- Oct 2013
We've discussed it (and believe me, I did understand).Wrong. Duty to Rescue isn't about rescuing, like giving someone CPR or whatever, its just the name of a larger doctrine, rescue essentially means LEO acting in the role of helping an individual in distress. Preventing and stopping crime does not mean the police has to intervene and help an individual in distress, it means the police owe the public as a whole the duty to attempt to catch and lock up the perp.
When a high court judge says that besides the circumstances when someone has a special relationship the police, they owe no individual the duty to rescue (or serve or help, they all mean the same), then that is what causes a shift in policing policies and techniques. That is now case law, that is the interpretation of the law and how it is applied, unless some future court reverses itself, or clarifies it in a different manner.
I think I answered to You too with my answer addressed to Iraq.