You have to follow rules in your job and so do the police. What if you are a Air Traffic Controller and decide to go against the rules?
We don't live in a perfect world and for better or worse most employers worry about liability. I don't know what the policy is at the PD in this post, but the thing I wondered about is why the officer didn't perform any life-saving techniques if warranted until aid arrived.
But policy does vary. For example, Seattle PD allows officers to transport a sick or injured person if in the opinion of the officer transport will save the person's life AND medical transport is unavailable. Would an officer going against the flow be sub-human as some of the puerile clowns on this thread claim?
I know of a sheriff's 911 dispatch center that prohibited call-takers after dispatching an aid car to give any pre-arrival instructions or life saving techniques (CPR, etc.) until certified by the state. Is that person sub-human as some of the puerile clowns on this thread claim?
In an incident that happened at this center, imagine the call-taker's human helpless feelings they were going through who knew CPR when a woman called that her boy-friend next to her had a heart attack and was turning blue. A deputy and aid car were dispatched - the fire station was nearby, but adding to incident the mail box was placed on the wrong street adding precious minutes until the house was located. By then he was dead.
Grow up kids!
YOur comments perfectly illustrate the problem of going by the book even in the face of absurdity.
The Founding Fathers got along quite well without swarms of police everywhere. Matter of fact, I think they'd be appalled at the current state of affairs with agents of the Crown.
Just because "police everywhere" is the status quo, doesn't mean it always was...
The officer was not trained in proper responses for this situation, nor did he have any equipment that would have been needed.
A bad outcome was almost certain under the circumstances.