or whether the deceased acted in a rage or frenzy or due to an uncontrollable impulse.” But all of the decisions relied upon by the special concurrence, holding (or arguably holding) that the suicides in question were not unforeseeable as a matter of law, involved a custodial or doctor-patient relationship between the majority likens the doctor-patient relationship to the duty of care that a police officer owes to the general public, it does not discuss any of the “prison cases” that specifically address potential liability of police officers for suicide. Regardless, neither line of jurisprudence applies here because, unlike in both the hospital and prison contexts, Sanders was never in Sahlberg’s custody or under his supervision or control. 45 See Tucker, 332 Ga. App. at 190, 192-93 (<HOLDING>); Harvey, 260 Ga. App. at 193-94 (2) (holding
holding that a detention officers alleged negligent conduct of failing to medically screen an inmate who later committed suicide in a holding cell  in violation of the police departments policies  was not the proximate cause of the inmates death when there was no evidence that the inmate would have been unable to kill himself if he had been medically screened and any claim that the inmate would have presented as suicidal in such screening was purely speculative holding that the due process clause permits the state to treat a prison inmate who has a serious mental illness with antipsychotic drugs against his will if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest holding that an inmate stated a claim under the due process clause when guards had placed her in a cell with a dangerous inmate holding that the due process clause permits the state to involuntarily treat a prison inmate who is seriously mentally ill if the inmate is dangerous to himself or others and the treatment is in the inmates medical interest holding that an inmates suicide was an unforeseeable intervening act for which a detention officer was not liable when inter alia there was no evidence that the inmate was in a rage or frenzy or had an uncontrollable impulse at the time when he took his own life but was instead calm and controlled and appeared to have known what he was doing