Another one to add to your “police have no duty to protect you” file……
=======
FAIR USE:

Ignored robbery victims can’t sue cops for bias
by J.M. Lawrence
Thursday, April 5, 2001

A Tedeschi’s clerk and customer who feared they were about to be robbed
can’t sue Brockton police for not responding to their call for help even
though three thugs later robbed them at knifepoint, a federal judge has
ruled.

“It was a terrible incident,” one of the women’s attorneys, Roland
Garrison, said. “The shame of it all was there was a cruiser available.”

The women claimed a Brockton police dispatcher discriminated against them
Jan. 27, 1997, when she refused to send help because they described the
suspects as black men in hoods outside the food shop.

“(Expletive) them . . . People who see black people with hoods on them
think they’re no good,” officer Nancy Leedberg said, according to another
police officer.

Leedberg, who is white, denies making the remark. Her superiors suspended
her for five days after the incident.

U.S. District Court Judge Patti B. Saris ruled that shopper Elizabeth
Pariseau and clerk Mary Diaz failed to prove that police discriminated
against them based on their race. The plaintiffs are white.

“While there is evidence of inept law enforcement, Plaintiffs have not
demonstrated that the conduct of Leedberg violated the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Saris ruled.

Attorneys for the women said they will refile the case in state court on the
basis of police negligence alone.

The three black males emptied the register and robbed Pariseau and Diaz of
their money and jewelry. They were never caught.

—————————————————————————-
—-

__________________
~USP

“[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is
held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would
simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future
generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential,
and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may
tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right
to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of
rights.” — Justice Scalia 1998