View Full Version : Deputy Scot Peterson has been arrested for his failure to act
Unfortunately this doesn't net enough people and is unlikely to go anywhere, but:
"Disgraced former Broward Sheriff's Office Deputy Scot Peterson has been arrested for his failure to act during the Parkland school shooting that left 17 people dead and 17 others wounded."
https://www.local10.com/news/parkland-school-shooting/former-bso-deputy-scot-peterson-arrested
Good.
You may get killed but god damn you; you will fight
Doc Safari
06-04-19, 14:51
Good.
You may get killed but god damn you; you will fight
Ditto. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Taking that oath and slapping on that badge comes with "assumption of risk."
dwhitehorne
06-04-19, 16:00
I’m sure a plea to a misdemeanor will get all the felonies tossed. The new Chain of Command is trying to look like they are doing something and it will all go away. They should hammer the whole chain of command in the SO office that was on the scene if they were really serious. David.
Two questions.
What took so long?
When will Israel be arrested?
I wasn’t there. So I can only monday morning quarterback. Which is borderline worthless. But I believe in dying fighting, rather than going home with those in my charge dead. Such a tragic disgrace.
Good.
You may get killed but god damn you; you will fight
“Everybody fights. Nobody quits.”
But I thought it was the fault of the NRA and Publix?????
Grand58742
06-04-19, 19:20
It's nice finally seeing justice come around.
Immunity/exemptions need to go away.
If I(& others like me) can get on the hook for motioning someone out in to the road and it ends up not being clear proceed resulting in an accident (with absolutely NO power to force that person to proceed) then there is a whole stack of people that need to be held responsible when their bad ideas bear similar fruit.
Aren't they charging him with basically good samaritan law violations? If they are that's probably not going to go well.
Aren't they charging him with basically good samaritan law violations? If they are that's probably not going to go well.
I don't think so. He didn't try to aid anyone except himself so not seeing how a Good Samaritan law would apply.
His actions were similar to instances where mom's new boyfriend abuses her child while she sits idly by Not assisting. If mom can get nailed for her actions (as she should), then so should the deputy.
I don't think so. He didn't try to aid anyone except himself so not seeing how a Good Samaritan law would apply.
His actions were similar to instances where mom's new boyfriend abuses her child while she sits idly by Not assisting. If mom can get nailed for her actions (as she should), then so should the deputy.
IDK...it seems that mom would have a different and more responsible relationship to her child than he would have to the school children. We may have a moral duty to help, but do we have a legal duty? That's why I mentioned the GS law.
titsonritz
06-04-19, 23:20
“Everybody fights. Nobody quits.”
"Come on you apes, you wanna live forever?!"
IDK...it seems that mom would have a different and more responsible relationship to her child than he would have to the school children. We may have a moral duty to help, but do we have a legal duty? That's why I mentioned the GS law.
My understanding is that he was the school resource officer. His job duty was to protect the students. Some also make the point that as the STATE forces the kids to be in school, the STATE assumes the role of protector. Peterson represented the STATE. Hence Peterson did not fulfill his duty.
IANALAIDPOOTV so I don't know the ins and outs of the above arguments. Just putting them forth as ones I read elsewhere on this matter.
My understanding is that he was the school resource officer. His job duty was to protect the students. Some also make the point that as the STATE forces the kids to be in school, the STATE assumes the role of protector. Peterson represented the STATE. Hence Peterson did not fulfill his duty.
IANALAIDPOOTV so I don't know the ins and outs of the above arguments. Just putting them forth as ones I read elsewhere on this matter.
I suppose it will come down to did he have a legal requirement to engage in a protective gun fight.
Coal Dragger
06-05-19, 00:50
My guess is that no he did not. Just as it’s been ruled the police don’t have to protect you.
This is just feel good bullshit, he’s not going to spent any time behind bars.
My guess is that no he did not. Just as it’s been ruled the police don’t have to protect you.
This is just feel good bullshit, he’s not going to spent any time behind bars.
That's kind of what I figured would happen too.
IDK...it seems that mom would have a different and more responsible relationship to her child than he would have to the school children. We may have a moral duty to help, but do we have a legal duty? That's why I mentioned the GS law.
That would be a duty to render aid law which is law in some countries.
Here, all anti 2nd amendment/ anti self defense laws are sold under that claim, but of course the no duty to protect carries the day.
I realize he is going to walk away unscathed from this, but in my opinion he (and, as I mentioned earlier, EVERYONE else above him that put this on/kept this on the books) is legally responsible. It would make no difference in any other contract if a party had no intention of fulfilling it's end of the contract so should be the case with the state.
I doubt that is the state's intent here, but the more people that gets to become aware of the no duty to protect exemption the better.
You don't sign up to be a sheepdog and then cower in the corner when the wolves are in the flock.
POS is a disgrace, as are others in chain of command. I will be (pleasantly) surprised if this goes anywhere.
Link to the arrest warrant:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/1067-scot-peterson-warrant/a3f71699c72f51bd6d7e/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Was his "duty to act" carried out while securing a position of cover some distance from the shooter? He was the sole officer In charge of those kid's safety in that situation, at least until Coral Gables officers arrived and took action.
In the past I've posted the job responsibilities/duties of Resource Officers in GA. My understanding is they are typical.
I don't buy the "no obligation to act" stuff, even if there are court case precedent. This is not the case of general LEO work. These officers have a very specific role, which includes active response to threats.
My guess is that no he did not. Just as it’s been ruled the police don’t have to protect you.
This is just feel good bullshit, he’s not going to spent any time behind bars.
At least they're trying and didn't just let him walk away as he planned. They can only do what they can do under the law, and that they didn't let it go, is credit due where it's due. There was a complete and total department wide failure from the top to the bottom (PD was well known for being highly dysfunction well prior to this event) and the top guy fired, various command staff fired, and that SRO walked away without a proverbial nor literal scratch. Unfortunately the lynch pin for that SRO's behavior may hing on the fact that worthless chief had altered the active shooter SOP from "shall" to "may" engage active shooters. I do see anything coming from this either that matches his crime, but he does not get to slink away with benefits without being dragged through the mud, perhaps costly (how will the union react?), and exposed for a while under spot light for what he did.
Jail time, not a chance, but it also sends a message to others who may be convinced they're protected from any repercussions from similar behavior. None of the LEOs I know have any empathy for him at all, and consider him a blight to the profession. I will always give LE the benefit of the doubt and always keep in mind I was not there, but this one is what it is...
Outlander Systems
06-05-19, 11:16
PADULA v. STATE establishes a good precedent for this particular instance of negligence.
In the past I've posted the job responsibilities/duties of Resource Officers in GA. My understanding is they are typical.
I don't buy the "no obligation to act" stuff, even if there are court case precedent. This is not the case of general LEO work. These officers have a very specific role, which includes active response to threats.
While I doubt that's what that SRO was thinking at the time, Israel added to the SOP for active shooters from "shall" to "may" likely giving him the legal out needed to get off without real penalties:
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article223496650.html
Far as i know, "shall" is the language used in all other active shooter SOP. The fail and cowardice started from the very top, and rotted out everything below it. Normally I'd think scapegoating was taking place to avoid responsibility, which happens to LEOs all the time as we all know, this does not appear to be such to me. Israel deserved to be fired, as did those in the command staff who fu&#ed it up at every turn and ignored well established active shooter protocols, as did the first person who had the opportunity to act, the SRO.
It's also well established both publicly and behind the scenes, that when the Coral Cables team showed up they were floored by what they saw, and by some accounts, it got very heated between them.
PADULA v. STATE establishes a good precedent for this particular instance of negligence.
I'd hope it could rise to the level of criminal negligence, but I doubt that would stick.
Outlander Systems
06-05-19, 11:41
Agreed; how comma ever, if the State can force me at gunpoint to conscript my child into their custody, they can use that same gun to defend said child.
I'd hope it could rise to the level of criminal negligence, but I doubt that would stick.
titsonritz
06-05-19, 11:51
This will turn out to be political showboating.
I heard on the radio today, I think by a father, that he hid behind a concrete barrier of some sort for 45 minutes. Is that true?
I heard on the radio today, I think by a father, that he hid behind a concrete barrier of some sort for 45 minutes. Is that true?
Not sure about 45 minutes, but if I got it right from the arrest warrant link Sam shared the shooting was app. 7 minutes start to finish and the timeline of radio broadcasts during that time mention Peterson still in hiding.
Looks like the turd managed a rate of fire similar to an Enfield #1 or #4.
My understanding is that he was the school resource officer. His job duty was to protect the students. Some also make the point that as the STATE forces the kids to be in school, the STATE assumes the role of protector. Peterson represented the STATE. Hence Peterson did not fulfill his duty.
IANALAIDPOOTV so I don't know the ins and outs of the above arguments. Just putting them forth as ones I read elsewhere on this matter.
It's not a legal analysis, but in loco parentis should go both ways. Authority without responsibility is a surefire recipe for tragedy. :(
My guess is that no he did not. Just as it’s been ruled the police don’t have to protect you.
This is just feel good bullshit, he’s not going to spent any time behind bars.
While I agree with the bolded part, this isn't a case that Warren v. DC; South v. Maryland or Bowers v. Devito; should apply to. This specific case should result in conviction and work it's way up through the appeals process for making specific caselaw (assuming the Coward of Broward would appeal).
I say this because Coward was specifically posted to protect the children in loco parentis at the school. He was trained in ASR and was obviously aware that a violent felony was in progress. He not only failed to perform his assigned duties, he actively interfered with other officers attempting to perform their duties. His duty was not to protect individual students from harm, his duty was to protect the students under the custody of the school. That was his specific assignment and he failed spectacularly.
That's why he should be held criminally and civilly liable, but sadly I'm a cynic/pragmatist and I have no illusions that they want to hold him accountable for the craven abandonment of his duty. No, they want to deflect their own malfeasance and mitigate their own liabilities. If they can pin the whole sordid mess on him, that's what they'll do. We can't forget that Israel rewrote the policy and his office failed to act on a known threat. We also can't forget that the school actively operated and promoted a program (in collusion with BCSO), which shielded the threat from consequences that would've likely resulted in incarceration or at the very least, made him a prohibited person.
Coward wasn't an SRO, he was a fraud. He took large sums of money from the county on the premise that he would protect the students in custody of the school, assuming he was in a position to do so when the time came. Well he was fully in a position when the time came and he refused to perform his duty. He is a FRAUD. I literally can't find enough derogatory words to describe him, and I have a pretty colorful vocabulary.
But I feel exactly the same about ex-Sheriff Israel, MS-DHS Principal Thompson and the Broward Co. school board. To paraphrase Shakespeare, a pox on all their houses! :mad:
ramairthree
06-05-19, 20:10
His crimes are abhorrent to me.
But these are crimes of duty, courage, morality, etc.
For all my disgust,
I am unclear what legal crimes he can be convicted of.
Not that it applies to this particular guy but after reading part of that arrest warrant some of the training seems dis-ordered.
I get the order of importance being.
1. Victim / Hostage
2. Bystanders
3. LEO
4. Suspect.
But then it goes on to solidify that thought process by saying every shot by the suspect should be considered a kill.
Then the lone LEO is supposed to
1. Engage and force surrender
2. Engage and force barricade
3. Incapacitate by shooting.
That looks ass backwards to me considering the thought process is supposed to be every shot a kill by suspect and he is the least valuable person on the scene. My order would be...
1. Attempt to Kill it.
2. Barricade it.
3. Ask for surrender
4. Repeat 1 until successful
Along with my expectation of every shot a kill is that in typical public buildings he's going to be in a room with people. Seems like to me if you are in a situation where you can chit chat about surrender then he's already at point 2.
I don't know, it just seemed strange to me. Like I say it doesn't apply to this guy because he didn't engage but it seems conflicting.
Anybody who expect Scott Israel to face any charges, let alone see any punishment is going to be sorely disappointed.
Call it a ...... hunch........., but Mr. Israel is immunized against all dangers.
Nuff said
So the warrant link says he was a SRO since 1991(!). I hate to be that guy, but the hard charging face shooters generally aren't SROs. Kind of the opposite end of the spectrum. I'm not well versed in Florida statues or case law, but its an interesting case and will ripple though the LE community for sure.
The f'd up part is that the standard nightmare you have in or after the academy is that something prevents you from taking action. IE your gun wont shoot etc. Not that you're an indecisive c*nt who can't act. I think he was a guy who was coddled in a position where people are taken care of. The public imagines that SROs are all the hard charging face shooting dip-lip killers, but this isn't the reality. Sadly. This is a guy who strolled into work and didn't have much to worry about. Until that day.
Back in my day you got your ass whipped before you were allowed to go to FTO.
Anybody who expect Scott Israel to face any charges, let alone see any punishment is going to be sorely disappointed.
Call it a ...... hunch........., but Mr. Israel is immunized against all dangers.
Nuff said
I don't think anyone is expecting charges against Israel. At least he was very publicly fired.
I heard on the radio today, I think by a father, that he hid behind a concrete barrier of some sort for 45 minutes. Is that true?
No. The timeline showed that this despicable, worthless, PODS, maggot, asshole cowered in safety while children were slaughtered and the murderer walked away for 48 minutes, not 45.
I hope those children and all of their dead ancestors haunt this man's every waking minute and never allow him a moment's peace, day or night, for the rest of his miserable shitty life.
wow, that's bad. I honestly have not followed this too well. I really don't know what the various people are supposed to do and who is in charge when and all that. I had no idea he was laying low for the better part of an hour. ... and then go on TV and smile about it as though he was doing exactly what he was supposed to.
I think he's going to be found guilty on something. I guess he better hope his jury of peers are not LEOs and parents.
I had thought he was doing questionable things for maybe a few minutes that could be reasoned as confusion and wrong choices, but 48 minutes, that would seem to have to be purposeful. I mean if he had run around to the wrong building or something but 48 minutes of cover. That's hard to justify.
He sure trained a lot. Sounds like he's a professional student and smiling glad-hander.
wow, that's bad. I honestly have not followed this too well. I really don't know what the various people are supposed to do and who is in charge when and all that. I had no idea he was laying low for the better part of an hour. ... and then go on TV and smile about it as though he was doing exactly what he was supposed to.
I think he's going to be found guilty on something. I guess he better hope his jury of peers are not LEOs and parents.
I had thought he was doing questionable things for maybe a few minutes that could be reasoned as confusion and wrong choices, but 48 minutes, that would seem to have to be purposeful. I mean if he had run around to the wrong building or something but 48 minutes of cover. That's hard to justify.
He sure trained a lot. Sounds like he's a professional student and smiling glad-hander.
Did you not see this post? The most comprehensive report I have seen. Everyone needs to see that to fully appreciate the compete and total cluster fu%# that was that event from top to bottom and in between:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?212099-Parkland-Event-THE-comprehensive-report&highlight=parkland
wow, that's bad.That's hard to justify.
Really bad. There is no way to justify even one minute of hiding in fear for the person whose sole duty was the safety of those children. If the secretary at the front desk hid under her desk, I could understand that. This guy? No excuse. No hint of the beginning of the benefit of a doubt of an excuse. That coward deserves no leniency, forgiveness, understanding, or kindness of any kind. The only person that deserves worse than him is the lower than dirt at the bottom of a septic tank, poor excuse for a human being, that did the shooting in the first place. And even that is questionable. The shooter is clearly a deranged mentally ill lunatic. Not forgivable, but understandable. This guy is a straight up coward that chose to keep himself safe while listening to innocent children die in close proximity and standing there cowering with the means to stop the mad man in his hand.
My money still says Peterson would have been Johnny on the Spot if some bystander got wind of what was going on and rolled up armed to deal with Cruz.
I think it's too much to ask him to trade his life for other people's children.
Ar any rate, the lawyers say he'll walk because he had no duty to try to protect anybody.
What's also interesting is that 2 or 3 other sheriff deputies showed up, and took up positions in the parking lot. When the city police appeared, they said "what the hell is going on" and went into the school pronto.
I think it's too much to ask him to trade his life for other people's children.
Ar any rate, the lawyers say he'll walk because he had no duty to try to protect anybody.
What's also interesting is that 2 or 3 other sheriff deputies showed up, and took up positions in the parking lot. When the city police appeared, they said "what the hell is going on" and went into the school pronto.
Nobody expected him to trade his life. He was expected to immediately engage and stop the murderer. He was trained to do so, and that was the whole point of him being there.
I think it's too much to ask him to trade his life for other people's children.
Ar any rate, the lawyers say he'll walk because he had no duty to try to protect anybody.
What's also interesting is that 2 or 3 other sheriff deputies showed up, and took up positions in the parking lot. When the city police appeared, they said "what the hell is going on" and went into the school pronto.
He took taxpayer money on the premise he would for 25 years. That makes him a major league fraud.
I think it's too much to ask him to trade his life for other people's children.
Ar any rate, the lawyers say he'll walk because he had no duty to try to protect anybody.
What's also interesting is that 2 or 3 other sheriff deputies showed up, and took up positions in the parking lot. When the city police appeared, they said "what the hell is going on" and went into the school pronto.
He’s lived his life.
In police work you can do absolutely everything the right way and still die.
They give you a gun for a reason
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.