Shouldn''t everyone that allowed him walk until this point be guilty of common law negligence?
1 duty - officials have an oath to uphold laws 'n' stuff
2 breach - Paul was not arrested or processed in compliance with the laws the officials have a duty to uphold
3 causation - letting paul walk allowed a known dangerous person loose on the streets
4 damages - the public was harmed by Paul's being free in the same way the publc is harmed by convicts who have escaped
... ?
Can we get a law that recognizes the right of the public to hold politicians and their appointees accountable for clear violations of their oaths and duty to uphold the law instead of just praying for the next election?
Shouldn''t everyone that allowed him walk until this point be guilty of common law negligence?
1 duty - officials have an oath to uphold laws 'n' stuff
2 breach - Paul was not arrested or processed in compliance with the laws the officials have a duty to uphold
3 causation - letting paul walk allowed a known dangerous person loose on the streets
4 damages - the public was harmed by Paul's being free in the same way the publc is harmed by convicts who have escaped
... ?
Can we get a law that recognizes the right of the public to hold politicians and their appointees accountable for clear violations of their oaths and duty to uphold the law instead of just praying for the next election?
I think this a**hole isn't the first rich and 'powerful' person that had the law look the other way, sad to say.