|
Maybe it would benefit us to all put our personal feelings about police aside, and read what this decision says. (MrSelfDestruct even provided a link for us)
The issue before the court was whether or not Ms. Gonzales' 14th Ammendment right of the State to "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" had been violated. She claimed that she had a property interest in the police enforcement of the restraining order against her husband.
According to the way that the restraining orders in Colorado was written, it stated that an officer "shall arrest, or, if an arrest would be impractical under the circumstances, seek a warrant for the arrest of the restrained person." In other words, arrest if you are able to, but if you can't (such as if the location of the offender is unknown), apply for a warrant. It's my understanding that this is what was done in this case... that the officer(s) enforced the restraining order by applying for a warrant for the violators arrest, because the whereabouts were not immediately known.
The question before the court was whether or not her due process rights, guaranteed under the 14th ammendment, were violated. I didn't read anything in there that says that the police do not have to enforce restraining orders. What I read is that the courts said that the enforcement of restraining orders is not a constitutional right covered by the 14th ammendment.
|