Reply #62: Peace officers versus police [View All]

[one-eyed fat man]

As you and others have pointed out, there is plenty of Federal case law concerning the government's obligation to protect only those it has in custody and no expectation of individual protection, my point in citing the Marin county incident was to point out that "... if a cop is standing on the corner, and watches as some asshole shoots three people then drives away, all he is expected to do is take the license number?" has already happened.

I mentioned peace officers in passing as here in Kentucky the police are not peace officers. There are subtle but important distinctions under the Kentucky constitution and law. Peace officers are elected officials and include: sheriffs, coroners, constables and jailers. They are obligated by their oath and office. Kentucky law gives them arrest powers at all times, and in the case of felonies, in all places.

Police are hired by various public entities, like Incorporated towns and cities, public universities, airport boards etc. They have no arrest powers outside their respective jurisdictions except that of any ordinary citizen, and indeed, may not even be authorized arrest powers in their home jurisdiction when off duty if that is their city or department policy. A Kentucky sheriff can compel able-bodied men to assist in an arrest or join a posse, a policeman can't.

It would appear that if a peace officer failed to act, thus having committed an impeachable offense, the Commonwealth and county are immune from suit, by virtue of his oath of office he may not be.