(1) Whether the 11th circuit failed to comply with this court's binding ruling in FARMER V. BRENNAN, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) in its finial opinion, since the farmer ruling only requires petitioner Nealy (a civilly committed detainee) to produce circumstantial evidence showing that defendants respondents, (FCCC staff) knew of a serious risk of harm to Nealy from a violent mentally unstable civil detainee (RN), despite whether defendants (respondents) had knowledge or not that a risk of harm would actually occur to Nealy from civil detainee (RN), who has a long standing pervasive and well documented history of physically assaulting civil detainees and staff at Florida civil commitment center [FCCC], which risk of serious harm to petitioner Nealy from civil detainee "RN", was so obvious to defendants, by their review of incident reports of civil detainees [RN] detailing RN's prior assaults upon other civil detainee's and staff at FCCC and because defendants (respondents) had knowledge that RN had outside pending criminal charges for assaulting FCCC staff, prior to placing RN in the same dorm as petitioner Nealy, where RN physically assaulted Nealy and officer banks, causing Nealy's physical injuries and pain?

(2) Whether defendants (Respondents) knowledge of RN's long and pervasive well documented history of physically assaulting civil detainees and staff at FCCC and defendants knowledge of RN's pending outside criminal charges for assaulting another staff at FCCC, prior to respondents placing RN in the same dorm with petitioner Nealy, resulting in RN physically assaulting petitioner Nealy and causing him physical injuries and pain, denied petitioner reasonable safety, which was not based upon a sound professional judgment, pursuant TO YOUNGBERG V. ROMEO 457 U.S. 307 ?

QP: Whether the 11th Circuit failed to comply with Farmer v. Brennan in assessing deliberate indifference when defendants knew of a serious risk of harm from a violent mentally unstable civil detainee