Did Defendants violate Scott's right to be protected from assault by another inmate?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED : l. On 4/24/18, 4/25/18 Did Defendants Al Sexton, Burchfield violate Scott’s clearly establish right to be protected by assault from other inmate Savage who between 10:30 pm on 4/24/18 held Scott hostage in his cell by tying it up where end he’d in his cell while holding a bottle out his trap “feces / urine” telling Defendants Malone, Sexton they no gonna feed Scott and he gonna dash them and Scott if they don’t get Lt. or Sgts. down here. And continue to have Scott hostage unto 5:00 am. On 4/25/18. | , Defendant Malone/ Sexton who stated they not going to get involve it’s between Scott and Savage didn’t try to secure Savage trap, or go get supervisors unto breakfast call. Who once Lt. Burchfield come down had Savage untie Scott, but didn’t secure Savage trap. And when Cpl. Sexton handed Scott his tray Inmate Savage reach out and dash Scott with urine, After! having him held hostage in his cell from 10:30 am 4/24/18-4/25/18 5:00 am. | , 2. Did District Court abuse it discretion dismissing Scott failure to protect and. intervene claim on Defendant Malone, Sexton, Burchfield in screening process stating: Scott instigated invents to file a § 1983 complaint. When Scott admitted to throwing water on imate Savage trap to get Lt. and Sgt. to they cell cause they been repeatedly having problems with each other. “ This was done to prevent from each one doing something each other at 10:30 pm”. 3. Did District Court violate Fed.r.c.P.(56),(60) dismissing Scott claims of Defendant Plummer retaliating on him for his use bf grievances and § 1983 complaint by (a) denying him medical attention; (b) putting him on behavior control confiscating all his personal property, bedding and linen and not do proper paperwork in computer to cover it up and wouldn‘t nobody no about, when Scott presented genuine issue of material facts in dispute to prove his claims. 4. Did District Court violate Fed.R.C.P (37) by allowing Defendant Plummer . failure to participate in discovery, them file false/ nisleading discovery, Discovery sought would prove Scott claim Plummer retaliated on him by putting him on behavior control and not inmate brooks. And Plummer didn’t do proper paperwork to cover it up. 2 ay .