiction. Your law degree doesn't change that fact.

She stormed out of the room and gave him another court date. He still has yet to plead, he hasn't even gotten that far yet. He just got a letter in the mail last week letting him know that they've put in for a change of venue.. LOL Guess thats what happens when you express your rights.

Now I agree that there is absolutely no contract anywhere when applying for a drivers license that explicitly states that you forfeit your rights. But you are also correct in that it is implied. HOWEVER, that goes without saying you can make their life / jobs extremely difficult when you DO express your rights.

I'm very intrigued by your story, please let us know what happens next.

Dogman
10th February 2015, 10:11 AM
I'm very intrigued by your story, please let us know what happens next.

Ditto,

Bet she hit the books to work out her next strategy.

Love it when one can get a lawyer/prosecutor to sputter and spin in place.

expat4ever
10th February 2015, 10:32 AM
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/DLbrief.shtml

Ares
10th February 2015, 11:08 AM
I'm very intrigued by your story, please let us know what happens next.

I definitely will. We're still just waiting for a new court date since the previous court put in for a change of venue. Basically it was a small town court and they are changing it over to the county. Most likely because my brother didn't role over and just pay the fine like they were expecting.

I'll create a new thread once I get an outcome.