Court Rules That Trump Supporters Can Sue Calif. PD for Attacks by Protesters

According to Police One (July 28, 2018) supporters of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump who were roughed up by protesters at a June 2016 campaign rally in San Jose can sue the city and its police for allegedly putting them in danger and then failing to protect them, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.

After the rally at the McEnery Convention Center, police directed those in attendance to leave from a single exit. There, according to the lawsuit, they were ordered to head out onto a street where hundreds of anti-Trump protesters were waiting, even though a safer route and other exits were available.

Twenty plaintiffs in the suit said they were beaten or struck by objects thrown by the protesters, and one plaintiff said an officer told her that police had been instructed not to intervene. The plaintiffs said police arrested three people for allegedly assaulting officers, but no one for attacking Trump supporters.

If the plaintiffs can prove their allegations, Nelson said, they would show that police increased the danger to the rally-goers and knowingly exposed them to a risk of injury.
--
The courts have decided that you have no right to expect the police to protect you from crime! Incredible as it may seem, the courts have ruled that the police are not obligated to even respond to your calls for help, even in life threatening situations!

While case law dates back to the early 1960's, a leading case on the topic is Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981) when the Court stated "fundamental principle of American law is that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen."

The seminal case establishing the general rule that police have no duty under federal law to protect citizens is DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (109 S.Ct. 998, 1989; 489 U.S. 189 (1989)). The court in DeShaney held that no duty arose as a result of a "special relationship," concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves.

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846, which state in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee may be sued for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals."

It would seem that there is well established law stating that the police have no duty to protect you, even in life threatening situations. What the police may not however do is by their actions increase the danger to you, or expose you to greater risk of injury than you would face on your own.