Note: This is the full turning 18 guide, issued by the Idaho Office of the Attorney General:http://www.scribd.com/doc/193139838/Turning-18-Guide
Mark Reinhardt- Boise Idaho
Within the State of Idaho, the Attorney General’s Office has a publication called, “Turning 18 In Idaho, A Survival Guide For Teenagers.”
According to the guide, this is what it says about the subject of crimes,
However, this standard is not applied to Law Enforcement Officers, as stated in Idaho Code under, “Qualified Immunity.”
“ 18-921. Peace officers — Immunity. No peace officer may be held criminally or civilly liable for actions or omissions in the performance of the duties of his office under this chapter, if the peace officer acts in good faith and without malice.”
http://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title18/T18CH9SECT18-921.htm
According to Cornell University Law School, this is the purpose of Qualified Immunity,
“Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment, distraction, and liability when they perform their duties reasonably.” Pearson v. Callahan (07-751). Specifically, it protects government officials from lawsuits alleging that they violated plaintiffs’ rights, only allowing suits where officials violated a “clearly established” statutory or constitutional right. When determining whether or not a right was “clearly established,” courts consider whether a hypothetical reasonable official would have known that the defendant’s conduct violated the plaintiff’s rights.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/qualified_immunity
Such rights, include rights under the 4th Amendment, to which the American Civil Liberties Union argued in snyder-v-trepagnier,
“In the rare situation where the standard for qualified immunity and the constitutional claim are identical, qualified immunity cannot be a defense to a claim of a constitutional violation.5 In the excessive force context, once it is determined that an objectively reasonable officer would not have used the force in question, it makes no sense — indeed it is conceptually incoherent — to assert that the very same objectively reasonable officer could have believed that the force was reasonable. In other words, a police officer cannot have an objectively reasonable belief that his conduct was lawful when the unlawfulness of that conduct rests on a determination that an objectively reasonable officer would not have acted in the same way in the same circumstances.”
https://www.aclu.org/content/aclu-amicus-brief-snyder-v-trepagnier
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment
Addressing Domestic Violence, the State of Idaho writes,
“If you are in immediate danger, call 911. When the police arrive,
explain what happened. The officer who arrives will give you a written
statement that will tell you of local shelters and other community
resources. The officer will make sure you have transportation to a
hospital for treatment or to get you to a shelter or other safe place.
The officer will also give you a written notice that informs you of your
right to ask the city or county prosecuting attorney to file a criminal
complaint. (I.C. § 39-6316) When an abuser is charged with a crime of
violence, the judge in the criminal case will typically issue a no contact
order restricting the abuser from contacting the victim during the case.”
However, Police Officers are not required to enforce no contact orders, as the United States Supreme Court wrote in 2005.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZO.html
Justice Antonin Scalia stated as the case was dismissed,
“ We conclude, therefore, that respondent did not, for purposes of the Due Process Clause, have a property interest in police enforcement of the restraining order against her husband.”
In other words, Law Enforcement does not have to protect you from Domestic Violence Situations.
Qualified Immunity has been the subject of frustration for many adults in the United States, leading to the creation of groups like,
http://www.copblock.org http://www.oathkeepers.org and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
http://www.leap.cc/
Oathkeepers and LEAP are made up of current and former active duty members of Law Enforcement.
When discussing being arrested, the Guide says,
The Idaho ACLU, however, writes, “Q: Do I have to answer questions asked by law
enforcement officers?
A: No. You have the constitutional right to remain silent. In
general, you do not have to talk to law enforcement officers (or
anyone else), even if you do not feel free to walk away from the
officer, you are arrested, or you are in jail. You cannot be pun-
ished for refusing to answer a question. It is a good idea to
talk to a lawyer before agreeing to answer questions. In gen-
eral, only a judge can order you to answer questions”
Click to access kyr_english.pdf
As teenagers graduate from High School, more court battles are taking place in terms of rights under the 4th Amendment, and 14th Amendment, years after September 11th, 2001.
Idaho Calling
This is Idaho Calling 