When is a specific officer held liable for failing their duty of care?

The correct response is grounded in the concept of "duty of care," which refers to the legal obligation a law enforcement officer has to act in a manner that protects others from foreseeable harm. An officer can be held liable when their failure to fulfill this duty directly results in injury or harm to an individual. This means that if an officer neglects their responsibilities or fails to take appropriate action that could have prevented harm, and this lapse directly leads to someone's injury, liability may be established.

Liability hinges on the causal connection between the officer's failure and the resulting harm, so demonstrating that an injury occurred as a direct consequence of that failure is crucial for liability to be found. In scenarios where an officer adheres to their duty of care effectively and an injury occurs, liability may not apply since there would have been no breach of that duty.

Understanding this principle helps clarify the legal nuances related to an officer's responsibilities and potential consequences for negligence. Thus, the correct answer encapsulates the essential legal link between the breach of duty and the injury sustained.