[Fogest]

The problem is more where do you draw the line with that protection. What kind of risk warrants you getting special round the clock police presence? What if a criminal leader is having problems with another gang who keeps putting hits out on him? Maybe he had multiple attempts made on his life already. Should he also get protection? Or would he not count because of his criminal history?

If anything what should be happening here is the insurance company who is paying her should be helping protect her. Otherwise why wouldn't she just drop the client? If it is unsafe for her she may as well just cave in and drop that high risk client. I don't see how her career had to end because she couldn't drop a single client.

The insurance companies also could have put pressure on the prosecutors to go after these criminals. What I find interesting is that in the story we heard nothing from the insurance companies despite them being the main one going head-to-head against these guys.

In my city in Ontario our police department is already underfunded and has less officers per 100 000 people than most other departments in Ontario. And because of the BLM movement one of their proposed budgets would end up forcing them to cut 216 officers. Unfortunately people want to ask for things like these 24/7 protections but then they are unwilling to properly fund the police and instead look to defund them. A lot of police services in Ontario are understaffed and can barely keep up with 911 calls for service, how do you expect them to protect someone 24/7 for who knows how long when they can barely keep up with normal 911 calls?