According to Milstead v Kibler, what must be proven for an officer to be liable for civil damages?

In the context of Milstead v. Kibler, to establish liability for civil damages against an officer, it is essential to demonstrate that the officer's conduct violated a clearly established right. This principle is rooted in the concept of qualified immunity, which provides officers with protection from liability unless their actions infringe upon rights that are clearly established in constitutional or statutory law.

The standard of a "clearly established right" means that the law must have been sufficiently well-settled at the time of the alleged misconduct, such that a reasonable officer would understand that their actions were unlawful. This ensures that officers cannot be held liable for actions that were not clearly recognized as wrongful at the time they were taken, allowing for some discretion in law enforcement conduct.

Understanding this standard is crucial for determining whether an officer can be held accountable in civil court. In contrast, the other options do not accurately reflect the legal standards required for establishing that an officer should be liable, such as specifics in legal statutes or the necessity of eyewitness testimony.