Boating Accident/Death off Diamond Island

[Skip]

Originally Posted by chipj29

...I would think that the person would have to be able to give permission to have blood taken and tested. In absense of that, I would think the police would have to obtain a warrant, and I am sure there would be some sort of court decision. Put it this way, if she were my daughter, I would not want someone taking her blood for anything other than a medical reason. I would fight that as hard as I could. Prove that she acted criminally, then we will talk. Innocent until proven guilty...

First, let me reiterate that no evidence has been provided to the public indicating that any crime has taken place in reference to the discussed incident.

That said, I provide the following RSA to show that in the case we are discussing, mandatory blood testing must occur as required by State law. Consent is not optional.



265-A:16 Blood Testing of Certain Motor Vehicle Fatalities. – When a collision, boating accident, or OHRV accident results in death or serious bodily injury to any person, all drivers or operators involved, whether living or deceased, and all deceased vehicle, boat, or OHRV occupants and pedestrians involved shall be tested for evidence of alcohol or controlled drugs. A law enforcement officer, authorized agent, or peace officer shall request a licensed physician, registered nurse, certified physician's assistant, or qualified medical technician or medical technologist to withdraw blood from each driver or operator involved if living and from the body of each deceased driver or operator, deceased occupant, or deceased pedestrian, in accordance with RSA 611-B:14, II, for the purpose of testing for evidence of alcohol content or controlled drugs; provided that in the case of a living driver or operator the officer has probable cause to believe that the driver or operator caused the collision or accident. All tests made under this section shall be conducted by the forensic science laboratory established in RSA 106-B:2-a or in any other laboratory capable of conducting such tests which is licensed under the laws of this or any other state and which has also been licensed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1988, as amended. A copy of the report of any such test shall be kept on file by the medical examiner. The filed report is not a public record under RSA 91-A. However, the report shall be made available to the following:
I. Any highway safety agency for use in compiling statistics to evaluate the effectiveness of its program; and
II. Any person, including his or her legal representative, who is or may be involved in a civil, criminal, or administrative action or proceeding arising out of an accident in connection with which the test was performed.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Skip

First, let me reiterate that no evidence has been provided to the public indicating that any crime has taken place in reference to the discussed incident.

That said, I provide the following RSA to show that in the case we are discussing, mandatory blood testing must occur as required by State law. Consent is not optional.

Thanks for clearing that up for me Skip...guess my logic is a bit off.

But please don't think I was insinuating a criminal act occurred in this instance. That was not my intent.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Thanks for clearing that up for me Skip...guess my logic is a bit off.

But please don't think I was insinuating a criminal act occurred in this instance. That was not my intent.

Nope Chip, didn't think you were insinuating anything, and you raised a very good point....a belief that many folks share.

While most of us agree that rampant speculation and gossip can be harmful in a situation like this, an intelligent discussion of different points like you and others have raised provide an opportunity for each of us to educate ourselves on the issues pertinent to the incident.