Police arrest ex-deputy who 'did absolutely nothing to mitigate' Parkland school mass

Commander Wallace · 06-04-19, 09:50 PM

Quote: Broward County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Scot Peterson, 56, was terminated from his position and charged with multiple counts of child neglect on Tuesday after an internal investigation found that he retreated while students were under attack in the February 2018 shooting, that left 17 people dead.

The office announced Peterson’s arrest along with the termination of BSO sergeant Brian Miller. It said both officers had "neglected their duties" in the deadly shooting.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/former-she...opstories.html

The only surprise for me is that it took this long to charge this coward.

Jimbuna · 06-05-19, 05:45 AM

Pretty hard judgement call to make but if the evidence shows he failed to act similarly to other responders then so be it.

Skybird · 06-05-19, 06:00 AM

Takes more than uniform to make a man,
takes more than a pistol and a badge.
Confront your enemies, do not avoid them if you can,
a police officer must act while others run.

not by Sting

Commander Wallace · 06-05-19, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Pretty hard judgement call to make but if the evidence shows he failed to act similarly to other responders then so be it.

I think most feel Differently. Peterson knew there was a least 1 active shooter in the building. Peterson had said in interviews he was waiting for backup. While he waited, more kids were shot and killed.

He was in fact being paid well for protecting those same kids. He failed to do so then lied about it during official inquiries.

My only question is, was he ordered to wait for backup. The fact that he has been charged would seem to indicate that he wasn't.

Aktungbby · 06-05-19, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Pretty hard judgement call to make but if the evidence shows he failed to act similarly to other responders then so be it.

I AGREE; AS A FORMER FEDERAL BLDG SECURITY OFFICER; ATM AND PERSONAL BODYGUARD; THE PUBLIC AND THE CLIENT HAVE CERTAIN EXPECTATIONS. THE SERGEANT SAYS HIS ACTIONS WERE 'IN ACCORD' WITH HIS TRAINING PROTOCOL WHICH IS 'CURRENTLY BEING REVAMPED IN BROWARD COUNTY'. HE DECLARED A CODE RED LOCKDOWN AND ESTABLISHED A PERIMETER..... THE REAL SCAPEGOAT IS HIS PENSION :

Quote:

Scot Peterson, the sheriff’s deputy vilified for failing to confront the Parkland school shooter, has begun receiving a state pension of $8,702.35 a month. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/br...515-story.html

WHICH WILL BE TAKEN AWAY IF HE IS CONVICTED; PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD NO BUSINESS PERSONALLY ATTACKING HIM PRIOR TO HIS TRIAL http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-bz-florida-school-shooting-scot-peterson-20180223-story.html
ALL THIS IS 'COPYCAT' FROM COLUMBINE 20 YEARS AGO;

Quote:

That's an entirely different tactic than what was used during Columbine. Twenty years ago, police waited for a SWAT team and in those minutes the shooters kept killing. Now, in Colorado, officers are told to go in alone and get the shooter The police response to Columbine was heavily criticized at the time, leading to a drastic change in active shooter incident response nationwide. Immediate action rapid deployment (IARD) tactics replaced scene containment, leading to departments training and equipping personnel for solo officer response. While “Columbine changed everything” is a common refrain, events like the Parkland school shooting show we still have room for improvement in how we secure our schools and respond to active killers on campus.

SO HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE ARRESTED AT COLUMBINE FOR NOT CLOSING WITH SHOOTER?

AS IN ANY ATTACK, TIME AND TERRAIN ARE THE KEY AND THE SHOOTER COUNTS ON A TIME ZONE FOR MAXIMUM DESTRUCTION; THE FIRST RESPONDING OFFICER, WHO HAS ELECTED TO BE IN THIS TRADE AND PROFESSION, THEREFORE BECOMES THE EXPENDIBLE OFFICER (NOT A REAL ISSUE FOR 68 YEAROLDS) IN CLOSING THE TIME-WINDOW IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES....IF HE CAN'T DO THAT HE NEEDS TO SEEK OTHER EMPLOYMENT...NO IMHO ABOUT IT

Platapus · 06-05-19, 04:02 PM

Other than the perjury charge, I am not sure that what he did (didn't) do reaches to the criminal level.

I think the child neglect charges are over the top.

I don't agree with what he did, but being fired from the job and the resulting civil suits should be sufficient.

If they are going to charge Peterson, why not charge the other officers who also did not advance into the building when they arrived. How about the female captain who ordered the police to stay by their vehicles and not advance to building 12? She resigned but where are the charges for her.

At least Peterson was alone, she had multiple officers and she still decided not to advance. If one is guilty why not the other?

Prosecuting this person may set a precedent that will have undesired effects.

If the police know that they can be prosecuted for not taking action and not suffer consequences if they do take action, what is to prevent the police from going in all Rambo when the situation does not warrant it?

We are going to make action happy police even more action happy.

It is very easy to be brave and talk about what we would have done all the while being safely behind a keyboard. A politician even said he would have gone in to the building without a weapon. Easy to say.

This guy was a cop for over 30 years. I bet he has been in a lot of stressful situations and most likely handled himself well.

He was there, we weren't. He did not run away, he did not panic. I would have wanted him to take a more active role and he should have. But failing to take an active role is not the same as breaking the law.

It is important to keep in mind that we know considerably more about what happened in this incident than Peterson could have possibly known at the time.

Hindsight is 20/20. I am sure that Peterson, now could figure out a million things he should have done...If he knew what he now knows.

It is all about what did Peterson know and when did he know it. I have not seen any evidence of malicious intent. He stayed at the scene and radioed what he understood was happening.

Could he have done more? Sure. Should he have done more? Sure. But was what he did/didn't do a crime?

Even if he is a coward (and that has not been established), he was not in the military and even being a coward is not a criminal offense.

I am not yet convinced that what he did was criminal in nature, and other than the perjury charge, I think the other charges are inappropriate.

Rockstar · 06-05-19, 04:47 PM

Ya. hit the nail on the head Platapus, well said.

The officer did not kill those children.

Unfortunately it seems many have in perfect hindsight made their judgment of what exactly he should have done. That's gonna make national news and will have devastating effects on this guy. I think at the very least he should be debriefed and an opportunity to retire with full pension. Given professional direction to help overcome the scenario he lived through and the crap he's gonna hear over media. But I'm afraid even with help, he will quite possibly be tormented for the rest of his life.

I know a fella who on more than one occasion placed his life in jeopardy to rescue others. The pucker factor being so great you couldn't drive a needle up his arse with a mallet, he was that afraid. It's not an easy thing finding the wherewithal to continue when the crap hits the fan and it's just as difficult to make the right decision or live with the ones that weren't.

Platapus · 06-05-19, 05:15 PM

I would not be surprised if this guy ends up committing suicide.

Rockstar · 06-05-19, 06:20 PM

or when no one has a solution.

Skybird · 06-06-19, 05:10 AM

I must disagree. If you place dedicated guards somewhere, these then have a dedicated role and purpose which sets them apart from being ordinary people who may act hesitantly and indifferent - if guards act like this, then they have been ill-choosen. People around them trust in them, think they get help by them, and that they come to the rescue if need arises. Like a fire fighter would have chosen the wrong job if being too afraid of fire as if he would not get paralysed by the sight of it, a guard being paralysed in case of sudden violence, and failing those he was engaged (and paid) to protect, has chosen the wrong job. In case of amok runs, it is an often published consensus assessment that to quickly close in on the attacker and limit his further movement radius, is of the essence. Mount pressure on him. I agree absolutely that such a situation, the sudden outbreak of unexpected, lethal violence around you, is a shocking experience, I have experienced it when I was young and just had finished school, I know hat I talk about there: having a club blowing up twnety meter behind you and then seeing the drama opn the scene unfolding while dealing with your own psychological after-effects, is no pleasurable experience. But guards and police alike should and must be trained to have the mental and psychological stamina to deal with this, and to act nevertheless, and keeping their own reaction time low. In an extreme situation like an amok run, I even go further and say that if somebody is tasked with sentry duty and thus serves as protecting a community around him, he has the obligation to try confronting the attacker and to limit the number of fatalities the attacker can "score" - even if superiors at another place who are not in full understanding of the situation at hand give opposite orders and command him to stay inactive while civilian victims get slaughtered. I do not go as far as to demand that a gguard must sacrifice himself to save somebody else, no, own protection and survival are absolutely valid motives to stop short before self-sacrifice. But he has to try to fight. Just to just reduce any risk to oneself a smuch as possible at the cost of a killing spree around going on, is unacceptable for a guardian. Hell, he is not an ordinary bystander - he is the GUARD...!!!! People trust him, consider themselves being protected and acting on grounds of this assumptions - that in case of need they would find help and best possible protection by him.

A guard is not just decoration, but a function. His functionality defineshiss purpose. A guard is not just a spotter counting the bodies falling. A guard is a GUARD.

Yes, in situations like this officer was in, adrenaline flows like rivers and you are confused, and must face you own fears and instinct for self-preservation, I fully understand that. But you also must overcome these obstacles, and your training that you should have received in preparation for your later job, should have prepared you to do so indeed - or should have sorted you out. I do not say that everybody has what it takes to do this kind of duties. Thats why those who do, deserve respect, because ideally they indeed have what it takes - and then act accordingly where others cannot.

I do not ask guards to commit suicide. But I expect a guard in such a situation to come to try to come the rescue of the victims and protect them as best as he or she can. That what makes a guard a guard.

What this guard did, by all what I have read in the few media report,s equals to no guard being present. Thats the worst performance possible. A guard you cannot rely on, is not worth its money.

Its like this not just with guards, but also with any sort of responsible personnel, for example the crew on a cruise ship. Take for example events of havaries, and the rescued tourists later describe if the crew either did a good job in gettign the visitors off the ship, or failed to do so and rescued themselves first. Media and public opinion take note of these differences, and usually cast crystal-clear moral verdicts on whether or not the crew acted well or not. The crew, from the captain down to the stewart, are no ordinary people aboard the ship like the tourists, they bear responsibility, and this responsibility they have to serve in case of crisis. Officers set up on guard, also have this responsibility. As long as they take the money, they have to live up to this responsibility. Or quit the job.

Bilge_Rat · 06-06-19, 06:05 AM

Well said Platapus, completely agree.

Commander Wallace · 06-06-19, 01:50 PM

I have read the the entries that everyone has posted. With the exception of Skybird, everyone basically feels that that Peterson should be given a free pass.

I had some things to add to this:

The Sheriff's department that Peterson belonged to has military grade weapons and like most local police forces, consider themselves to be paramilitary forces because of their advanced training and use of military grade assault weapons.

If the Sheriff's Department are a Para-military force, Then lets look at how the U.S military views dereliction of Duty.

Quote : Generally, dereliction of duty refers to failure through negligence or obstinacy to perform one's legal or moral duty to a reasonable expectation. ... U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), addresses dereliction of duty within the regulations governing the failure to obey an order or regulation.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/de...-military-law/

Further, the various U.S Law Enforcement code provides Dereliction of Duty by a police officer definitions.

Quote:
Dereliction of duty. (A) No law enforcement officer shall negligently do any of the following: ... (2) Fail to prevent or halt the commission of an offense or to apprehend an offender, when it is in the law enforcement officer's power to do so alone or with available assistance. ( this is for Ohio but is the same standard )

https://law.justia.com/codes/ohio/20...2144-2c1f.html

This is generally considered to be a Misdemeanor B offense. With multiple fatalities involved that may have been prevented, It's anyone's guess how this will play out

So, if in fact Peterson had a duty to act and directed to do so and failed to follow orders, then Peterson should have been charged. I assume, not knowing the facts of the case that the District Attorney's office performed their due Diligence in determining charges were appropriate. 15 months have passed since the Parkland Florida shooting.

As a counterpoint, A Federal Judge has ruled that Peterson had no such duty to protect those same students. A County Judge came to an opposite ruling.

Quote : The Dec. 12 ruling, by Judge Beth Bloom, came on the same day that a county judge, Patti Englander Henning, came to the opposite conclusion. Judge Henning found that Scot Peterson, the armed sheriff’s deputy who heard the gunfire but did not run in and try to stop the attack, did have an obligation to confront Mr. Cruz.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/u...ng-police.html

Peterson is drawing an 8700.00 dollar a month pension. As most of you who have served in the military or police force know and understand, when you put on a uniform, you should expect to be placed in harm's way. The Captain and Executive officers involved in the collision of a U.S Navy Destroyer and commercial ships were also disciplined using a similar standard. Ironically, the owners of the commercial vessels with pay the U.S Navy for damages resulting from the collisions. Peterson, for whatever reason, decided to remain outside the school while the bloody rampage was going on. Those who feel Peterson acted appropriately may feel differently if their child had been senseless murdered while an armed law enforcement officer, paid to protect those same students, failed to act.

I guess we will just have to see how this plays out in court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/u...avoidable.html

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...ald-collision/

Rockstar · 06-06-19, 03:24 PM

There was a failure on so many levels far above this man's pay grade long before that fateful day. I fail to see what good a public hanging will do by targeting of all people the lowest man on the totem pole. I know crap runs downhill but this is ridiculous.
IMO he does not deserve jail nor should he be charged. Simply allow him to retire and live with his decision. IMHO its enough this man will be tormented by this nightmare for the rest of his life.

Platapus · 06-06-19, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

I have read the the entries that everyone has posted. With the exception of Skybird, everyone basically feels that that Peterson should be given a free pass.

I don't see where anyone is saying that he should get a free pass. I, and I think the other posters, feel that he is being over charged.

I absolutely agree that he should no longer be a police officer. I don't agree with his actions, but at the same time, I don't think his actions broke any laws. Tradition, codes of conduct, and even common decency? Sure and probably more. But not laws.

It does seem that the perjury charge is legitimate but I would want to see all of the evidence. The perjury charge is either a Class 2 or Class 3 felony which will take away his pension and most likely any retirement benefits.

He is going to have the snot sued out of him so any quality of life after he gets out of prison will be approximately zero. As I opined before, I would not be surprised if he ends up commuting suicide.

He may end up wishing he could be put in prison for the rest of his life.

He is not getting any free pass. His life will be hell.

about 60 years old
Felony record
No retirement
Savings gone in the lawsuits
Does not even get to live off of the tax payers while in prison

No one is going to hire him. If he does not have family, he will end up in a shelter. A free pass this ain't.

I am not exactly shedding tears over him either.

Commander Wallace · 06-06-19, 05:27 PM

^ Sorry Rockstar, I don't see it. decisions far above his pay grade have nothing to do with this as far as I can tell. Law Officer motto, " to serve and protect ." Peterson served only his own interests that day and protected no one. I doubt his conscience, if he has one, will bother him. Peterson was being paid to protect those kids and did nothing.

To be fair, I can see your point Rockstar and Platapus to varying degrees. Rockstar had said that Peterson has been given a life sentence of regret with regards to his decision not to act. Well, the parents of the kids who were killed have been given a life sentence as well. They will forever grieve and wonder if their kid could have been saved if a coward of a police officer had done what he was well paid to do. With June here, kids the world over are graduating from High School and looking foward to College, Military Service or life in general. These kids that were killed will never see that.

You had mentioned perjury, Platapus so I'm left to wonder what he lied to cover up. The D.A's office apparently feel that charges are justified. As you pointed out, Platapus, we don't know all the facts. I'm sure they will come out when Peterson has his day in court.

This is no doubt a contentious issue with varying opinions. Apparently, 2 judges are also taking opposing viewpoints as well from the links I provided. That being said, i'm not surprised there are differing opinions here as well.

One thing we can all agree on is a number of kids senselessly and tragically lost their lives. I know we are all sorry about that.

06-04-19, 09:50 PM	#1
Commander Wallace Navy Seal Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 5,017 Downloads: 360 Uploads: 0	Police arrest ex-deputy who 'did absolutely nothing to mitigate' Parkland school mass Quote: Broward County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Scot Peterson, 56, was terminated from his position and charged with multiple counts of child neglect on Tuesday after an internal investigation found that he retreated while students were under attack in the February 2018 shooting, that left 17 people dead. The office announced Peterson’s arrest along with the termination of BSO sergeant Brian Miller. It said both officers had "neglected their duties" in the deadly shooting. https://www.yahoo.com/gma/former-she...opstories.html The only surprise for me is that it took this long to charge this coward.

06-05-19, 05:45 AM	#2
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 181,344 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Pretty hard judgement call to make but if the evidence shows he failed to act similarly to other responders then so be it. __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!! GWX3.0 Download Page - Donation/instant access to GWX (Help SubSim)

06-05-19, 06:00 AM	#3
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,547 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	Takes more than uniform to make a man, takes more than a pistol and a badge. Confront your enemies, do not avoid them if you can, a police officer must act while others run. not by Sting __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

06-05-19, 04:02 PM	#6
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 18,972 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Other than the perjury charge, I am not sure that what he did (didn't) do reaches to the criminal level. I think the child neglect charges are over the top. I don't agree with what he did, but being fired from the job and the resulting civil suits should be sufficient. If they are going to charge Peterson, why not charge the other officers who also did not advance into the building when they arrived. How about the female captain who ordered the police to stay by their vehicles and not advance to building 12? She resigned but where are the charges for her. At least Peterson was alone, she had multiple officers and she still decided not to advance. If one is guilty why not the other? Prosecuting this person may set a precedent that will have undesired effects. If the police know that they can be prosecuted for not taking action and not suffer consequences if they do take action, what is to prevent the police from going in all Rambo when the situation does not warrant it? We are going to make action happy police even more action happy. It is very easy to be brave and talk about what we would have done all the while being safely behind a keyboard. A politician even said he would have gone in to the building without a weapon. Easy to say. This guy was a cop for over 30 years. I bet he has been in a lot of stressful situations and most likely handled himself well. He was there, we weren't. He did not run away, he did not panic. I would have wanted him to take a more active role and he should have. But failing to take an active role is not the same as breaking the law. It is important to keep in mind that we know considerably more about what happened in this incident than Peterson could have possibly known at the time. Hindsight is 20/20. I am sure that Peterson, now could figure out a million things he should have done...If he knew what he now knows. It is all about what did Peterson know and when did he know it. I have not seen any evidence of malicious intent. He stayed at the scene and radioed what he understood was happening. Could he have done more? Sure. Should he have done more? Sure. But was what he did/didn't do a crime? Even if he is a coward (and that has not been established), he was not in the military and even being a coward is not a criminal offense. I am not yet convinced that what he did was criminal in nature, and other than the perjury charge, I think the other charges are inappropriate. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right. Last edited by Platapus; 06-05-19 at 05:16 PM.

06-05-19, 04:47 PM	#7
Rockstar Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 11,865 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Ya. hit the nail on the head Platapus, well said. The officer did not kill those children. Unfortunately it seems many have in perfect hindsight made their judgment of what exactly he should have done. That's gonna make national news and will have devastating effects on this guy. I think at the very least he should be debriefed and an opportunity to retire with full pension. Given professional direction to help overcome the scenario he lived through and the crap he's gonna hear over media. But I'm afraid even with help, he will quite possibly be tormented for the rest of his life. I know a fella who on more than one occasion placed his life in jeopardy to rescue others. The pucker factor being so great you couldn't drive a needle up his arse with a mallet, he was that afraid. It's not an easy thing finding the wherewithal to continue when the crap hits the fan and it's just as difficult to make the right decision or live with the ones that weren't. __________________ Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 06-05-19 at 06:25 PM.

06-05-19, 05:15 PM	#8
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 18,972 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	I would not be surprised if this guy ends up committing suicide. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

06-05-19, 06:20 PM	#9
Rockstar Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 11,865 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	or when no one has a solution. __________________ Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

06-06-19, 05:10 AM	#10
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,547 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	I must disagree. If you place dedicated guards somewhere, these then have a dedicated role and purpose which sets them apart from being ordinary people who may act hesitantly and indifferent - if guards act like this, then they have been ill-choosen. People around them trust in them, think they get help by them, and that they come to the rescue if need arises. Like a fire fighter would have chosen the wrong job if being too afraid of fire as if he would not get paralysed by the sight of it, a guard being paralysed in case of sudden violence, and failing those he was engaged (and paid) to protect, has chosen the wrong job. In case of amok runs, it is an often published consensus assessment that to quickly close in on the attacker and limit his further movement radius, is of the essence. Mount pressure on him. I agree absolutely that such a situation, the sudden outbreak of unexpected, lethal violence around you, is a shocking experience, I have experienced it when I was young and just had finished school, I know hat I talk about there: having a club blowing up twnety meter behind you and then seeing the drama opn the scene unfolding while dealing with your own psychological after-effects, is no pleasurable experience. But guards and police alike should and must be trained to have the mental and psychological stamina to deal with this, and to act nevertheless, and keeping their own reaction time low. In an extreme situation like an amok run, I even go further and say that if somebody is tasked with sentry duty and thus serves as protecting a community around him, he has the obligation to try confronting the attacker and to limit the number of fatalities the attacker can "score" - even if superiors at another place who are not in full understanding of the situation at hand give opposite orders and command him to stay inactive while civilian victims get slaughtered. I do not go as far as to demand that a gguard must sacrifice himself to save somebody else, no, own protection and survival are absolutely valid motives to stop short before self-sacrifice. But he has to try to fight. Just to just reduce any risk to oneself a smuch as possible at the cost of a killing spree around going on, is unacceptable for a guardian. Hell, he is not an ordinary bystander - he is the GUARD...!!!! People trust him, consider themselves being protected and acting on grounds of this assumptions - that in case of need they would find help and best possible protection by him. A guard is not just decoration, but a function. His functionality defineshiss purpose. A guard is not just a spotter counting the bodies falling. A guard is a GUARD. Yes, in situations like this officer was in, adrenaline flows like rivers and you are confused, and must face you own fears and instinct for self-preservation, I fully understand that. But you also must overcome these obstacles, and your training that you should have received in preparation for your later job, should have prepared you to do so indeed - or should have sorted you out. I do not say that everybody has what it takes to do this kind of duties. Thats why those who do, deserve respect, because ideally they indeed have what it takes - and then act accordingly where others cannot. I do not ask guards to commit suicide. But I expect a guard in such a situation to come to try to come the rescue of the victims and protect them as best as he or she can. That what makes a guard a guard. What this guard did, by all what I have read in the few media report,s equals to no guard being present. Thats the worst performance possible. A guard you cannot rely on, is not worth its money. Its like this not just with guards, but also with any sort of responsible personnel, for example the crew on a cruise ship. Take for example events of havaries, and the rescued tourists later describe if the crew either did a good job in gettign the visitors off the ship, or failed to do so and rescued themselves first. Media and public opinion take note of these differences, and usually cast crystal-clear moral verdicts on whether or not the crew acted well or not. The crew, from the captain down to the stewart, are no ordinary people aboard the ship like the tourists, they bear responsibility, and this responsibility they have to serve in case of crisis. Officers set up on guard, also have this responsibility. As long as they take the money, they have to live up to this responsibility. Or quit the job. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 06-06-19 at 08:31 AM.

06-06-19, 06:05 AM	#11
Bilge_Rat Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: standing watch... Posts: 3,793 Downloads: 344 Uploads: 0	Well said Platapus, completely agree. __________________

06-06-19, 01:50 PM	#12
Commander Wallace Navy Seal Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 5,017 Downloads: 360 Uploads: 0	I have read the the entries that everyone has posted. With the exception of Skybird, everyone basically feels that that Peterson should be given a free pass. I had some things to add to this: The Sheriff's department that Peterson belonged to has military grade weapons and like most local police forces, consider themselves to be paramilitary forces because of their advanced training and use of military grade assault weapons. If the Sheriff's Department are a Para-military force, Then lets look at how the U.S military views dereliction of Duty. Quote : Generally, dereliction of duty refers to failure through negligence or obstinacy to perform one's legal or moral duty to a reasonable expectation. ... U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), addresses dereliction of duty within the regulations governing the failure to obey an order or regulation. https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/de...-military-law/ Further, the various U.S Law Enforcement code provides Dereliction of Duty by a police officer definitions. Quote: Dereliction of duty. (A) No law enforcement officer shall negligently do any of the following: ... (2) Fail to prevent or halt the commission of an offense or to apprehend an offender, when it is in the law enforcement officer's power to do so alone or with available assistance. ( this is for Ohio but is the same standard ) https://law.justia.com/codes/ohio/20...2144-2c1f.html This is generally considered to be a Misdemeanor B offense. With multiple fatalities involved that may have been prevented, It's anyone's guess how this will play out So, if in fact Peterson had a duty to act and directed to do so and failed to follow orders, then Peterson should have been charged. I assume, not knowing the facts of the case that the District Attorney's office performed their due Diligence in determining charges were appropriate. 15 months have passed since the Parkland Florida shooting. As a counterpoint, A Federal Judge has ruled that Peterson had no such duty to protect those same students. A County Judge came to an opposite ruling. Quote : The Dec. 12 ruling, by Judge Beth Bloom, came on the same day that a county judge, Patti Englander Henning, came to the opposite conclusion. Judge Henning found that Scot Peterson, the armed sheriff’s deputy who heard the gunfire but did not run in and try to stop the attack, did have an obligation to confront Mr. Cruz. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/u...ng-police.html Peterson is drawing an 8700.00 dollar a month pension. As most of you who have served in the military or police force know and understand, when you put on a uniform, you should expect to be placed in harm's way. The Captain and Executive officers involved in the collision of a U.S Navy Destroyer and commercial ships were also disciplined using a similar standard. Ironically, the owners of the commercial vessels with pay the U.S Navy for damages resulting from the collisions. Peterson, for whatever reason, decided to remain outside the school while the bloody rampage was going on. Those who feel Peterson acted appropriately may feel differently if their child had been senseless murdered while an armed law enforcement officer, paid to protect those same students, failed to act. I guess we will just have to see how this plays out in court. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/u...avoidable.html https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...ald-collision/ Last edited by Commander Wallace; 06-06-19 at 02:10 PM.

06-06-19, 03:24 PM	#13
Rockstar Rear Admiral Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 11,865 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	There was a failure on so many levels far above this man's pay grade long before that fateful day. I fail to see what good a public hanging will do by targeting of all people the lowest man on the totem pole. I know crap runs downhill but this is ridiculous. IMO he does not deserve jail nor should he be charged. Simply allow him to retire and live with his decision. IMHO its enough this man will be tormented by this nightmare for the rest of his life. __________________ Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time.

06-06-19, 05:27 PM	#15
Commander Wallace Navy Seal Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 5,017 Downloads: 360 Uploads: 0	^ Sorry Rockstar, I don't see it. decisions far above his pay grade have nothing to do with this as far as I can tell. Law Officer motto, " to serve and protect ." Peterson served only his own interests that day and protected no one. I doubt his conscience, if he has one, will bother him. Peterson was being paid to protect those kids and did nothing. To be fair, I can see your point Rockstar and Platapus to varying degrees. Rockstar had said that Peterson has been given a life sentence of regret with regards to his decision not to act. Well, the parents of the kids who were killed have been given a life sentence as well. They will forever grieve and wonder if their kid could have been saved if a coward of a police officer had done what he was well paid to do. With June here, kids the world over are graduating from High School and looking foward to College, Military Service or life in general. These kids that were killed will never see that. You had mentioned perjury, Platapus so I'm left to wonder what he lied to cover up. The D.A's office apparently feel that charges are justified. As you pointed out, Platapus, we don't know all the facts. I'm sure they will come out when Peterson has his day in court. This is no doubt a contentious issue with varying opinions. Apparently, 2 judges are also taking opposing viewpoints as well from the links I provided. That being said, i'm not surprised there are differing opinions here as well. One thing we can all agree on is a number of kids senselessly and tragically lost their lives. I know we are all sorry about that.