Problem: just because a bomb has not exploded in 70-odd years does not mean it can not explode. Worse, some explosives become increasingly unstable as time goes on; the high explosive that was docile and safe to kick around in 1942 may be about as stable as potassium tri-iodide in 2017. (Which, it must be said, will explode if you breathe on it wrong. Literally.) (I3K! It blows up purple!)
Hence all the precautions when they find a bomb containing 1.4 tons of high explosive. That's enough to level the entire block around it, if it goes off.
This set my teeth on edge: "In July, a kindergarten was evacuated after teachers discovered an unexploded World War Two bomb on a shelf among some toys." That's like, AIIEEEE RUN AWAY RUN AWAY!
* * *
Yeah, this guy needs not to be a cop any longer, I think. Cop demanded that nurse do a blood draw on an unconscious man. Law and hospital policy clearly state that you can draw blood from a patient at police request if: 1) he can consent (patient was unconscious, so no consent); 2) is under arrest (patient not under arrest); 3) cops have a search warrant (no warrant).
Nurse explained that to cop. Nurse called her supervisor, who also explained that to cop. Cop then proceeded to arrest nurse, on the dubious legal theory that she was committing "obstruction of justice".
No charges filed.
The patient was unconscious because he'd been in a vehicle wreck. A person fleeing police rammed into his truck, causing a flaming wreck in which the fleeing person died. The patient, the driver of the truck, was innocent of any wrongdoing. The dashcam video shows the truck moving along in the opposing right lane, and the suspect veers across the road to cause the wreck. It's open-and-shut; that suspect caused the wreck, end of story. There was therefore no legal need for the truck driver to have his blood tested.
The truck driver patient is reportedly a reserve police officer in Rigby, Idaho; the going assumption is that [the asshat cop] wanted that blood sample Right Friggen' Now in order to absolutely clear the reserve police officer of any taint of guilt in the incident (even though, again, there's no suspicion that anyone but the original idjit was responsible for the crash).Arresting someone because they won't break the law, that has to be false arrest of one stripe or another. And wanting to make sure a fellow cop wasn't under suspicion of causing a wreck he clearly did not cause is a piss-poor reason to do it.
So as for the overly aggressive cop, "Every bus the governor, mayor and chief of police can find, they're preparing to throw him under...."
Yeah, that seems perfectly reasonable to me.
* * *
Well, I need to head out to the store. Spaghetti night!