SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - Police arrest ex-deputy who 'did absolutely nothing to mitigate' Parkland school mass

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/

06-06-19, 01:50 PM	#1
Commander Wallace Navy Seal Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 5,307 Downloads: 366 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.