Parkland deputy charged..

[ECU Pirates]

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


I don’t see any conviction happening. There is no duty to protect. Being a pussy is not illegal.

 

[ProgSpear]

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


I don’t see any conviction happening. There is no duty to protect. Being a pussy is not illegal.

Yeah? What if the mob insists?

On the other hand, that would support the idea of the good guy with a gun thing, which as we all know is a complete and utter fallacy according to progressive dogma.

EDT: The publicity afforded to the whole "no duty to protect" situation could be a huge boost to the 2A cause; the educational opportunity is huge...

 

[kev74]

He faces seven counts of neglect of a child, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury.

I don't know enough about Florida law to have an opinion about if the neglect or negligence are an overreach, but the perjury should be pretty clear cut.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Fuck this POS. Ok yes he didnt have a duty to protect but for example neither did these 2 dudes

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Scott peterson seems to be a bad name to have. Scott Peterson - Wikipedia

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Moral of the story: Don't let anyone named Scot/Scott Peterson watch your kids or your wife.

 

[Blimey]

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


I don’t see any conviction happening. There is no duty to protect. Being a pussy is not illegal.

Unfortunately I think you're right, I don't see a conviction. I hope I'm wrong because fuck this guy. I really believe 99% of cops would not done what he did.

 

[Saltwater60]

While I think he’s a POS I don’t think he should be charged. This opens a dangerous gate and cops to be charged on both side of the fence. You over reached charged, oh you didn’t do enough your charges. Don’t like it.

 

[Airborneguy]

Fuck this guy, but as others have said, I can’t see where they’re going to prove criminality except maybe on the perjury charge.

He breached a civil/social/job contract, clearly, but criminal?

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

In the military, dereliction of duty is deliberate or accidental failure to do what you should do as part of your job.

In the health care and related fields, mandated reporters are legally required to ensure a report is made when abuse is observed or suspected.

What legally enforceable charge is there for cops who don't do their job? None, according to the Supreme Court. Apparently cops are above the law by this standard.

 

[Airborneguy]

In the military, dereliction of duty is deliberate or accidental failure to do what you should do as part of your job.

In the health care and related fields, mandated reporters are legally required to ensure a report is made when abuse is observed or suspected.

What legally enforceable charge is there for cops who don't do their job? None, according to the Supreme Court. Apparently cops are above the law by this standard.

1. The military has its own set of laws. No comparison.

2. At least in NY, cops are mandatory reporters as well. I have personally known cops who've been severely punished for failing to properly report child abuse and/or maltreatment.

3. The Supreme Court case you (and many) reference does not absolve cops of all responsibility, no matter how many times you (or anyone else) tries to use it as a smear. It simply states that the police do not have a duty to protect any individual person, which is correct.

As to this coward, unless Florida's child endangerment laws are written much differently than ours here, I don't see how those charges stick. Whatever they have for perjury is a different story and may very well be valid. But simply not "going in" in a situation like this... I don't see how that rises to the level of criminality, but we shall see I guess.

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

OK, I'll play.

1. The military has its own set of laws. No comparison.

And cops don't? They can drive around with out a seatbelt. They can talk on their cell phone. They can speed.

The point is, the military has a specific law that applies to not doing their job.

2. At least in NY, cops are mandatory reporters as well. I have personally known cops who've been severely punished for failing to properly report child abuse and/or maltreatment.

Yes, and he "reported". But that wasn't his primary role.

3. The Supreme Court case you (and many) reference does not absolve cops of all responsibility, no matter how many times you (or anyone else) tries to use it as a smear. It simply states that the police do not have a duty to protect any individual person, which is correct.

Which is my point exactly. There is no law that forces a cop to do his primary duty. Protect and serve. How is this point incorrect?

As to this coward, unless Florida's child endangerment laws are written much differently than ours here, I don't see how those charges stick. Whatever they have for perjury is a different story and may very well be valid. But simply not "going in" in a situation like this... I don't see how that rises to the level of criminality, but we shall see I guess.

That I can't answer either. Up to a judge and/or jury, at this point.

 

[GOPerfect]

OK, I'll play.



And cops don't? They can drive around with out a seatbelt. They can talk on their cell phone. They can speed.

All this is true for firemen as well. Huh, you would have thought?

 

[GOPerfect]

OK, I'll play.



And cops don't? They can drive around with out a seatbelt. They can talk on their cell phone. They can speed.

The point is, the military has a specific law that applies to not doing their job.



Yes, and he "reported". But that wasn't his primary role.



Which is my point exactly. There is no law that forces a cop to do his primary duty. Protect and serve. How is this point incorrect?



That I can't answer either. Up to a judge and/or jury, at this point.

Really not trying to be a dick, much incorrect stated...


Law enforcement is the group of people tasked with the prevention of crime and apprehension of offenders. As part of law enforcement, police officers have four major responsibilities: enforcing laws, preventing crimes, responding to emergencies, and providing support services.

Primary responsibility is not to protect and serve.

The Military has laws, rules and regulations that dictate every aspects of life. Cops and police departments have guidelines, but still follow the laws and regulations passed by the elected officials.


As for this asshole, I am curious, we as a people should be able to charge someone with cowardice?

 

[Pissed Off Patriot]

Really not trying to be a dick, much incorrect stated...

I understand. I'm just trying to see if we can come to an agreement.

Law enforcement is the group of people tasked with the prevention of crime and apprehension of offenders.

Primary responsibility is not to protect and serve.

Prevention of crime sounds a lot like protect.

Apprehension of offenders sounds a lot like serve (the public).

As for this asshole, I am curious, we as a people should be able to charge someone with cowardice?

No. I think he should be charged with not doing his job, that you so succinctly stated above is a LEO's responsibility. Namely, prevention of crime (i.e. a mass shooting occurring under his nose) and apprehension of offenders (i.e. confronting the shooter).

Now tell me, where is the law for this?

 

[GOPerfect]

I understand. I'm just trying to see if we can come to an agreement.



Prevention of crime sounds a lot like protect.

Apprehension of offenders sounds a lot like serve (the public).



No. I think he should be charged with not doing his job, that you so succinctly stated above is a LEO's responsibility. Namely, prevention of crime (i.e. a mass shooting occurring under his nose) and apprehension of offenders (i.e. confronting the shooter).

Now tell me, where is the law for this?

One good thing, we all agree that this guy is and was an absolute piece of shit.

I get what you are saying about protecting the public. I take my responsibilities pretty seriously. Some crimes, yes they are designed to protect the public. Our elected elite as well as judges are a bunch of idiots. The courts tell us that the police do not have a full obligation to protect the public, then they basically tell us that we cannot protect ourselves. Go figure...

I cannot in good conscience say anything to assist this man and his lack of actions. I do not know Florida law, I do not know if the charges will stick to this guy. I hope so, he is lower than pond scum!

 

[Saltwater60]

Really not trying to be a dick, much incorrect stated...


Law enforcement is the group of people tasked with the prevention of crime and apprehension of offenders. As part of law enforcement, police officers have four major responsibilities: enforcing laws, preventing crimes, responding to emergencies, and providing support services.

Primary responsibility is not to protect and serve.

The Military has laws, rules and regulations that dictate every aspects of life. Cops and police departments have guidelines, but still follow the laws and regulations passed by the elected officials.


As for this asshole, I am curious, we as a people should be able to charge someone with cowardice?

If the police departments primary goal is not to serve and protect then they should remove it as a slogan for the side of their cars, web sites, and other things. Not trying to be a jerk I just remember seeing to serve and protect on sides of police cars a lot.
First and foremost the sheriff changed the policy on must enter an active shooter situation. If anyone should be charged it’s the head guy IMO.

 

[Airborneguy]

And cops don't? They can drive around with out a seatbelt. They can talk on their cell phone. They can speed.

The point is, the military has a specific law that applies to not doing their job.

No, we don't. We have exemptions within the very same laws that exist for everyone, and only while on-duty for the most part. The military has an entirely different set of enforceable criminal laws.

Which is my point exactly. There is no law that forces a cop to do his primary duty. Protect and serve. How is this point incorrect?

Maybe there should be, I don't know. For whatever reasons, after nearly 200 years municipal police forces being the norm, we don't have such laws so apparently legal minds far above ours don't see this as part of the equation. Maybe it wouldn't be deemed legal to force someone to do a dangerous job at risk of criminal penalties. I don't know if there are any precedents out there for such a law. Like I said, I guess we will see now.

 

[Airborneguy]

Our policy is to immediately enter an active shooter situation as well, even if alone. But POLICY is not LAW. If I chickened out, breaking that policy, I would be fired, but I cannot be charged criminally. No different than any other of the departments various regulations.

While the VTL exempts police officers from wearing seatbelts, my department does not, so there is a penalty for doing so and monetarily it is far worse than a seatbelt traffic ticket. I almost lost 10 days for that once, the equivalent of 2 WEEKS PAY.

It would be stupid for society to expect cops to protect every individual person. How would such a standard apply to legitimate "failures"? It is not reasonable to set such a standard, which is what the Supreme Court stated, nothing more. If a department can be shown to have basically ignored a crime/emergency, you better believe that there will be civil consequences, it happens all the time for even minor issues. Legitimate, though unfortunate failures of the systems in place to protect any individual cannot be used to hold cops (or any emergency responders) accountable.

The example we use is a "jumper". As long as all of the procedures are followed, if the jumper ends up falling, how can we hold the cops accountable? If the negotiating cop said, "fuck it, just jump asshole," or walked away, that would be a different story and liability would be assessed.

 

[Truebeliever]

In the military, dereliction of duty is deliberate or accidental failure to do what you should do as part of your job.

In the health care and related fields, mandated reporters are legally required to ensure a report is made when abuse is observed or suspected.

What legally enforceable charge is there for cops who don't do their job? None, according to the Supreme Court. Apparently cops are above the law by this standard.

Cops are also have to report child abuse as well.

There is the charge in NY of official misconduct as well

 

[ECU Pirates]

This is a political move by the da I would guess. Must be an election year.

 

[Target]

31 police officers were sued over the Orlando nightclub shooting for not entering the building and violating civil rights.
Seems that they detained everyone exiting the place ( which seems logical as they had no idea how many were involved in the attack).
The off duty cop/ security was sued for abandoning his post which allowed the shooter to exit , go to his car ,rearm and reenter the club.

 

[Celt]

Screw this guy, Im glad hes being called on the carpet. I get police dont have a duty to protect individuals, but he had a duty to protect the school and its occupants. Now, Im not sure if I think he should face criminal charges, but Id be ok with him not collecting a tax payers paid pension for not doing his job.

 

[spat]

He had no legal duty to intervene ( and shouldn't IMHO). So he shouldn't be prosecuted for anything except maybe the perjury if it's real.

He did however have a moral duty, and that failure should follow him for the rest of his life. He shouldn't ever be given a position of authority or any job with serious consequences for failure ever again.

 

[Celt]

He had no legal duty to intervene ( and shouldn't IMHO). So he shouldn't be prosecuted for anything except maybe the perjury if it's real.

He did however have a moral duty, and that failure should follow him for the rest of his life. He shouldn't ever be given a position of authority or any job with serious consequences for failure ever again.

Im wrapping my head around this so bear with me.

I am on board with how police officers have no duty to protect individuals, legally. Afterall, this is all the more reason why private citizens should be armed and trained to protect themselves, and there should be no infringements.

However, I dont get how someone is assigned to protect a school, and does nothing while kids are being killed is not a dereliction of duty. His duty is to the public at large (not the individual). And in this situation "the public" was being attacked in his presence. The duties of the Broward County SROs say specifically that they are there to protect the people in the school. I suppose the only way out of this, legally, is that I cant see a PD requiring a LEO put himself in a situation that he would be likely to be killed.

Of course there is the moral side of this and he fails terribly in that regard. And he also violates the oath he took upon becoming a sworn police officer.

Here is a link for Fl SRO information that also lists duties of an SRO.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjACegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2iN7i8AXKewcUltL_rrE-4

AND I attached a screenshot of the page. See line g.

 

[GOPerfect]

Im wrapping my head around this so bear with me.

I am on board with how police officers have no duty to protect individuals, legally. Afterall, this is all the more reason why private citizens should be armed and trained to protect themselves, and there should be no infringements.

However, I dont get how someone is assigned to protect a school, and does nothing while kids are being killed is not a dereliction of duty. His duty is to the public at large (not the individual). And in this situation "the public" was being attacked in his presence. The duties of the Broward County SROs say specifically that they are there to protect the people in the school. I suppose the only way out of this, legally, is that I cant see a PD requiring a LEO put himself in a situation that he would be likely to be killed.

Of course there is the moral side of this and he fails terribly in that regard. And he also violates the oath he took upon becoming a sworn police officer.

Here is a link for Fl SRO information that also lists duties of an SRO.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjACegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2iN7i8AXKewcUltL_rrE-4

AND I attached a screenshot of the page. See line g. View attachment 46791

All correct. My hate for this man and his kind run deep.

Is it, his actions and lack thereof, a criminal charge. That is the big question. Cannot wait for the courts answer!

 

[Airborneguy]

Exactly. Celt you are correct in everything you say, but is it criminal? I don’t see how that’s possible but the courts will decide now. Bail was set so at least one judge so far saw merit in some of the charges.

 

[Saltwater60]

They can do all the training in the world and you may or may not overcome your natural instinct. Some it’s to freeze some it’s to act.

 

[kev74]

Something else to consider is that (if I have this correct) the Supreme Court decisions stated the police are not responsible for protecting the individual. The Coward of Broward, Peterson, turned his back on the whole population of students at the school. I think there is a difference there.

Regardless, if the prosecution can show that either through his job description or directive from a higher-up, that one of his duties was to protect the students, either the student body as a whole or individual students, and if they can show negligence in failing to follow proper SOP, he will be convicted.

Failing that, they'll nail him on the perjury charge.

 

[Rocpo]

Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia