• Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago
      1. Unless you can prove in a court of law that another cop was told by another court not to dump booze in another victim’s car, then arrest them for it, then there is no way we can expect her to have known this was wrong! (Qualified Immunity)

      2. Cops don’t have to know the laws they’re paid to enforce. (Heien v. North Carolina)

      3. Cops have no legal duty to protect you (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Castle Rock v. Gonzales)

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s not what qualified immunity means, FYI. Qualified immunity protects state actors (i.e. police) from being sued for actions performed during the execution of their duties. The state and/or department takes up financial responsibilities. It does not shield them from criminal prosecution.

        The cops certainly really, really wish it did. And if they had their preference, they’d have you believe it did, too. But it doesn’t.

        On paper, the police are not above the law in regards to criminal prosecution. Unfortunately in practice generally they are. As we’ve seen many times.