|
Police have no legal duty to respond
and prevent crime or protect the victim. There have BEEN OVER 10 various
supreme and state court cases the individual has never won. Notably, the
Supreme Court STATED about the responsibility of police for the security
of your family and loved ones is "You,
and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your
family and loved ones. That was the essence of a U.S. Supreme Court decision
in the early 1980's when they ruled that the police do not have a duty
to protect you as an individual, but to protect society as a whole."
"It is well-settled
fact of American law that the police have no legal duty to protect any
individual citizen from crime, even if the citizen has received death
threats and the police have negligently failed to provide protection."
Sources:
7/15/05 SUPREME
COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278 TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO,
PETITIONER v. JESSICA GONZALES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT BEST FRIEND
OF HER DECEASED MINOR CHILDREN, REBECCA GONZALES, KATHERYN GONZALES,
AND LESLIE GONZALES
On
June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the Supreme Court found
that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to individual
police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs.
Gonzales' husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales
to death, Mrs. Gonzales' family could not get the Supreme Court to change
their unanimous decision for one's individual protection. YOU ARE ON
YOUR OWN FOLKS AND GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety
Ordinance.
(1)
Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die.
Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
(2)
Barillari v. City of Milwaukee,
533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
(3)
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d
616 (7th Cir. 1982).
(4)
DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of
Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
(5)
Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693
N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
(6) Warren
v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981).
"...a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide
public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual
citizen..." -Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.
1981)
(7) "What
makes the City's position particularly difficult to understand is that,
in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon
for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to
rely for protection on the City of NY which now denies all responsibility
to her."
Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293
N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
(8) "Law
enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals
from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve
the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general
public."
Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice,
376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
New
York Times, Washington DC
Justices Rule Police
Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: June 28, 2005
The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued
protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory
for a violation.
|
