Court Case Question

[DoubleJ]

Does anyone remember the court case that "established" that it is not the duty of the police to "protect" us at all times.

the gist of it was two girls called the cops about a intruder(s), cops came to the home, looked around, didn't see anything and left. after the police left, the intruder either came back, or was lying in wait, and he then attacked and s. assaulted the girl(s).
the girl(s) sued, and if was found that it is not the duty of the police to protect citizens, or something of that nature.

anyone know what I'm talkin' about?

[Kalrog]

There are a few of those out there - depending on which specific aspect you are going for.

http://www.endtimesreport.com/NO_AFFIRMATIVE_DUTY.htm

[Keith B]

Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1, 4 (D.C. 1981) was the one I think you are refering to. There is a pretty good article here with multiple cases cited http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasle ... ction.html

[DoubleJ]

Thank you gentleman. I'm mainly going from the "They can't be everywhere, all the time," perspective.
This will probably be used in my presentation at work to help "fix" the "weapon-free" work environment policy.

[WarHawk-AVG]

ALOT of good info for us pro-gun folks

Gun Facts
page 58
I believe that case or a few in representation are listed in there as well..along with a few DC cases also

[ELB]

I once made up a list of cases addressing exactly this, i.e. the government's (federal, state, city level) lack of liability for protecting you. Warren is probably the most infamous one, but there are many, several decided at the SCOTUS level.

Also, there are briefs in the Heller case that touch on the issue of "they can't be everywhere," and in the case of the D.C. Police, even if they are everywhere they are often worse than useless. Here are the links:

The "Failed State" brief:
http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parke ... dation.pdf

The "Law Enforcement" Brief:
http://davekopel.org/Briefs/07-290bsacI ... sAssoc.pdf

And here's my collection of cases and articles, mostly taken from one of David Kopel's articles:

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/Prot ... _Abuse.htm

THE SULLIVAN PRINCIPLES:
PROTECTING THE SECOND AMENDMENT FROM CIVIL ABUSE
David B. Kopel[*]
Richard E. Gardiner[**]

Governments are immune from suit for failure, even grossly negligent or deliberate failure, to protect citizens from crime.[32] Governments (p.748)are similarly immune from suit by victims who were injured by criminals who were given early release on parole.[33]

[32] See, e.g., Bowers v. DeVito 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) (no federal Constitutional requirement that police provide protection);
Calogrides v. Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (Ala. 1985);
Cal. Govt. Code §§ 845 (no liability for failure to provide police protection) and 846 (no liability for failure to arrest or to retain arrested person in custody);
Davidson v. Westminster, 32 Cal.3d 197, 185 Cal. Rptr. 252; 649 P.2d 894 (1982);
Stone v. State 106 Cal. App.3d 924, 165 Cal. Rptr. 339 (1980);
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. App. 1983);
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981);
Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.), cert. denied 354 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1977);
Ill. Rev. Stat. 4-102; Keane v. Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1st Dist. 1968);
Jamison v. Chicago, 48 Ill. App.3d 567 (1st Dist. 1977);
Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. App.);
Silver v. Minneapolis 170 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1969);
N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 59:2-1, 59:5-4 (1972);
Wuetrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super. 324, 326, 382 A.2d 929, 930, cert. denied, 77 N.J. 486, 391 A.2d 500 (1978), aff'g 134 N.J. Super. 400, 341 A.2d 365 (N.J. Super. Ct., Law Div., 1975);
Chapman v. Philadelphia, 290 Pa. Super. 281, 434 A.2d 753 (Penn. 1981);
Morris v. Musser, 84 Pa. Commw. 170, 478 A.2d 937 (1984).
The law in New York remains as decided by the Court of Appeals the 1959 case Riss v. New York: the government is not liable even for a grossly negligent failure to protect a crime victim. In the Riss case, a young woman telephoned the police and begged for help because her ex-boyfriend had repeatedly threatened "If I can't have you, no one else will have you, and when I get through with you, no-one else will want you." The day after she had pleaded for police protection, the ex-boyfriend threw lye in her face, blinding her in one eye, severely damaging the other, and permanently scarring her features. "What makes the City's position particularly difficult to understand," wrote a dissenting opinion, "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 New York 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).
Ruth Brunell called the police on 20 different occasions to beg for protection from her husband. He was arrested only one time. One evening Mr. Brunell telephoned his wife and told he was coming over to kill her. When she called the police, they refused her request that they come to protect her. They told her to call back when he got there. Mr. Brunell stabbed his wife to death before she could call the police. The court held that the San Jose police were not liable for ignoring Mrs. Brunell's pleas for help. Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App.3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975).

[33] Dennis Hevesi, New York is not Liable for Murders, N.Y. Times, July 10, 1987.
========================

Other examples:

I don't see the recent more recent Castle Rock vs Gonzales case on that list; you can read about it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... ref=slogin

An explanation of the infamous Warren vs DC can be found here:
http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/warren.html

Another write-up, with citations, on the no-duty-to-protect, is
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasle ... ction.html

Good luck.

elb