LEOSA II passes House, goes to Obama

[Liberty Sanders]

"It is already well established that a LEO is not legally obligated to risk life or limb during the comission of a crime."

Established where and by whom???

You are mistaken...a LEO IS legally compelled to interfere. Deliberately failing to do so can result in criminal charges of dereliction of duty, as well as departmental charges of cowardice.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Established where and by whom???

Who are the United States Supreme Court and the Indiana Supreme Court, Alex?

You are mistaken...a LEO IS legally compelled to interfere. Deliberately failing to do so can result in criminal charges of dereliction of duty, as well as departmental charges of cowardice

May I have a cite for that dereliction of duty offense?

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Ohio Revised Code section 2921.44.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

When did we move Indiana Gun Owners to Ohio?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Here's the Ohio statute that Liberty cites:

2921.44 Dereliction of duty.

(A) No law enforcement officer shall negligently do any of the following:
(1) Fail to serve a lawful warrant without delay;
(2) Fail to prevent or halt the commission of an offense or to apprehend an offender, when it is in the law enforcement officer’s power to do so alone or with available assistance.
(B) No law enforcement, ministerial, or judicial officer shall negligently fail to perform a lawful duty in a criminal case or proceeding.
(C) No officer, having charge of a detention facility, shall negligently do any of the following:
(1) Allow the detention facility to become littered or unsanitary;
(2) Fail to provide persons confined in the detention facility with adequate food, clothing, bedding, shelter, and medical attention;
(3) Fail to control an unruly prisoner, or to prevent intimidation of or physical harm to a prisoner by another;
(4) Allow a prisoner to escape;
(5) Fail to observe any lawful and reasonable regulation for the management of the detention facility.
(D) No public official of the state shall recklessly create a deficiency, incur a liability, or expend a greater sum than is appropriated by the general assembly for the use in any one year of the department, agency, or institution of the state with which the public official is connected.
(E) No public servant shall recklessly fail to perform a duty expressly imposed by law with respect to the public servant’s office, or recklessly do any act expressly forbidden by law with respect to the public servant’s office.
(F) Whoever violates this section is guilty of dereliction of duty, a misdemeanor of the second degree.
(G) As used in this section, “public servant” includes an officer or employee of a contractor as defined in section 9.08 of the Revised Code.
Effective Date: 06-08-2000

 

[ATOMonkey]

Specifically...

Warren V DC SCOTUS ruling. Also. Indiana Code 34-13-3-3

 

[Liberty Sanders]

I did my lawing in Ohio. I'm sure Indiana has something similar.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Warren VS. DC has nothing to do with this. That was a case that involved an administrative snafu, not a deliberate failure of the police to act.

I reiterate that in any state in the country, a LEO is legally mandated to act when he observes a crime happening right in front of him, and failure to do so can have both legal and professional consequences.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I did my lawing in Ohio. I'm sure Indiana has something similar.

Does anyone have a citation for such a statute? I've never seen it.

I reiterate that in any state in the country, a LEO is legally mandated to act when he observes a crime happening right in front of him, and failure to do so can have both legal and professional consequences.

And the basis for such a statement comes from a statute in Ohio?

 

[ATOMonkey]

Does anyone have a citation for such a statute? I've never seen it.

I've been looking all morning and can't find it.

I think the worst you get in indiana is fired if you execute your duty in a derelict manner.

In Ohio Class 2 Misdemeanor offenses are punishable by up to ninety days in jail with or without a fine of no more than seven hundred fifty dollars.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

A LEO swears to uphold the constitutions of the country and state, and to enforce the laws of his state and political subdivision.

When you swear to do something, and then you deliberately fail to do it, you are committing a crime.

What is there in this that is hard to understand?

 

[dross]

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

A LEO swears to uphold the constitutions of the country and state, and to enforce the laws of his state and political subdivision.

When you swear to do something, and then you deliberately fail to do it, you are committing a crime.

What is there in this that is hard to understand?

I've never heard of an officer being prosecuted for failing to do something.

The law is pretty firmly established - as I understand it - that the police have no obligation to protect a specific person. Even if they are negligent, they can't be held liable for failing to act.

 

[Bill of Rights]

"It is already well established that a LEO is not legally obligated to risk life or limb during the comission of a crime."

Established where and by whom???

Castle Rock v. Gonzales (SCOTUS 2005)is the case that came to mind for me.

You are mistaken...a LEO IS legally compelled to interfere. Deliberately failing to do so can result in criminal charges of dereliction of duty, as well as departmental charges of cowardice.

I've never seen any statute to that effect either, Liberty. While I have no doubt it exists in Ohio, it does not seem to be codified here.

Regardless, the holding in Castle Rock seems to have been that police have no duty to protect any individual citizen and that failure to respond to a call for help is not an inaction for which they can be held accountable.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A LEO swears to uphold the constitutions of the country and state, and to enforce the laws of his state and political subdivision.

When I was a LEO, I affirmed that I would uphold the state and federal constituions, nothing was said about enforcing laws. I admit that I am unfamiliar with the oaths of other law enforcement agencies.

When you swear to do something, and then you deliberately fail to do it, you are committing a crime.

So, you are arguing that when law enforcement does not do something, negligently, recklessly, knowingly or intentionally, that this is . . . Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, Civil Rights Violation, CBO, etc.?

Anyone have any case law on this? Has this ever been prosecuted in Indiana?

 

[Pocketman]

I remember departmental policy requiring officers to always be armed. I also remember an off-duty deputy chief being disciplined for being at a crime scene unarmed. Don't know of any legal requirements. That said, it wouldn't surprise me to learn there are civil suits where an off-duty officer may have been zapped for not getting involved.

 

[mrjarrell]

When I was a LEO, I affirmed that I would uphold the state and federal constituions, nothing was said about enforcing laws. I admit that I am unfamiliar with the oaths of other law enforcement agencies.



So, you are arguing that when law enforcement does not do something, negligently, recklessly, knowingly or intentionally, that this is . . . Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, Civil Rights Violation, CBO, etc.?

Anyone have any case law on this? Has this ever been prosecuted in Indiana?

Or Ohio, for that matter.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I don't know Liberty. We live in an era where fire departments let houses burn down and the Lake County Sheriff refuses to enforce the law. I'm pretty sure this is not the America we grew up in.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Folks, I think some of us are confusing criminal law and tort law.

The court cases cited here have been CIVIL cases where people were seeking damages for some failure on the part of a police agency to act. It is true that the police cannot be held CIVILLY liable for their failure to protect an individual citizen. In other words, if you're attacked and robbed in a parking garage because there wasn't a policeman there to stop it, that is not the police department's fault and you will not succeed in seeking damages from them. This is as it should be. No law enforcement agency could possibly operate if they were responsible, either personally or collectively, for every crime that occurred in their jurisdiction.

HOWEVER....

I will reiterate this one more time and then bow out of this argument:

I'm talking here not about mistakes or oversights that can occur in any agency. I'm talking about a sworn police officer who DELIBERATELY, INTENTIONALLY makes a conscious decision to not act under circumstances where he clearly knows he is required to do so.

If I were still on the job and I saw a man dragging a woman into an alley, either while I'm on or off-duty, and I drove on by and did nothing, that would constitute a criminal act, at least in the State of Ohio.

I can recall any number of cases where LEO's have been charged with dereliction of duty, but it was generally for things they DID rather than things they didn't, and I can recall no cases where officers were prosecuted under the circumstances I describe here. I can also say that I never heard of a case during my law enforcement career where an officer actually did what I describe here, at least not in the Greater Cincinnati area. I worked with plenty of aholes in my time, but none of them were cowards. Most agencies have bigger problems, especially with younger officers, of overzealous response to off-duty incidents rather than failure to respond to them.

I know little of the details of Indiana law, but I simply find it impossible to believe that a LEO, in any state of the union, could simply ignore the oath and responsibilities of his office and run NO risk of legal repercussions.

If that's actually the case then the law here has a huge hole in it.

 

[rambone]

Government employees ignore their oaths all the time and get away with it. Look at congress.

If it is so essential to a LEO's job to be armed 24/7, then they should join forces with us and work toward restored rights for all of us. Frankly I consider being armed when I leave the house an *essential* activity too. My family's protection is just as important as some cop worrying about keeping his job.

No special classes, no way, no how. No super-citizens in this adolescent Police-State.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Government employees ignore their oaths all the time and get away with it. Look at congress.

If it is so essential to a LEO's job to be armed 24/7, then they should join forces with us and work toward restored rights for all of us. Frankly I consider being armed when I leave the house an *essential* activity too. My family's protection is just as important as some cop worrying about keeping his job.

No special classes, no way, no how. No super-citizens in this adolescent Police-State.

I couldn't agree more. And there is at least one cop organization that's been working for about the last twenty years to do exactly that.