1

Color of Law Essay and Critique

University’s name

Students name

Instructor

Course

Date
 2

The case of the officer David Freundlich

Introduction

The term "color of law" refers to the appearance of legal authority to act in ways that may

be illegal. In The Color of Law, Richard Rothstein argues with meticulous precision and

fascinating insight how segmentation in America—the persistent one- continued to dog our

urban centers and has caused so much recent social unrest as the consequence of explicit

government actions. The primary goal of this law is to regulate and control grand jury

investigations and performance malfeasance. Anyone who knowingly deprives any inhabitant of

the United States of America of their constitutional and human rights commits a crime under this

act. As a result, state prosecutors may pursue police officers, deputy sheriffs, federal agents,

public safety officials, plainclothes officers, and sometimes even off-duty officers who

acknowledge their official status. The establishment of this regulation is based on instances of

abuse of power and the reality that those in positions of authority get away with their activities

by using the "executed in the line of duty" phrase to avoid confronting the repercussions of their

actions.

The fundamental legal issue concerning the color of law that is concerning is the

opportunity for abuse and violence to be done under the pretext of performing a responsibility.

The above implies that the administration has special powers, such as police officers and "state

actors," might use excessive force while still being protected by the constitution. As a result,

sometimes, it is now illegal to deprive someone of their property or any constitutional or human

rights in the course of work. An officer cannot, for example, employ excessive force to restrain a

subject during an arrest. It's important to remember that everyone has rights that should be
 3

protected regardless of whether or not they commit a crime. Coercive power, false arrests,

perverting the course of justice, property expropriation, sex offenses, and failing to keep from

damages are all covered by the color of law act in this regard. To put it another way, both law

enforcement and private security people are prohibited from using excessive force when

conducting an arrest. Yes, they are permitted to use force to control a situation, but only if it is

necessary. Anything beyond that could lead to legal action. In this case, the statement "the end

does not immediately to mind" applies. In maintaining the law, those in positions of power also

shouldn't violate anyone's rights.

In a recent instance, the principle of "color of law" was examined In a notable incident,

the Federal District Court, for such District of Maryland was involved. To file a civil rights case

in federal court against a police source or organization, the claimants must demonstrate that a

"human" acting "under color of law" infringed the complainant's rights. his or her rights

contravened a federal level constitutionally guaranteed right. If most of these three criteria are

missing, the individual will not file a claim in Federal Court. When investigating an officer's off-

duty activity, organisations should always assess the conditions to see if the officer was acting

under the color of authority of law. An under the d by Congress will not be brought against the

agency or the police if the officer is not functioning under lawful cover.The terrorist attack of

David Freundlich, a former Anne Arundel District police officer, was part of the Boliek case.

Officer Freundlich as well as his spouse have been taken into custody experiencing a hard patch

in their marriage. Mrs. Frendlich started seeing Ronald Boliek while they were separated. Mrs.

Frendlich eventually decided to come back to her spouse. Officer Frendlich continued to

intimidate Boliek despite his return. Boliek reported some of these statements to the Anne

Arundel County Police Department as per the lawsuit. According to Boliek, the policeman
 4

placed a statement within Boliek's home suggesting that he might come and grab him anywhere

at time.

Officer Frendlich moved out of his home in October 2003 after agreeing to resign his

employment. He told his girlfriend he was going to New Jersey for Halloween and also had 3

gravestones put on the property's front lawn. Mrs. Frendlich and her kids went technique with

Boliek and his child on Halloween night. They expected to leave to Freundlich's place for a

supper. When they came back home, Officer Frendlich was hidden in the basement. Freundlich

murdered Boliek utilizing his government department service weapon before committing suicide.

The estate of Boliek filed a lawsuit against the Anne. As per Anne Officer Frendlich did not

condone homicide under the "color of law," hence no federal claims could be made(Stinson Sr,

Liederbach & Freiburger, 2012).During considering the claim, the Court recognized numerous

factors in deciding if an officer is acting beneath "color of law" anytime individuals perform

certain actions that causes injury. The "content of the act getting performed" is perhaps the most

important factor in determining whether such a person is operating legally. The first evaluation

would be that the officer had been on duty or having to wear their outfit at the scene of the

offence." Another concern is whether the officer was trying to travel through their police vehicle.

Primarily, the Court determined yet if the act must have been carried out along with the rights

conferred on police agencies. An power relationship granted by state law, often including service

members' police powers, is indeed an atrocity committed under cover of law. "There would still

be no evidence that perhaps the claimed incident transpired as a consequence of standard policy

considerations; on the contrary, the evidence proves that perhaps the attack happened at the start

of the officer's personal and interpersonal concerns," says Barna. As a reason, the need for a
 5

police-issued firearm by a police officer doesn't really immediately transform the personal

conduct into a police operation.

Conclusion

The Prosecution must prove the connection among and use of a pistol as well as the

practice of state power." The Court made a point of saying that when other officers are involved

during the off officer's actions, the occurrence takes on a "air of legal sanction" and thus

confronts the "color of law" prerequisites. Officer Frendlich's actions weren't performed under

the color of law, according to the Court. According to the Court, the allegation that he was using

his service revolver in the murder was the only indication of police involvement. Aside from

that, the act was entirely personal. Officers must be aware that if they take some Employees who

behave off-duty and are now under the color of law could subject themselves to federal civil

rights liability.
 6

References

Kean, S. M. (1999). Municipal Liability for Off-duty Police Misconduct under Section 1983:

The Under Color of Law Requirement. BUL Rev., 79, 195.

Stinson Sr, P. M., Liederbach, J., & Freiburger, T. L. (2012). Off-duty and under arrest: A study

of crimes perpetuated by off-duty police. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 23(2), 139-163.