4 ms·

The police are liable if they don't follow-up on the report, and reports are often tailored to be vague by the neighbor to ensure a confrontation with police.

by than3 4y ago

The police are liable if they don't follow-up on the report, and reports are often tailored to be vague by the neighbor to ensure a confrontation with police. That said, its not up to the police to decide the law, its up to the judge or CPS, so going to the lowest common denominator, you'll have to explain it to the judge or assigned case worker. Most investigations are generally a guilty until proven innocent from what I've heard since the safety of the child is paramount. All they have to do is prove there was some negligence which is a very low bar.

qball 4y ago
>The police are liable if they don't follow-up on the report Since when? The police have zero duty to protect anyone or otherwise enforce the law in any way; they already don't bother investigating a good chunk of smaller thefts and will just stand around while crowds torch buildings and shootings continue inside their perimeter. They have a lot of discretion; I suggest they exercise it. >All they have to do is prove there was some negligence which is a very low bar. Most people are agreeable enough that their first response isn't a life-and-death dash to the nearest lawyer. This is generally a mistake, but they really don't know better. >reports are often tailored to be vague by the neighbor to ensure a confrontation with police. "Swatting" and more indirect cases of vexatious litigation are criminal offenses for a reason (even if nobody gets hurt). Karen is guilty of violating these laws; it's time to get serious about enforcing them.
- IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
  I think its time to start giving tickets for misuse of city resources (law enforcement). People should think twice about reporting stuff they should know better about reporting, and police should have a way to use their judgement to decide if what someone reported constitutes a valid complaint, grey area, or a busybody with nothing better to do than waste tax payers' time.
- than3 4y ago
  > Since when? Its what the courts in many areas have generally ruled. If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. A judge decides damages which impact ongoing budgets. > Karen is guilty of violating these laws. Yes, but how difficult is it to prove intent. How often do defamation suits win? Will a prosecutor ever really go after someone that claims a plausible excuse? Don't they have more important things to devote their resources towards? What about the harms caused to the parents, and the children, very hard to quantify. A report is self-enforcing because the police have a duty of care to respond to reports. Litigation would only ever actually occur civilly, and outside of extreme circumstances that demonstrate clear bad faith its a grey area that goes unenforced and unpunished. So who in the end actually gets punished, and is that punishment coercive. The courts generally don't recognize it as such since the accused (the person reporting it) has good faith protection. Its very hard to prove they did it in bad faith. Litigation would only ever actually occur civilly, and outside of extreme circumstances that demonstrate clear bad faith its a grey area that goes unenforced and unpunished. So who in the end actually gets punished?
  - skissane 4y ago
    > If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. A judge decides damages which impact ongoing budgets. It isn't just about legal liability, it is also about politics. Suppose a child is abducted/murdered/etc. Turns out some concerned bystander saw something suspicious and called the police, but the police decided not to follow up. Even if the police aren't legally liable, once the media and politicians are done with the story, the general public will be so outraged, decent odds the chief of police will be forced to resign. You can say this is a very rare scenario and almost never happens, but government culture encourages risk-aversion – especially when it comes to children – so they'll worry about the risk, they'll overestimate it – and then they'll craft policies based on it.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
    > If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. That is certainly not the case everywhere, least of all the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzale.... > Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband.

by than3 4y ago

qball 4y ago

>The police are liable if they don't follow-up on the report Since when? The police have zero duty to protect anyone or otherwise enforce the law in any way; they already don't bother investigating a good chunk of smaller thefts and will just stand around while crowds torch buildings and shootings continue inside their perimeter. They have a lot of discretion; I suggest they exercise it. >All they have to do is prove there was some negligence which is a very low bar. Most people are agreeable enough that their first response isn't a life-and-death dash to the nearest lawyer. This is generally a mistake, but they really don't know better. >reports are often tailored to be vague by the neighbor to ensure a confrontation with police. "Swatting" and more indirect cases of vexatious litigation are criminal offenses for a reason (even if nobody gets hurt). Karen is guilty of violating these laws; it's time to get serious about enforcing them.

IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
I think its time to start giving tickets for misuse of city resources (law enforcement). People should think twice about reporting stuff they should know better about reporting, and police should have a way to use their judgement to decide if what someone reported constitutes a valid complaint, grey area, or a busybody with nothing better to do than waste tax payers' time.
than3 4y ago
> Since when? Its what the courts in many areas have generally ruled. If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. A judge decides damages which impact ongoing budgets. > Karen is guilty of violating these laws. Yes, but how difficult is it to prove intent. How often do defamation suits win? Will a prosecutor ever really go after someone that claims a plausible excuse? Don't they have more important things to devote their resources towards? What about the harms caused to the parents, and the children, very hard to quantify. A report is self-enforcing because the police have a duty of care to respond to reports. Litigation would only ever actually occur civilly, and outside of extreme circumstances that demonstrate clear bad faith its a grey area that goes unenforced and unpunished. So who in the end actually gets punished, and is that punishment coercive. The courts generally don't recognize it as such since the accused (the person reporting it) has good faith protection. Its very hard to prove they did it in bad faith. Litigation would only ever actually occur civilly, and outside of extreme circumstances that demonstrate clear bad faith its a grey area that goes unenforced and unpunished. So who in the end actually gets punished?
- skissane 4y ago
  > If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. A judge decides damages which impact ongoing budgets. It isn't just about legal liability, it is also about politics. Suppose a child is abducted/murdered/etc. Turns out some concerned bystander saw something suspicious and called the police, but the police decided not to follow up. Even if the police aren't legally liable, once the media and politicians are done with the story, the general public will be so outraged, decent odds the chief of police will be forced to resign. You can say this is a very rare scenario and almost never happens, but government culture encourages risk-aversion – especially when it comes to children – so they'll worry about the risk, they'll overestimate it – and then they'll craft policies based on it.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
  > If you make a report, and those reports are valid but ignored, they can be sued and the city or organization becomes liable because they were negligent. That is certainly not the case everywhere, least of all the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzale.... > Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband.