{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011764705882352941, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007058823529411765, 'mean_word_length': 4.789115646258503, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, 23 August 1988.

The plaintiff, a woman who alleged that she had been subjected to harassment and vandalism by her former husband, sought damages from the local police department under federal US Civil Rights legislation. She claimed that she had been deprived of due process and equal protection of the law because the police had failed to respond to her repeated complaints even though they knew that she had been severely beaten by her husband and that she had obtained a restraining order against him. Although the Court ruled that the police had no constitutional duty to protect people from crime, it held that in this case a special relationship existed between the plaintiff and the police because of their knowledge of her complaints and the restraining order. The Court allowed the suit to proceed.