Full Forecaste

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Area News

Man sues over fluid samples taken by force

Friday, February 1, 2008 5:35 AM PST

By Tony Lystra
Tlystra@tdn.com

Font Size:
 
 

A former Cowlitz County man has accused two sheriff’s deputies and a state department of corrections officer of forcibly restraining him at St. John Medical Center while hospital staff drew blood and forced a catheter in him to get a urine sample.

In a lawsuit filed Jan. 10 in Cowlitz County Superior Court, Matthew Clifford Arthur, 37, said that after he was arrested for driving under the influence in 2005, authorities drew the blood and urine from his body by force as he “protested and struggled.”

“He was held down kicking and screaming while they shoved a catheter into his penis,” said Kevin Blondin, the Longview attorney representing Arthur in the case.

After hospital staff forcefully injected the catheter and drew “a small amount of urine,” Blondin said, “the pain was to such a degree that he agreed to provide a sample to make them stop what they were doing.”

The suit, which asks for unspecified damages, names as defendants Cowlitz County, the Cowlitz County Sheriff’s Office and the state Department of Corrections. Defendants also include Sheriff’s deputies Tory Shelton and Pat Shallert, as well as Kevin Rentner, who works for the corrections department. It says Arthur “suffered physical pain and mental anguish ... and continues to suffer presently as a result” of the officers’ actions.

“I don’t want to analogize this too much with the victims of sexual assault, but we are talking about a very intimate part of his body being molested,” Blondin said. “He suffers from some of the same psychological trauma and, I guess, lingering effects of being manhandled in this fashion.”

Sheriff Bill Mahoney declined to comment Thursday evening. The state Attorney General’s office, which is representing the defendants, said it was still preparing its response to the suit and also declined to comment.

Blondin said Arthur, who has a long criminal record, had signed a probation agreement stating he could be subject to blood and urine tests at any time. When Arthur refused to provide the samples, Blondin said, the deputies should have taken him to jail.

“But that wasn’t good enough on that night,” he said. “He is the victim of an assault. We’re looking for the county and the state to provide some answers as to why they believe their behavior was justified and lawful. They have yet to provide us with an answer.”

Washington State Patrol records show that Arthur has been convicted of four felonies, including harassment and malicious mischief, 23 gross misdemeanors and five misdemeanors. He was sentenced in August to 33 months in prison after he pleaded guilty to violating a domestic violence protection order. Blondin suggested he was still in prison, but declined to say where he is serving his time.

Arthur was arrested on Nov. 29, 2005, for driving under the influence in Castle Rock. A report from that night says Arthur drove into a “No parking” sign on Barnes Street in Kelso, smashed into some mail boxes, then took off.

A short time later, a deputy spotted Arthur’s car spin 360 degrees and veer into the parking lot of the Four Corners Store near Castle Rock. Arthur’s breath, the report said, smelled of intoxicants and he refused to cooperate with a field sobriety test. He also refused a portable breath test. The report said he was placed in the back of a patrol car and kicked the car’s rear window repeatedly, knocking it out of alignment.

Deputies took Arthur to St. John Medical center to be evaluated. Rentner, the corrections officer, arrived, according to the suit, and asked Arthur to provide a blood and urine sample under the conditions of his probation. Arthur, the suit said, refused.

The suit says Rentner as well as deputies Shelton and Shallert restrained Arthur while blood was drawn and a catheter inserted. Arthur, meanwhile, fought and screamed, Blondin said.

“He was trying to prevent the assault from occurring,” he said.

Medical staff usually administer lubricant and anesthetic when they insert a catheter, Blondin said. He wonders if the proper procedures were followed.

“Under these circumstances,” he said, “it’s not unreasonable to think that some corners would be cut to accomplish the ultimate goal of what needed to be done in the eyes of the officers.”

Blondin said he didn’t include the hospital’s staff in the suit because they were “acting under the orders of law enforcement” and probably didn’t realize that “what was going on was not proper.”

“There’s a couple of folks with guns and badges ordering you to do something,” he said. “I would tend to withhold judgement against (the medical staff) for complying.”

Asked why, exactly, authorities wanted the blood and urine samples, Blondin said, “Mr. Arthur still would like to know.”

The deputies’ report makes no mention of the incident. It says that Arthur was “verbally abusive toward Rentner” and that Arthur threatened to cut Rentner’s throat. It also says that, after medical staff “cleared” Arthur, he refused to walk to a patrol car, struggled with deputies and hospital staff and had to be placed in a wheelchair where he “continued to struggle, putting his feet around the wheels.”

The report said Arthur also “kicked door casings and walls in an effort to halt the wheelchair.” Once he reached a deputy’s car, it said, Arthur “struggled to keep from being put in the vehicle.”

Arthur was later convicted, Blondin said, of obstructing justice, reckless driving and DUI and two counts of malicious mischief — all stemming from the Nov. 29 arrest. Blondin, who represented Arthur in the criminal case, said his client was found not guilty of harassment.

Previous Next

dirty cops wrote on Feb 6, 2008 12:13 PM:

" Since when do Police officers and probation officers have the right to perform these kind of procedures. These officers should be fired. These unprofessional acts make all of the dept. look very bad and for the Admin. who permit it. I mean really! "

Dirty Cops 2 wrote on Feb 6, 2008 1:17 PM:

" That's what the cops are like in longview anymore: Dirty Cops- It seems that if the slightest thing occurs here they feel they have to take such extreme measures- And in this case they don't even seem ligitmately within reason or legal for that matter.
It's almost as if they have "little man syndrome"
The cops should pass a psych. evaluation for their actions they performed on this poor man... Just sickening. "

Tazer Baby wrote on Feb 6, 2008 2:52 PM:

" C'mon now, you know you're not getting the whole story from this guy. On top of that he made an agreement to submit said samples and decided to not follow through. I say the samples were obtained the only way this gentleman forced the authorities to get them. Accountability is a two way street. "

RE: Dirty Cops 2 and dirty cops wrote on Feb 6, 2008 3:05 PM:

" Funny how some people just jump to the conclusion that this incident actually occurred the way the jailbird says it did. Hospital staff don't answer to cops unless there is a court order or warrant. Of course, there is always the possibility that you guys don't care about this case as much as you care about getting a dig in against the cops. "

nurse 2 be wrote on Feb 6, 2008 5:43 PM:

" I think the poster above has an excellent point, there may be parts of this story that are missing, including a possible court order. However, if there was no said order, then what happened is deffinately wrong and the hospital ought to be held accountable. Hospital Staff are not just silly people that do whatever the cops say, they either had a court order or they should be held accountable. We need more information. "

nurse 2 be wrote on Feb 6, 2008 5:54 PM:

" p.s.
QUOTED FROM STORY:

“'There’s a couple of folks with guns and badges ordering you to do something,' he said. 'I would tend to withhold judgement against (the medical staff) for complying.'"

and that:

"Blondin said he didn’t include the hospital’s staff in the suit because they were 'acting under the orders of law enforcement' and probably didn’t realize that 'what was going on was not proper.'"

Sounds to me more like they probably can not be held accountable because there likely WAS a court order left unmentioned. HIGHLY doubt that the Hospital Staff failed to realize EXACTLY what was going on. They tend to be educated in such matters, I am sure. "

The Facts wrote on Feb 6, 2008 6:24 PM:

" Before you judge, lest ye' be judged...Why doesn't someone look up Mr. Arthurs arrest history and lengthy criminal record...it's public record you know. You may have a different outlook when you know the whole story! "

Tazer Baby wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:48 AM:

" Manhandeled. Owned. "

Krista wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:12 AM:

" “He was held down kicking and screaming while they shoved a catheter into his penis,” said Kevin Blondin, the Longview attorney representing Arthur in the case.

Catheter "shoved" in his penis? Can someone give me a break? I've never been able to "shove" a catheter into anyone if there wasn't room for it. It's either you insert it or you don't. His attorney is a delinquent.

Everyone has to be accountable, with the exception of the criminal... what is wrong with this picture?

Cops need to be able to do their job- protect the rest of us- without being scorned and accused of being boorish. You people that condemn law enforcment have no idea the kind of crap that they have to endure (and criminals are abusive to nurses too) from the dregs of society, meanwhile you run your mouth off while you sit comfortably in your safe home.... absolutely stupid. "

He has the right to be upset!! wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:45 PM:

" But only with himself. Shouldn't have been drinking after you agreed to the tests huh buddy. I'm sure there was a reason you sign the authorization form. LOL. "

bucketball wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:58 PM:

" What happened to all the other comments previously posted? "

Thacher Schmid, tdn.com web reporter wrote on Feb 7, 2008 3:56 PM:

" The Daily News lost comments on all our stories on Wednesday, Feb. 6, due to an upgrade of our system that will allow us to make changes to future stories without losing future comments.

In other words, we lost comments to gain comments. Sorry for the inconvenience.

tschmid@tdn.com "

dirty cops wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:28 PM:

" yea when cops act like this, I and everyone else have a right to get a dig in at the cops. I suppose you would be stupid enough to believe them even after they do illegal and immorral acts like this. Couldnt they just say refusing is just as well dirty and call it good. Its people like you who allow it, you couldnt imagine cops doing somthing like this doesnt that saY anything! "

RE: dirty cops (again, sigh) wrote on Feb 8, 2008 7:26 AM:

" Ummm, ok so you automatically believe a lifelong crook who is attempting to continue his victimization of society? You are already convicting the police? So "innocent until proven guilty" only works for Criminals? "

Old School wrote on Feb 8, 2008 8:29 AM:

" Isn’t it strange how our populous views these types of events?

We had a couple soldiers intimidate some terrorist and we put the soldiers in prison. And keep in mind these guys were killing our own people. Then you have an American who is drunk and we treat him worse then the terrorist and then congratulate the police for actions worse then our soldiers are in prison for.

This also brings to mind the incident at the border where we are paying the drug dealer a million plus and put our border guards in prison. WHAT IS GOING ON?
"

blame the right people wrote on Feb 8, 2008 10:39 AM:

" I do believe the police in this town handle many things wrong but most of the peole commenting are lossing sight of the fact that the guy was drinking and driving, if he wasn't he wouldn't have anything to hide. He is mad because his rights were violated but what about the other people on the roads don't we have the right to feel safe when we get behind the wheel. He got what he deserved and maybe he will think twice about drinking and drivingn again "

duh wrote on Feb 8, 2008 1:39 PM:

" The police could have taken him in and cited him for being non compliant,on top of the other charges, and left it up to the judges, instead of hauling him to the hospital to get poked and molested. "

Outraged at drunk wrote on Feb 8, 2008 2:24 PM:

" I am shocked and outraged by thses allegations, and that this attourney would even take this case. My family and I personally know the Shelton family including deputy Shelton and his wife. We attend the same church. We know the family, including deputy Shelton to be honest, caring, and upstanding people. This accusation is preposterous and obscene. This guy should get a serious clue. Leave these poor officers alone and let them do their jobs. They did nothing wrong, and this is just simply a witch hunt targeting good officers. "

to Old School... wrote on Feb 8, 2008 4:00 PM:

" What the heck are you drinking? "

bucketball wrote on Feb 8, 2008 4:08 PM:

" It's not up to the police to make him comply with whatever agreement he may have signed. If he is in violation there job is to take him to jail or his probation officer. I'm sure if there was a warrant for this procedure/molesting, The Daily News probably would of reported it. What do they gain for not? That is probably why this attorney your all so shocked about is taking this case. Now what he did leading up to that event is a whole seperate issue and should be kept to ensure proper justice. You all don't obvioulsy relize there is laws already in place for when you refuse. There is also already consequences for voilating your probation which is revokation and and finish your original jail sentence. I also thought that police were not supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner. These two Sherriff deputies need to stand criminal trial for what they did unless they had a warrant which they probably did not. So to all of you people defending these "good officers" hopefully you get get accused of anything innocently or even if you did it get subjected to this same procedure without warrant. It is your Fourth Admendment right after not to testify against yourself and I'm sure that means fluids also. Especially warrantlessly. If the police didn't like what he was doing they shoulda took him to jail and let the courts figure it out. That's what they are for. "

bucketball wrote on Feb 8, 2008 4:19 PM:

" Krista, you say You people that condemn law enforcment have no idea the kind of crap that they have to endure.... No one asked them to take this job. I'm glad they do though don't get me wrong. I wouldn't want to do it but if you can't handle the power that goes along with it, it is probably a job you shouldn't have. Are you saying two wrongs make a right? Just cuz they take a bunch of crap they can dish it right back? If that is the case I wouldn't want them being in law enforcement because they just stooped to the criminals level and are no better at this point. Why don't you move to Afganistan or somewhere that way. You don't have anything to hide right? "

To bucketball wrote on Feb 8, 2008 5:09 PM:

" I'm not even going to waste my time pointing out the absurdity of your comments with one exception. Your statement that "No one asked them to take this job" is, without a doubt, one of the most uneducated statements I've read in a while. It's a frivolous statement that can be made about every job in existence. Just because nobody "asked" them doesn't mean that they can't verbalize their frustrations about their jobs. I would bet you wouldn't last a day in their job without saying "Holy Crap, I didn't know people could do that to each other!" It's a pathetic level of keyboard courage you exhibit. "

lady wrote on Feb 8, 2008 5:47 PM:

" he deserved it maybe next time he will give the sample willingly "

You have the right wrote on Feb 9, 2008 9:04 AM:

" The facts are, even if the officers had a proper warrant. And the man still refused, the officers don't have the right to forcefully molest. They do have the right defer to the courts. If this is the case then you can only begin to think of the examples that would come of this power. It would strain the tax payer's dollars at the court level with law suits. The facts are we have the right to refuse, a choice, and have the right to a judge or jury to decide if the choice was right or wrong. These laws protect the officers as well as the tax paying citizens, that will pay in the end. We all make bad choices, and we all have to answer for them, and Mr Arthur should answer for his. The officers should have the same rights, they should have to answer for their bad decisions, in the proper manner (non forcefully) and with a judge or jury.If we as a society except our law enforcement's are given the right to preform sensitive procedures at will, with no boundaries or the right of refusal then we all just gave the right to become a victim to any officer. I only hope for society that the decision's of the officer's is right! You can play out the senatorial s of the right not to refuse. Thank you for the right to comment! "

Confused wrote on Feb 10, 2008 10:34 AM:

" Im confused if he was drunk how does he remember all the fine details. Just a thought! "

Proof is in the pudding wrote on Feb 10, 2008 3:10 PM:

" Bottom line is; if can be proved that force was used to obtain the bodily fluids, the police violated the law and his rights. Proving that a struggle took place in the emergency room will probably have to be documented. But if it is a fact that he was refusing to give blood or urine, get the checkbook out for a settlement. Charges for the officers involved would certainly be in order if his lawsuit is won.
Proving what took place at the hospital may be questionable. A lot of laws will probably come into play about confidentially? At least by hospital personell. "

Common Goodsense wrote on Feb 11, 2008 8:14 AM:

" Silly felon...he should have realized the protection offered by the Fifth Amendment is only for the connected, the rich and/or politicians! "

kalama res wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:40 PM:

" He deserved it? I think not. What he deserved is to be taken to jail and considered to have a dirty UA. They cannot force you like this. If you ask me, it's a sex crime because they violated his private area. How would you feel if someone held you down and stuck a catheder in you? not very good, huh? "

Deb wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:44 PM:

" For starters, at least in the state of Oregon, no urinalysis is ever performed for proving a suspected DUI. The most accurate and legally upholding test is a blood draw, and the suspect does NOT have to give permission for that. A blood draw is taken, period, with police officers and medical staff present. Frankly, I think this `catheter' story is full of bull. People, if you are going to get behind the wheel of a car while under the influence,thereby breaking the law, you have then forfeited your rights, period. I am sick and tired of people screaming aoubt `violation of civil liberties' when they do something that breaks the law! What about MY right to not get hit by someone driving drunk or stoned? I work for OHSU, for the Trauma Center, and I cannot begin to estimate how many patients we recieve who are maimed or worse by DUI drivers. And folks, many of those DUI drivers don't have insurance and are driving illegally, and many of their victims don't have health insurance - so guess who gets to pay the bills? You & I, the taxpayers. Everyone needs to quit crying about civil liberty violations, obey the law, and grow up. Driving is a privilege, not a right. You blow that privilege and endanger others - then you deserve what you've got coming. Period. "

Methinks wrote on Feb 12, 2008 5:14 PM:

" I'll bet this whole thing didn't even happen. "

Dr. Todd wrote on Feb 13, 2008 11:03 AM:

" Ever try to put a cath on someone who didn't want it? Someone is going to pay.. "

toMattfromclassmates wrote on Feb 13, 2008 6:51 PM:

" Just the guy we were looking for! Didn't know you'd be right under our nose...Matthew, you are being sought our by former classmates so we can send you an invitiation for our 20 year reunion...we have information posted on classmates.com. Good luck! and hope to hear from you! "

RE: To bucketball wrote on Feb 14, 2008 10:17 PM:

" If I have a pathetic level of keyboard courage, what does that make you? You had to use a keyboard to type that to me. Like I said in my earlier posting, nobody asked them to take the job. I never said anything about verblizing their frustrations out either like you say. Besides that is not the issue here. There was nothing verbal about the guy forcefully getting a cathider besides the threat of one if he didn't comply probably. Next time you want to tell someone they are uneducated in any sence maybe you should to go to school and take a reading comprehension class because if I'm uneducated that must make you a complete imbecile. "

********** wrote on Feb 15, 2008 6:10 PM:

" If these police were smart they would have realized that eventualy he would have had to urinate on his own and just waited him out if they needed it that bad, what does this teach our teens, that when they want something bad enough they can just forcefully take it. "

gary wrote on Feb 16, 2008 1:30 PM:

" I cant believe that cops would go to such extreme measures to produce evidence like that!All they had to do is lock him up and wait for him to urinate not force feed his penis and stick him with needles! "

Jimmy wrote on Feb 17, 2008 8:26 PM:

" Poor cops??? Are you freakin kidding me.....I have heard enough. These guys completely abused their power and should be stripped of their badges. It does not matter what he signed, it is not up to the cops or the hospital staff to forcefully take fluids from him. If he violated the agreement, then send him to jail.

The police in this case believe they are above the law and not accountable for their actions. They are bound by the same laws they swear to uphold. "

Broken System wrote on Feb 18, 2008 11:53 AM:

" You know, the more responsibility we place on our police force to mandate, monitor and restrict our most simple daily tasks, the more invasive and reprehensible approaches we will see. The people have the police fighting wars - a War on Drugs, a War on Drunks, a War on Domestic Violence, a War on Cigarette Smokers, even. Yet we fail to look beyond at the way we are conditioning our police. Are they always expected to be soldiers, parents, authoritarians, teachers, referees, evidence seekers, and much more and not get mixed up occasionally? Chances are that a prosecutor somewhere said, "We have to have the evidence, or we cannot proceed to try the cases." So, the police were getting the evidence. The president gets away with illegal wire taps...why can't the cops get away with an illegal "tap" of another sort? "

SIS wrote on Feb 22, 2008 2:07 AM:

" Have any of you ever had to deal with people like this drunk when they are brought into the hospital? I have. And for your info! if their blood alchohol level is over a certain point, they cannot take them to jail, they remain in the hospital to sober up then we have to deal with their horrible behavior. Kicking at us, hitting us, stumbling all over, ect... let me tell you, I really don't feel for him, I'll bet he is full of crap, and he is just in need of a little money and someone helped his story along. "

To Sis wrote on Feb 22, 2008 2:09 PM:

" You sound like you were probably one of the nurses on duty that night. "

david waldeck wrote on Feb 24, 2008 3:43 PM:

" re:tazer baby
it doesn't matter what the story is.Without a court order no one had the right to touch the man.I signed that same contract with d.o.c.You have one hour to submit to a u.a. or blood test.If you don't provide it's called dirty and you go to jail.As far as the police,they can only ask you to provide and if you don't you go to jail and your license is suspended.If it's already suspended then a judge is to deal with it not the police without a court order and there wasn't one or the police would of stated so and not left things out of police report.Yes, police are needed but,the police need to be policed too.The law didn't follow the law and will lose this in court. "

Hide Behind wrote on Feb 25, 2008 7:52 AM:

" If perp had been a woman would that of changed public outlook? "

nurse wrote on Feb 25, 2008 8:03 AM:

" for the record i was not present when this alleged event took place. But remember that the hospital is responsible for the physical well being of the patient. Alchol ingestion in large quantities can be fatal especially if used with other drugs or medications. The only way to deterimine if the patient is in danger is to determine what his blood alchol level and what other drugs might be in his system. The only way to determine this is with blood and urine tests. what would you think if the hospital did nothing and the patient died of an overdose? "

re: nurse wrote on Feb 25, 2008 12:47 PM:

" if the forced urine was taken for reasons to prevent an overdose of some kind than why wasnt it used for that purpose, and that purpose only. that is no excuse only if it was just used to prevent an overdose, in any event medical staff should of done this not the police "

Hide Behind wrote on Feb 25, 2008 1:57 PM:

" This is a police state, and they are empowered to do as they see fit.
Everyone loves seeing the bad guys squeal and beg for mercy; turn on the tube.
Heaven forbid that anyone would not beleive a guy who goes to church and is married is not a nice guy.
That point alone should end the argument of wether actons of cops was rightous. Case Closed!

"

gravydonor wrote on Feb 27, 2008 11:16 AM:

" I'll give the cops my saucy recipe. "

Dumb Guy wrote on Feb 29, 2008 8:31 AM:

" If they had a court order I would think that it should have stated where and how the samples were to be obtained. "

Think things through People... wrote on Feb 29, 2008 11:33 AM:

" Come on people think this through...

One: He was required to give samples by a court order - he refused (against the law)

Two: He showed extreme, violent, and chemically induced behavior which meant if he had been taken to jail and then became ill, there would now be a lawsuit for NOT taking him to the hospital first.

Three: Besides having medical proffesionals take the samples, how else would they gain a blood sample? (the guys behavior showed that eventually when he did have to go he would rather make a mess of himself and whatever cell he was in rather than turn over incriminating evidence)
Four: He is a seasoned criminal and this was probubly his last chance... he knew that to be caught would mean the end to the fun for a LONG time, this guy wasn't going to give up without a fight.

so since when do we give in to the criminals and say that they have just as much right (even more) to threaten the safety and rights of the average population just because they may cry fowl when we put them in their place?

I say bring back the days where jail was not a hotel with cable TV... Get em out cleaning up the mess they created, put em to work on the chain gangs again like they do down in Texas...
Maybe then we wouldn't just be pouring our tax dollars into free luxary housing for the scum of society! "

Thinking wrote on Feb 29, 2008 12:06 PM:

" When stories don't make sense, it is because some of the parts are missing. It looks to me like we don't have all of the information/ "

I bet wrote on Mar 1, 2008 8:56 AM:

" I bet that Hide Behind knows a little more about the "Police State" than he lets on. "

angry wrote on Mar 1, 2008 7:18 PM:

" here is an idea dont drive drunk
problem solved "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals