From a reported threat to the housing and supervision decisions that followed

Preserve intake interviews, keep-separate alerts, classification scores, gang or vulnerability information, protective-custody requests, grievances, kiosk messages, phone calls. Include medical or mental-health notes, prior assaults, witness reports and communications between shifts. For each item, identify who received it, when, and what authority that person had to change housing, supervision, transport, or separation.

Farmer v. Brennan requires a substantial risk and subjective knowledge and disregard for an Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect theory. Hooks v. Atoki explains that the Tenth Circuit continues to apply a subjective deliberate-indifference component to Fourteenth Amendment pretrial-detainee failure-to-protect claims. The exact standard still depends on custody status and claim framing.

Obtain housing rosters, bed moves, classification overrides, separation lists, unit logs, door-control and access data, recreation and transport schedules. Include staffing assignments, observation records, video, radio traffic, incident reports and post orders. Compare the stated classification process with actual decisions and record who approved each override or movement.

The assault response is a separate part of the case. Timeline calls for help, staff entry, backup, restraint of assailants, first aid, emergency medical services, transport, evidence collection, and preservation of the scene. A delayed response may affect damages or causation even when the pre-assault notice evidence is disputed, but it requires its own legal analysis.

An individual claim should state what risk the defendant knew, how the defendant learned it, what the defendant could do, what response occurred, and how that decision caused the injury. Qualified immunity requires comparison with controlling law at an appropriate factual level. A supervisor's title or after-the-fact review is not personal participation by itself.

A Monell claim requires a policy, widespread custom, final-policymaker act, or deliberately indifferent training or supervision failure that caused the constitutional injury. Relevant evidence may include repeated ignored separation alerts, known classification-system defects, chronic inability to staff required posts, prior similar assaults, audit findings, and policymaker responses. One tragic event does not eliminate the need for that proof.