>>503715

you need to learn the law anon

>South v. Maryland, 59 U.S. (How.) 396, 15 L.Ed.433 (1856) (the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local law-enforcement had no duty to protect individuals, but only a general duty to enforce the laws.);

since 1856

look up sparf v US and you'll learn the judge has no specific duty to properly inform the jury of it's rights and duties

and people wonder why were in the fix we're in

>>503885

ease up there lad and learn

>Westbrooks v. State, 173 Cal.App.3d 1203, 219 Cal.Rtr. 674 (1985)

>(1) the county deputy sheriff had no duty to warn drivers that the state highway bridge had collapsed during the storm,

>county deputy sheriff had no duty

>deputy sheriff

>>503952

>My statements still stand.

believe what you want

I wouldn't bet my life on it

just my 2¢