Legal Question in DUI Law in Minnesota

While there are always exceptions and exemptions to every legal question. I find it very difficult to imagine any situation where the police would be liable.

This is not a criminal law question, but a civil, personal injury law question (or hypothetical). It sounds like a query about what is known in the law as "third party liability" since it is assumed that police did not directly cause any harm. If liabilty were to be based in a tort cause of action, there would need to be proof of a duty towards the injured party, a breach or violation of that duty, damages caused by that breach, and proof that the actions of police were the "proximate cause" of the plaintiff's injury. If the plaintiff's lawyer could come up with evidence to support each of those elements, then it might be up to a judge, hearing a summary judgment motion for qualified "good faith" or official immunity, then perhaps a jury. I would be quite surprised to hear that such a thing could happen.