I’m thinking the Supreme Court has the final say in immunity...not able to continue reading....must get ready to leave.(Justice Department-also)
*****************
In Imbler, the Supreme Court held that prosecutors are generally entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability under the federal civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for actions, taken in their role as prosecutors, that may have violated the rights of a criminal defendant. Absolute immunity is exactly what it sounds like—a blanket and unconditional grant of protection from civil liability. A related doctrine, qualified immunity, also protects government officials from liability, but as the Supreme Court explained in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, only if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights . . . .” Put simply, qualified immunity protects government officials who abide by the rules (although the law defines those rules very narrowly). Absolute immunity protects them from civil liability even when they break the rules.
NIKK..ignorant of law...but Peabody after reading this...it leads me to believe if the prosecutors/all involved/ didn’t follow the rules ..perhaps broke laws in the Florida case/ they can go back to court?