[Music] thank you okay foreign [Music] what would happen if a police officer initiates a Pursuit with a fleeing vehicle then that vehicle crashes and then the officer says oh well and he just drops a Pursuit and he leaves the scene he doesn't stop and give first aid he doesn't call for an ambulance he just leaves he just turns the other direction and heads to Dunkin Donuts is that a civil rights violation the answer to that in my opinion anyways might surprise you it was May of this year in Dallas Texas Dallas police officer Leonard Anderson and his trainee officer Darian Robertson observed the vehicle leaving a gas station with his lights off they began to pursue and attempted to initiate a traffic stop but the vehicle fled lights still off [Music] the police car gets left in the dust basically [ __ ] with balls foreign apparently the Dallas Police Department has a Pursuit policy that provides for officers not to pursue Vehicles unless they're pursuing a subject believed to have committed a violent felony offense and that appears to have been the case here as far as I can tell they were chasing the guy just because he left the gas station with his lights off now dash cam footage actually captures the officer's witness this car wreck off in the distance as well as their reactions to it through audio from the dash cam video officers Anderson and Robertson can be heard talking to each other about the crash they just witnessed Anderson was driving at the time did you see that Robertson asked that's his fault Anderson replied [Music] let's see yeah a nearby surveillance camera captured a better view of the vehicle which narrowly missed hitting a pedestrian jumping the curb and then wrecking 19 seconds later the same camera captured these police officers Anderson and Robertson pull up to the crash site and promptly make a right-hand turn driving away from the scene bystanders at the scene saw what happened they witnessed the rack they witnessed the police car drive away and they instead of the police officers attempted to help the driver who is now trapped apparently his car on fire eventually the two officers returned to the scene after other police officers and First Responders had already arrived and the crowd wasn't happy they had seen what had happened and they were telling everyone who would listen about it and the officers tried to tell them at one point that they didn't see what they actually saw but they weren't having it foreign bro they said all right okay hey so it's like yeah probably said that God no I don't know his information want to get some gas man and when we pulled out the damn lawful behind me man and he go this way you know what I'm saying y'all know his first thing no I don't man age okay so I was watching it I just definitely got in the car telling us something different that was driving bro I got the police was behind him man that's what made him run into the damn thing like that man you telling me I'm lying bro yeah you know we're just trying to make everything make sense about to die afterwards the chief of the Dallas Police Department said that he was appalled by the officer's actions here and he commended the civilians for helping the crash victim now here's what happened in the end fast forward from May of 2022 to just last week it was announced by the Dallas Police that senior Corporal Leonard Anderson would be terminated as a result of this incident and his trainee officer Darian Robertson was given a 30-day suspension now here's the question clearly we saw police officers in this footage fail to Aid somebody who needed a no doubt it was a violation of Department policy but was it a civil rights violation under federal constitutional law let me know in the comments what you think this is an interesting issue and it's not quite that simple so it's important to remember the basic fact that the U.S Supreme Court has held as many people do know that in general police have absolutely no duty to protect us they can refuse to do their jobs or they can be really bad at doing their jobs and we can't sue them for it it's not a civil rights violation according to the Supreme Court the Supreme Court has held that government officials cannot be held responsible for harm caused by Third parties the main case in this is the deschaney case I'll put some of the citations for what I'm generally describing here in the blog post Linked In the description so what about here where there was no third party who caused anybody harm but rather just a car wreck that was caused by the individual himself who chose to flee from the police with its lights off and Andy crashed if a bystander had been hit and killed that would be the classic sort of third party case that you generally see but this one's a little bit different this is sort of like a suicide case there's an exception to the general rule that police have no duty to protect the state does have a duty to protect citizens against private violence or harm where the state has a quote special relationship with that citizen basically that means that where the police physically takes somebody into custody whether through incarceration handcuffing them or any other number of factual scenarios we we could see they may then theoretically have an obligation to protect that individual from some harm could that apply to this situation for that to be a possibility we'd have to consider that the driver was seized by the officers and unfortunately for him the courts have held including the fifth circuit which applies here in Texas that drivers fleeing the police in Pursuits are not seized for constitutional purposes at least not yet though the police have engaged in a show of authority commanding the driver to stop turning their lights on Etc here the driver refused and it's not a seizure according to the courts until the driver actually submits or until the police engage in some sort of use of force to effectuate that seizure like the pit maneuver ironically here the officer's actions at this scene of leaving the scene arguably allowed the government to avoid liability even being triggered here had they continued pursuing and arrived at the crash site and placed handcuffs on the guy inside his burning car at that point sort of the Pottery Barn rule whoever's fault it was the wreck it's now broken and they have to fix it it's their baby so the question is okay so they're not technically responsible yet but they saw the crash we saw them see it we heard them see it they didn't call an ambulance they didn't provide first aid themselves is that a civil rights violation we're back full circle to the first issue the fifth circuit specifically is held that there's no General right to Medical Care this right has only been found where there again exists some sort of special custodial or relationship between the person in the state now there's also a legal Doctrine which is sort of the same thing called the state-created danger Theory the idea is that yeah the government has a duty to protect you but if they actually create the danger that caused you the harm there should be liability for instance the Texas A M bonfire case government employees built are allowed to be built this huge dangerous bonfire they cause harm to people unfortunately for citizens in Texas the fifth circuit they have refused to adopt the state created danger Theory there could be a couple of other ideas I'm sure I could come up with something over a cigar maybe an excessive force Theory under slightly different facts that we don't have here probably the best option would be some sort of failure to provide medical care Theory but you'd have to be able to prove that the subject had already been seized which as I explained is unlikely to be proven here so it probably would fail now is this news to you did you know that the federal courts generally hold that police officers have no legal obligation to call an ambulance for you to provide you first aid CPR and so on I find that shocking and unacceptable but it's important to know because you have to know the exception when when there's custody or a special relationship do you think that the officers here were just playing 4D chess that they knew all this law they were just playing 40 chess for their insurance company I don't think so now the victim here perhaps didn't deserve compensation he did it to himself he could have killed an innocent persons so I'm just speaking in general terms really the usual tragedy is that this happens and then the guy hits like a car full of kids and wipes out an entire family then the government similar to what they did here they just say oh oh well and they take a right-hand turn and the government just drives somewhere else as always thanks for watching I have some big updates coming in the near future and I want you to know that I really thank you for your support here on YouTube and this is going to allow me to really go all out in the coming months and I predict that in early 2023 I'll be able to file even more lawsuits against the government than I have in any previous year so there are some big updates coming on cases that you may be following I'm putting together a list of other like-minded civil rights lawyers hopefully in all 50 states I've been overwhelmed by requests for legal assistance and referrals and if I haven't responded to you directly please bear with me I'm I'm working on a plan and I I think you'll like it I want to provide access to civil rights lawyers for anyone and everyone who wants one and for those of you who have to represent yourselves or want to represent yourselves Pro Se I also want to find a way to help you and provide resources so please make sure to subscribe and stay tuned also sign up for email updates at the blog at the Civil Rights lawyer.com remember freedom is scary but otherwise it doesn't exist the Karens and the cowards can just deal with it I'll see you next time foreign [Music]