You make a fair argument, but it won't carry the day. The place they "threw here into" was a public street, that had no sign of imminent danger. As far as they were concerned, they were not putting her in harms way. It is not reasonable to hold them to prescience, or to judge them with the benefit of hindsight. IOW, had nothing happened (which is the case the majority of the time), the same action would NOT have "made it worse."
The law is very stingy about assigning duty to itself.
Cboldt, I disagree. I think there was a sign of imminent danger and they knew, or should have known, that they were putting her in harms way. Not only was she being harassed inside the store, which in itself might be sufficient, but according to the earlier posts she actually pleaded with the police not to put her out there with them because of her own fears for her safety. The police would have determined that those fears were well-founded in light of the way that she was being abused inside the store.