NCJ Number
207273
Journal
Victim Advocate Volume: 4 Issue: 3 Dated: Spring 2004 Pages: 19-21,25
Date Published
2004
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This article explains how many domestic-violence victims have succeeded with failure-to-protect suits against law enforcement agencies.
Abstract
The common-law "public duty" doctrine states that individual police officers and departments are not liable to individual citizens for failure to provide adequate police protection; however, a notable exception to this immunity from liability is when a police officer or department has a "special relationship" with the injured party. This special relationship occurs when a victim has contacted police about the victimization, and the police have either made a promise of protection that was unfulfilled or the police failed to comply with a mandatory-arrest law by not taking the abuser into custody. Civil remedies for domestic-violence victims against police can also be pursued under the Federal constitutional rights of due process and the right to the equal protection of the law. Under such claims, victims must prove they were deprived of a federally protected right by someone acting under color of State law or that the police created a danger for the victim or subjected the victim to a known danger. This article discusses the details of the successful pursuit of such claims. A discussion of municipal liability in failure-to-protect suits focuses on a departmental policy or custom of inadequate response to domestic-violence cases compared with other assault cases, as well as a causal link between such a policy or custom and the plaintiff's injury. The article concludes by noting that the 11th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects States and their agencies from damage awards in Federal court, does not cover municipal or county police departments. 32 notes