If a state actor operating w/ discretionary action uses a private actor to harass or systematically annoy does the state have to prosecute?
I understand that state actors are under soverign immunity and can not deprive a person of their constitutional rights but if their actions are done with a non disclosure agreement then technical the agent provocateur would then be forced to lie to avoid treason charges , arrest , prosecution etc. If the violations where in the thousand example : Sally follows Jim places trash on his yard , follows him to a grocery store daily for years bys the exact items as the target , slanders him and video evidence existed then Sally the state actor which is by the way a state official and stakeholder to the state would technically not receive arrest or prosecution by the state since the state works to shield the state and hide the crimes of stakeholders working for the state or branch.
While technically i can conduct a citizens arrest .What purpose would it serve if police and prosecutors let Sally free with no citation ?
Sallys defense maybe coicidence when a court expert testimony was presented. Protected activities are not community mobbing , gangstalking ,role playing games on people that have sought police intervene .
If the state and government intergovermental organizations and regional council under soverign immunity use femas whole community approach community engagement groups and coordinators or a contractor what assurance does the state provide in a the target gaining justice if it is a stakeholder ?
Sorry for typos using a small cell.
- linkus86Lv 711 months ago
The state is never required to prosecute. In fact many crimes aren't because there is insufficient evidence to even try or may choose not to at all in the interest of justice, which is the more common justification to not prosecute an undercover law enforcement agency who breaks the law in pursuit of the private citizen criminal.