When you show an officer clear documentation of a law or their own department policy and they willfully do the opposite, that should be a crime. That implies that producing false documentation should carry heavy penalties, and I'm OK with that.

For this particular case, how's this: Ask the hospital to keep a sample for later analysis should a warrant be obtained.

First, where did I say anything about the nurse?

Second:

And I disagree completely with your suggestion that they "hold a sample" for later. The truck driver was *the victim* in this case.

Ever heard of a CDL?

§382.303 Post-accident testing.
(a) As soon as practicable following an occurrence involving a commercial motor vehicle operating on a public road in commerce, each employer shall test for alcohol for each of its surviving drivers:

(1) Who was performing safety-sensitive functions with respect to the vehicle, if the accident involved the loss of human life

Short version: If you're operating a CMV (Commercial Motor Vehicle) and you're involved in an accident that causes a fatality, you must be tested for alcohol in order to keep your CDL (Commercial Driver's License) whether you're at fault or not.

What I'm getting at is that any time a cop - or a salesman, or anyone who wants you to do something you're not enthusiastic about - starts insisting that you have to do it right away "for your own good" it's best to delay it. If they're not willing to wait, there's something not kosher about the request.

"If you wait for your lawyer before answering these questions, I won't be able to help you." OK, thanks, I'll definitely wait for my lawyer then.

"I can't guarantee this offer will still be there tomorrow." OK, I'll talk to you tomorrow and see what the deal looks like then.

"If the other driver's family tries to sue for wrongful death, this guy's best defense will be a clean sample from immediately after the accident. If he's not conscious to give consent, would you agree to take the sample and give him the option to test it or dispose of it once he's awake?" Oh, that's actually pretty reasonable. Let me check with my supervisor.

But that's not what he said. There's clearly no reason for a police phlebotomist to do the draw unless he's a suspect. His reaction confirmed he was acting outside his authority, and the lieutenant who told him to do it was also wrong.

I was citing the CDL regs just to make the point that it's entirely normal for a professional driver to be tested after an accident, even if he's not believed to be at fault. Who normally performs that test, I didn't check.