BREAKING: Disgraced Broward Deputy Scot Peterson Arrested

Scot Peterson Parkland broward coward

This Feb. 14, 2018 frame from security video provided by the Broward County Sheriff’s Office shows deputy Scot Peterson, right, outside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. The video released Thursday, March 15, shows Peterson going toward the high school building while a gunman massacred 17 students and staff members, but stayed outside with his handgun drawn. (Courtesy of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office via AP)

Scot Peterson was the armed school resource officer on duty at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida when a student opened fire inside the building more than a year ago. Instead of challenging the shooter and saving lives, he stayed outside the building, listening to the sound of gunfire and screams while 17 students and teachers died.

Now Peterson has been arrested for his cowardly neglect. According to WDAE . . .

Following an investigation by FDLE, former Broward Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson, 56, was arrested in Broward County today on seven counts of neglect of a child and three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury. The arrest comes after a 15-month investigation into the actions of law enforcement following the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting.

“The FDLE investigation shows former Deputy Peterson did absolutely nothing to mitigate the MSD shooting that killed 17 children, teachers and staff and injured 17 others,” said FDLE Commissioner Rick Swearingen. “There can be no excuse for his complete inaction and no question that his inaction cost lives.”

“I was pleased the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in conjunction with the State Attorney’s Office conducted a thorough investigation that yielded the arrest of Scot Peterson. All the facts related to Mr. Peterson’s failure to act during the MSD massacre clearly warranted both termination of employment and criminal charges. It’s never too late for accountability and justice,” Sheriff Gregory Tony said.

Peterson is also being sued by a group of Parkland survivors and parents for his failure to act, though similar suits have been dismissed.

Peterson was just one of a number of ill-trained, incompetent officers under the command of former Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel. Israel was removed from his position for cause when Florida Governor Ron DeSantis took office.

comments

  1. avatar jason braswell says:

    Hmm. I think the guy is a waste and shouldn’t be getting a free ride for life (his pension) for failing the one time he was really needed, *but* I’m not entirely sure how I feel about criminal charges here. I can’t really articulate a good reason why yet, but it just sets off my alarms a bit.

    1. avatar LKB says:

      The child neglect charges may be a stretch (don’t know the Florida law in question), but a perjury trap is probably their hole card here.

      My guess is that he’ll cop a plea.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        I hope Florida has something on the books to cancel his cushy retirement for committing a crime while in uniform…

        1. avatar Nigel the expat says:

          Not sure how this will play out given the two cases that have precedent for ‘no specific duty to protect’. Not sure how that will play with the neglect charges which may have other duties to protect that were specifically enumerated for a school resource officer.

        2. avatar Ranger Rick says:

          He’s going to be shitting some decent legal fees now.

        3. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          We have an update –

          Just heard on the radio his bond is $102,000, so he’s on the hook for $10,200, 10 percent being the standard bail-bondsman ‘fee’ here in Florida.

          The NY Times confirms the $102,000 :

          https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/04/us/parkland-scot-peterson.html#commentsContainer

          Good…

        4. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Local news is reporting the same thing, plus he’ll need $100,000 or so to get a lawyers interest. I see financial {if nothing else) pain in the cowards future..

        5. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “… plus he’ll need $100,000 or so to get a lawyers interest.”

          Good, bankrupt his sorry ass…

        6. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “Not sure how this will play out given the two cases that have precedent for ‘no specific duty to protect’.”

          Perhaps there is a department policy of conviction of a felony crime while on duty making him ineligible to draw a pension?

        7. avatar Roymond says:

          Nigel, the :no specific duty to protect” doesn’t cover officers who are assigned a duty specifically to protect, and that’s exactly what an armed SRO is for. He can’t argue that he had no duty to protect when the job he signed up for was precisely to protect.

        8. avatar MAGA says:

          It may come out of his rear end all at once, considering what happens to cops in prison.

      2. avatar Ian in Transit says:

        I’m pretty sure willful neglect is covered by the concept of parentis locus. Schools and SRO’s have assumed the authority to hand out punishment for activities and social media posts that kids do outside of school hours. You bet your ass they should be held accountable for neglect when the kids are actually in their care.

        Looking at it another way . . . if a pilot or a rail worker does their job negligently in a way that COULD have caused injury/death they can be (and often are) fired, fined, possibly jailed even if nobody was hurt. There is no reason peace officers should be exempt from that standard.

        1. avatar Ian in Transit says:

          Loco Parentis . . . stupid missing edit button. Will be interesting to see what the courts say about the conflict between having no responsibility to protect the minor children specifically put in your care to protect. Case precedence on both sides of the argument.

    2. avatar John Boch says:

      Let’s hope that sucker of bleep loses his gold-plated pension.

      Too bad he didn’t suck start his pistol. The good news is there is always rope around.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “Too bad he didn’t suck start his pistol.”

        That’s still an option he may consider, considering his impending legal fees.

        And he just might, if he has a wife he doesen’t want to see homeless… 🙂

        1. avatar doesky2 says:

          IIRC his pension is something like 100K$ a year.
          He’s gonna make out OK if he doesn’t get convicted.
          At worse he’ll have to have his retiremnet in Pompano Beach instead of Boca Raton.

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      I’m not entirely sure how I feel about criminal charges here. I can’t really articulate a good reason why yet, but it just sets off my alarms a bit.

      If you take the kings shilling, then you march to the sound of the cannon.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        LOL. Perfect.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        Except there’s no king here, and there is a big difference between military and civilian law. People complain about the militarization of police, I would argue that when you start to mix the legal footing of each you are committing much more to ‘militarization’ than letting some podunk department drive a ridiculously expensive to maintain armored vehicle in parades.

        1. avatar John in AK says:

          Despite my personal feelings, this is a ridiculous case to bring in a criminal setting, and one that rightly deserves to be tossed rapidly by a judge. Further, the prosecutors bringing the charges should be heavily sanctioned, as they should know full well that any such charges are specious and unConstitutional.

          All case law, and common sense, are on Peterson’s side.

          He was NOT a ‘caregiver’ in the legal sense of the word; He was not assigned to provide care to a specific person, nor was he given any greater responsibility than that of any other police officer–to ‘protect’ the public at large, not one individiual, and no contract between him and a specific person or person existed that would have legally required him to act in any more than a general sense–which he did, although his actions were insufficient morally. As he had no specific contract with anyone at all, his actions fall under the ‘no specific duty to protect’ decisions of numerous courts.

          Although the public has some expectation, valid or not, that police officers and fire-fighters may have to risk their lives to protect the lives of the public at large, it’s just not reasonable to expect a mere government employee–whether it be police officer, fire-fighter, garbageman, or dog-catcher–to risk their own lives for a paycheck and the promise of a pension.

          Accountants won’t do it. Doctors won’t do it. Librarians won’t do it. Schoolteachers aren’t expected to do it. Assemblymen surely won’t do it.

          Simply put, you CANNOT pay a government employee enough to die for you. If you think that you CAN do so, then I’d like to have you state the figure of money for which you’d give up your life, your family, and your future.

          I suspect that it’d be just slightly higher than a cop’s yearly salary, or the cumulative value of his pension.

          Now that we have a figure to work with, are you willing to pay that to every cop and fireman on the force? Do you think that by paying each of them that much that they’d be more willing to die for you, or some abstract citizen? Would you?

          I think not.

          You can go ahead and start the flaming. I’m a retired cop, with 22 years of service. I did take the risks, did run to the sound of gunfire, did go into schools alone with active gunmen, and didn’t end up dying for it. Looking back on it, I’m fine with that, in the ethical and moral sense. But I never was paid enough to make it worth my while to actually die, because dying is awfully permanent and although you’re all dressed up, there’s no place to go, and you end up looking a mess.

          You couldn’t pay me enough.

        2. avatar bob says:

          John,

          I agree and would also like to add.
          The big thing being over looked here also is that not everybody is a born hero or killer.
          Freezing up and not participating in a firefight happens to 95% of the people involved.
          We can’t hold anyone criminally liable for being afraid.
          Realistically, most people talk a big game but when your life hits the line, reality kicks in hard.

          I would even go as far as to say its wrong to morally shame the guy if that is what actually happened, if he did it out of sheer selfishness or laziness that would be one thing, but if he was just too afraid, well, that must makes him a normal human.

        3. avatar WARFAB says:

          I’m familiar with some of the legal precedents and as much as I’d like to see Peterson prosecuted, I doubt it will happen.

          That said, does anyone have a duty to protect our kids in a public school? The fact that nobody seems to have any legal liability for the safety of kids in school is at least part of the reason that most public schools still haven’t gotten serious about security to prevent shootings. What message does it send to parents that they’re sending their kids to a place that has no legal responsibility to protect their kids? What does it say to criminals and would be school shooters when they see that nobody is required to stop them if they want to attack a school?

          Right now we’re dealing with random psychos and not taking it seriously. Are we going to keep pointing fingers and not taking school security seriously after a terrorist group targets a school and streams it all live on Facebook? This is messed up.

    4. avatar HellBilly says:

      Don’t feel bad for him. Cowardice and desertion used to be a thing punishable by death, even here in America, all the way up until the 1960s. Whatever he gets, wether it’s just a loss of benifits or some jail time is far less then that.

      1. avatar John in AK says:

        Please explain to which branch of the United States Armed Forces the Broward County Sheriff’s Department belongs.

        What? It doesn’t? It’s not really an active military branch? Does that mean that its employees are just that–county government employees, who get paid a certain amount every hour or so to do certain things, one of which is most certainly NOT ‘dying’ for The Cause? Do county government employee contracts often include the provision that employees may have to die to collect their paychecks, or is that just ‘understood’?

        Would you work for a private company that wrote that into your contract? “Note: 7-11 Employees may be required to give up their lives to protect the Frostee Machine.”

        Once more: You CANNOT pay a mere employee enough to die for your organization. You just can’t.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          But the government can pay pennies on the dollar to military members with that same requirement? One is ok and the other isn’t? Are both not government employees? Aren’t both suppose to enforce the will of the government? Just because one fights wars in distant lands and the other is suppose to fight the criminal war here in our own streets doesn’t mean that there is but little distinction between the two. One being that of higher starting pay in one vs the other. All of that aside there is no excuse for a coward who swore to uphold the law to stand by while the very law they swore to uphold is being broken in one of the worst ways possible. If the law allows this than let the record show that the law isn’t always right.

        2. avatar John in AK says:

          Frankly, they aren’t different.

          It is no more just or moral to demand that a soldier die than for anyone else. This was especially true with compulsory service, which was basically slavery under another name. It is no less true today with voluntary service, although in the case of one volunteering to possibly risk death, the volunteer does so willingly–although he really, truly doesn’t actually believe that HE is going to die–it’s always the other guy who does that.

          I repeat: There is no amount of money that one could possibly be paid that will compensate for one’s death.

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          Was this now ex deputy sheriff forced under loss of life to choose law enforcement as his chosen career? If not than he chose that line of work voluntarily of his own accord and has to accept the bad with the good just as a military member would have to. Ask any law enforcement or military member that does not lie to themselves if there’s a possibility of losing their life in their chosen line of work. Right or wrong it is what it is and no there is no amount of money that can compensate for one’s life. The simple fact of the matter is regardless of the reason this guy was wrong in his inaction and should be held accountable. Standing by while people are being killed in his position is indeed wrong and is and should be a crime. I know for a fact that I couldn’t stand there and do nothing while listening to the mayhem that was going on inside that school. I couldn’t live with myself and the shame of knowing that I could have tried to do something and didn’t.

        4. avatar WARFAB says:

          The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.

          – George S. Patton

          Which branch of the military is paying soldiers to die? Put their lives on the line with no guarantee of survival sure, but if we’re ‘paying soldier to die’ we’re doing it wrong.

        5. avatar No One Special says:

          Paying soldiers to die? No paying soldiers to fight sometimes in a war that nobody wants or needs. Neither of which is the point. The point is there are inherent risks in either profession and lying to one’s self going in doesn’t change the fact. Lying to one’s self also doesn’t and shouldn’t absolve the responsibility of the duty that was willfully taken on. Maybe it’s easier to not hold people responsible and accountable these days. Especially if the chance is there for the tables to be turned at some point. Then it can be said this has been done before and it was ok then so it must be ok now. Problem is it’s not ok now and it won’t be ok at any point in the future. There are some things that will always be morally and ethically wrong.

        6. avatar Chris Tanner says:

          I agree to that LEO are not paid to be a caregiver. A law officer is like any other normal human being, meaning they can get hurt or lose their life while doing their duties. But Peterson signed up for the job, that people expect them to protect the security of the kids for the school. If he is NOT willing to sacrifice.. then DO NOT take the job, Give the spot to someone else is willing to help and protect the kids for the school. If this coward officer know is so unwilling, he should not take the job and just there to collect for his golden pension. How do you feel, if you personally hire a bodyguard, but in the moment comes, this person would just say, hey.. you don’t pay me enough to die for you. sorry.. you are on your own…

        7. avatar No One Special says:

          Yep no one should be able to take a job that is known to have inherent risks and then not do the job when those risks present themselves. I’ll also say this along with many many other reasons is why my wife and I home school our daughter. No one will protect my child like I will. Not to mention that 80%+ of what children learn is at home anyway. Buying my child curriculum and paying taxes for the worthless public education around here burns my hide but the benefit outweighs the cost. Teaching my child at home also keeps me out of jail since I don’t have to deal with some leftwing politicized screwball teacher or school board member trying to brainwash my child with their crap.

        8. avatar John in AK says:

          Yes, without doubt NOT interceding to save the lives of unarmed innocents when one IS armed and trained in how to act, at least in some aggressive manner, when confronted by a murderer IS ethically and morally reprehensible.

          But it’s not criminal. Nor can it ever be. It is impossible to demand that one give up his life, which is ostensibly of equal value to any other, to save another human life, no matter how much one is getting paid. VOLUNTEERING to do so is another story.

        9. avatar No One Special says:

          Why isn’t willful acceptance of the job volunteering enough? If anyone can honestly say they took a job in law enforcement not knowing that they were indeed possibly putting their life on the line probably shouldn’t have been in the line of work to begin with. Now going in with the lie that it will never happen isn’t as bad but dang close. I went in the military at 17 and I had no dilusions about what I was doing and what could possibly happen because of what I was doing. I also accepted that because I chose to join that I might be asked to do things I might otherwise not want to do. I join and said I would do the job I asked for which shouldn’t and doesn’t allow me to say no when those situations present themselves. It is not mine to reason why but mine to do or die. It simply is about duty, honor, and courage. It’s about completing the mission no matter what because I said I would. I was raised that a man is only as good as his word. This deputy said he would do the job when he accepted it and when the situation became less than ideal he went back on his word. Why, because he was afraid? We are all susceptible to fear. It’s what we do in the face of fear that makes the difference.

    5. avatar HuntingtonGuy says:

      Is this is what accountability for him looks like then so be it. There are some things that cannot be excused, cowardice by someone sworn to protect that results in the deaths of anyone, certainly children, cannot go unanswered.

    6. avatar Seizure doc says:

      The idiot supervising captain and the self serving moron general (Scott Israel with more stars than general MacArthur) should be sitting with this guy. If my kid had been lying dead in that school there would have been a different sort of justice.
      The authorities failed at EVERY level on this case. Typical of our useless justice system that only the guy at the bottom faces criminal charges.
      My uneasy feeling is not for officer Peterson but for the political hacks who are NEVER held accountable.

      1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

        Yes. Why is Israel not included in this? I guess they only needed one scapegoat.

      2. avatar WARFAB says:

        Agreed. Israel just released a statement completely throwing Peterson under the bus. After all the BS that Israel spewed during the CNN “town hall” that blamed Dana Loesch and the NRA despite the fact that he likely knew exactly what went wrong with his department’s response to the shooter, you’d think he would keep his incompetent pie hole shut.

    7. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Petersen is the scapegoat for the continued failure of “gun free zones.”
      He had 3 minutes 45 seconds to murder and maim without resistance.
      Until teachers and staff are ALLOWED to be armed, murders will continue..
      Security guards and law enforcement will always be too late.

    8. avatar Ralph Sinamon says:

      Try this then. He WAS a cop and under cop rules, which is limiting. He was ALSO at the school, in the capacity of a PROTECTOR…..an ARMED PROTECTOR! He had the capacity to act, he had the authority to act AND he was getting paid specifically to protect! He needs to pay back ALL of the money he fraudulently took as pay. He needs to be dishonorably discharged and jailed. Hiring cowards and PAYING them to protect his charges is, apparently, a non-sequiter!

    9. avatar Paul says:

      There are two kinds of people when gunfire erupts. There are those who run from the gunfire, and there are those who run toward the gunfire. If you happen to be one of the former, you have no business wearing a uniform and carrying a gun. In that case, you are a fraud.

      1. avatar Peter says:

        Paul, Are you dyslexic ?

  2. avatar George from Alaska says:

    About f’ing time!

  3. avatar LKB says:

    Wow. This is extraordinary.

    I have to wonder whether this might have some impact on the civil suits against the county.

    1. avatar Wonderingoutloud says:

      How does this not fall under the Warren vs. DC “no duty to protect” precedent?

  4. avatar troutbum5 says:

    Wow, that’s a surprise. Hopefully justice will ultimately be served. Cowardly douchebag.

    1. avatar Rene Douche' says:

      Hey it takes a special breed to be a douche bag. I mean, think of the nasty conditions you are forced to work under. Your clientele are almost always cunts except for the occasional asshole. You may experience some personal pride when people compare you to presidents and world leaders but that is only temporary. And no matter how well you do your job, some dick always comes along and messes it up again.
      You couldn’t pay me enough to be a douche bag.

  5. avatar Stateisevil says:

    The FL GOP has already punished the citizenry. Why not?

  6. avatar Anonymous says:

    It won’t hold water.

    The supreme court has ruled police don’t have a duty to save/protect you.

    1. avatar HellBilly says:

      That could be over turned, imagine what that would entail…

      1. avatar SK88 says:

        There is no way in hell they overturn something they have repeatedly ruled upon going back to 1855 with South V. Maryland and as recently as 2005. Disregarding Stare Decisis they would still not open the can of worms by letting citizens sue the government for failure to protect. Unless you die while under arrest and it was very, very clearly the cops fault, then you have no case.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          “Unless you die while under arrest and it was very, very clearly the cops fault…”

          It’s interesting to ponder. I was kicking this around with a legal eagle friend of mine a few weeks ago: At what point can you claim legitimate self-defense against a police officer who’s abusing his authority?

          It’s a tough hill to climb but if the cop’s enough of a douchebag it can actually be done under some specific circumstances.

        2. avatar HellBilly says:

          Strych9 there’s actually a SCOTUS ruling on it, defendant was attacked by police in his home without any justification and he killed an officer in self defense. SCOTUS ruled in his favor. I cannot remember the name of the case. It was a long time ago, however.

      2. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        It takes nearly action of God Almighty to get the Supreme Court of Lawyers in Drag to overturn one of their prior decisions.

        Remember: Dredd Scott hasn’t been overturned – except by the US Congress and the states by Constitutional Amendment.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Remember: Dredd Scott hasn’t been overturned – except by the US Congress and the states by Constitutional Amendment.

          BOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          That there, folks, is a TRUTH BOMB of epic Biblical proportions!

          (Wow! That is one of the most profound things that I have ever read!)

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          Just because admitting wrong means swallowing pride and most don’t want to do it doesn’t make the wrong any less wrong. All that should do is cast great doubt on the wrong doer in the future. If there isn’t great doubt about the government and justice system of this country by most, that is more of the problem.

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      This isn’t a civil suit, it’s a criminal case.

      When you sue government for failing to protect you, government can tell you to pound sand.

      When you fail to provide for children under your care and they die, government can prosecute you.
      It’ll be interesting to see if the legal system agrees that this event meets the legal definition of criminal neglect.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        This isn’t a civil suit, it’s a criminal case.

        When you sue government for failing to protect you, government can tell you to pound sand.

        I don’t see how it matters. If they prosecute this guy for not going in gun’s blazing, then they can prosecute another police officer for not running into a convenient store to neutralize a armed robber. It’s never going to happen. Doesn’t matter if a citizen leverages a civil suit, or the community leverages criminal charge of “neglect.” They will appeal and the court will strike the lower court down. The bottom line is… the police have a duty to apprehend suspects. Not to protect the public. It has always been this way. Florida citizens are appearing to just now figure this out.

        This whole setting looks like theater to me. It’s a show to make the citizens feel good. It will not hold water.

        1. avatar James Tate says:

          The process will be the punishment.

          Unless of coarse he is still covered by police union lawyers which wouldn’t surprise me.

        2. avatar John in AK says:

          That’s now this is supposed to work. Is it?

          Since when do we want prosecutions to be punishment? If a prosecutor knows going in that he’s going to lose, and prosecutes anyway just to ‘punish’ someone that he doesn’t like, isn’t that fraud? Prosecutorial misconduct? Malfeasance? Unlawful prosecution?

          Our system of Law does not permit such things, nor should it. If something is illegal, or civil liability can be found, then so be it; Punish for the crime committed upon conviction, or assess the civil penalty after a legitimate trial. The idea of impoverishing someone just to punish them by wrongfully prosecuting them, or suving them civilly, knowing that the whole process is grossly unfair in a legal and moral sense, is grotesque, and I hope that you are not supporting it.

          It could be you some day.

      2. avatar Anonymous says:

        When you fail to provide for children under your care and they die, government can prosecute you.

        They can’t prosecute him for “neglect” for not running in guns blazing to save people. The court will strike it down. If the court doesn’t strike it down… there will be no cops. No one will want that job. It makes them liable for not saving people. It will be struck down. Watch.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          We are going to watch him get pounded. That’s what we are going to watch!

    3. avatar Chuck U says:

      Maybe it’s about time this gets changed……..

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Where do you draw the line?

        Suppose there are 5 robbers in a bank armed with full autos. They keep killing hostages. There is one police officer outside the bank. If he doesn’t run in there and stop the bad guys, then he could be charged with “neglect.”

        It’s not going to happen, ever. This is a show for our appeasement. It will go nowhere at all.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          They are going to draw the line at standing by sitting on your hands and pissing your pants while some 19 yr old punk goes into a school and slaughters 17 kids while you collect a $1700 a week paycheck to keep them safe. That is where we are going to draw the line.

        2. avatar John in AK says:

          A simple question for you:

          Have you ever been in a similar circumstance, or one even remotely similar? If so, what did you do? IF not, then you have no IDEA, really, what you WOULD do.

          You only have the hope, perhaps, of what you THINK that you would do, a rosy, noble picture of you rushing in and saving The Day, then riding off into the sunset with your best gal by your side.

          But, you don’t KNOW.

          Now, pontificate some more about what someone else did when faced with a REAL crisis, and tell us all how you would’ve done it better.

          From behind your keyboard.

        3. avatar Ad Astra says:

          Hey john we’re waiting for a list of all your citations for valor.

    4. avatar LKB says:

      The perjury count is what I suspect they will ultimately get him on, assuming he doesn’t cop a plea. (And who knows, maybe as part of a pleas deal they’ll get him to roll on ex-Sheriff Israel on the shenanigans surrounding the downgrading of charges against Israel’s son.)

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        How many times has dispatch told someone to wait for backup?

        This case will go nowhere at all.

        All he needs to do is claim he had a reasonable assumption that he was massively outgunned and was waiting for backup. Case dismissed.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          What about the back up that arrived and this coward held back?

        2. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          He HAD backup, two cops from another jurisdiction were prevented by Peterson from entering the building…

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          He HAD backup, two cops from another jurisdiction were prevented by Peterson from entering the building…

          That’s not the story I read. Source?

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/it-was-my-job-and-i-didnt-find-him-stoneman-douglas-resource-officer-remains-haunted-by-massacre/2018/06/04/796f1c16-679d-11e8-9e38-24e693b38637_story.html?utm_term=.f880c9eb1d92

          The bottom line is… he waited for SWAT. He acted only when SWAT arrived.
          This case is going no where.

        4. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Source? Me I watched the video of his fat ass climb into the golf cart then moments later another cop car pulled up and Peterson motioned the cops to take cover behind a car in the parking lot. It’s ALL that ran on local news in Fl for two days….

        5. avatar No One Special says:

          Sounds like you don’t want it to go anywhere. Seems like everyone else here wants it to whether they think it will or not. Even if it does only bankrupt the coward at least that’s something. Which means it didn’t just stall out. There are military veterans that kill themselves every day that are better than this coward. This coward should do the families of the victims a favor and swallow his gun. Save the tax payers from prosecuting his worthless hide.

    5. avatar BradP says:

      Special relationship doctrine is a legal principle that makes the state liable for the harm inflicted on the individual by a third party provided that the state has assumed control over the individual which is sufficient to trigger an affirmative duty to provide protection to that individual. The special relationship doctrine is an exception to the general principle that government actors are not responsible for private acts of violence.
      https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/special-relationship-doctrine/

      The state established a special relationship by mandating school attendance (with a few exceptions) and therefore has a duty to protect while kids are in school.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        The state established a special relationship by mandating school attendance (with a few exceptions) and therefore has a duty to protect while kids are in school.

        Just like the Gov has claimed responsibility for all the previous school shootings???? Come on man.

    6. avatar will says:

      Yes its a slippery slope. If he is poorly trained then who is responsible for putting personal out to do jobs they are not qualified to do. are they guilty. What were the requirements. Did he take a oath to defend children. Is this the same as cowardice on the battle field. Remember PVT. Eddie Slovik. He got a firing squad.
      Where do we then draw a line. As a person with CCP would I be then required to intervene to save people I do not know, just because i happen to be in that location. At Walmart is my duty to stop a shooter or to retreat to safety. If some one breaks into my home we must be sure we are in fear of losing our life before using deadly force. Did you try to retreat the police want to know. Just because someone in Walmart is shooting and I hear the shots it does not mean my life is in danger.

      One thing he should never be hired for any type of job where there is an expectation is to defend the public with his life if necessary.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        If a person in any of those scenarios hindered backupnofficers in any way they would be charged. SP used his badge , uniform and position as SRO to direct cops to stay back. That cost lives.
        It’s too bad the little shit wasn’t shot in the school or on the street instead of being arrested.

    7. avatar Geoff says:

      It is agreed that the SC has ruled in that manner. What is interesting to see if the SC would apply that same logic to minors in danger such as the parkland school shooting , since minors can’t very well defend themselves with the same abilities/capabilities adults have access to.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Every police officer in the US will be watching this case… and then the case will go nowhere. Guaranteed. If it goes anywhere at all, it will go to a higher court which will strike it down.

        1. avatar Gimme a Break says:

          I guess most guys here want speeding citations everyday. That’s pretty much the logical extent of what they are advocating for. The indictment is a shiny object pure and simple, won’t even go to trial. The sense of pleasantly surprised enthusiasm displayed here is exactly the intended affect nothing more. In three too six months they’ll 250 comments bitching over the dismissal.

    8. avatar Ralph Sinamon says:

      Unless you have a cop with you 24/7, a cop cannot protect you. In order for you to need protecting, you are already being treated as a victim. Three actors have to be present….you…the prey! Him…..the predator……AND the cop! It’s up to you to not get caught in the cross-fire!

  7. avatar crndl says:

    he’s a piece of raw meat being thrown to the wolves, but what about those higher up the food chain?

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Such as the school board and executives getting bonuses for reporting year on year reductions in crime committed by students, in direct collusion with (former) sheriff Israel?

      1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        Yea, them.

  8. avatar Truckman says:

    he is getting what he deserves the charges is because he did not live up to his sworn duties of protection of the kid in that school .He let them be killed and others be wounded while stayed outside when he took the job to protect those people even at the cost of his own and he neglected that duty therefore he is charged with child neglect

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      He was looking after what was important to him. His hide, his career, and his pension.

  9. avatar S R says:

    I don’t think it’s fair that only he is being arrested and not the former sheriff.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Sheriff Dipstick wasn’t on scene. He was derelict in many ways though criminal charges might be a stretch.

  10. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    This won’t stick. There’s plenty of case law establishing that police do not have a duty to protect any specific individual. This is just red meat for the pro-2A crowd, as will be evidenced by the approving whooping and hollering in here. They get your support, whike this goes nowhere and Florida continues to erode your RKBA.

    There is enough in the law and regulations to fire him and strip him of his pension, I’d expect, but not to prosecute him criminally. Same goes for the ludicrous civil suit strategy. The guy is a broken man and virtually unemployable at this point. Every time I see a “BREAKING” here in reference to him, I expect the story to report him having committed suicide.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “There is enough in the law and regulations to fire him and strip him of his pension, I’d expect, but not to prosecute him criminally.”

      Good, him drawing a cushy pension for his cowardice is an outrage on its own…

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        The pension is the worst part imho.

    2. avatar Forrest says:

      I would agree with you completely if he hadn’t committed perjury during the investigation. Had he come out and said “I took this job because I thought it would be easy and I’d never actually need to protect people. I was a coward when it counted. I’m sorry.” He would be fine, legally.

      But Florida has to Florida, so he got overcharged and will wind up going free as a result.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “But Florida has to Florida, so he got overcharged and will wind up going free as a result.”

        Don’t count on that result.

        The outrage over his cowardice here in Florida is universal fully bi-partisan…

    3. avatar MaddMaxx says:

      I’m a “PRO 2-A” crowd guy and I actually agree that what is going on here is politically motivated.. Should this asshole be drawing an $8,700.00 monthly pension check? No, he’s a coward he let that shithead run amok killing and wounding children at will and he should not be rewarded with over $104,000 a year for the rest of his life. If any one should be sitting in jail tonight it’s Scott Israel. While Peterson did nothing to mitigate the shooting and failed to investigate the source of the shooting AND prevented other responding officers from entering the building much of the blame for his inaction falls right on Israel’s shoulders. I don’t believe anything will come from the neglect charges but perjury is pretty cut and dry, There is activity underway to strip his pension so If he doesn’t kill himself (something that must be prevented at any cost) he will need to get a job doing something until he is eligible for his Social Security.. This guy is a scumbag and whether he is required to protect or not will be debated by folks above my pay grade but that is exactly what he signed up for when he took the position of SRO, that was his one and ONLY responsibility in that job..

    4. avatar huntmaster says:

      This isn’t about any specific individual. This is about an entire school full of kids and staff.

  11. avatar No One Special says:

    Now the big question, will he actually do time and will the coward now ex sheriff be metaphorically strung up with him? I can say I honestly hope so but given the world we live in I seriously doubt it.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      Actual time, doubtful. His wallet likely will be drained, and then some…

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Bankrupt and then some is at least something but I have to say not enough in my opinion. Essentially maybe not by law but in my mind he is culpable as an accomplice to murder and should be charged as such. Doing nothing in this case is just as bad as the criminal act itself in my opinion.

      2. avatar doesky2 says:

        I’d bet the police union has to cover his lawyer expenses.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          This is going to bankrupt even them.

  12. avatar Sean G./The Rookie says:

    It would be interesting to know the details of the perjury charge.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Me thinks the camera contradicted his version of events on an official report.

  13. avatar ro says:

    I don’t know…does protect and serve mean die in the process….if so then maybe cops should not shoot ever until they are shot at instead of shooting when they get a feeling they are in imminent danger

    question….who are they placating with this criminal action….seems political to me and not well thought out by anyone. How come no charges for anyone who hired this guy or poorly screened him or trained him….

    1. avatar Jim from LI says:

      You can’t “train” courage into a person. Either they have it or they don’t, and it may take years before you find out what they’re made of.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Exactly! “Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.” John Wayne

        Fear is deadly, not just to the person afraid but others that are affected by their actions or lack thereof.

        1. avatar frank speak says:

          meanwhile teachers inside were doing their best to protect the kids under their charge…often at great cost to themselves…the solution is obvious……

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          Yep arm teachers so they can have a real fighting chance. If memory serves Florida has already passed a law allowing that very thing. I say cudos to them for having the courage to take that step. The more armed good guys makes things better all the way around. It should actually take more wind out of the antigunners sails.

  14. avatar ozzallos says:

    ” ill-trained ”

    No. In the Skills vs Values equasion, this is definitely a values related deficiency. I doubt being “ill-trained” had anything to do with it.

  15. avatar Jim from LI says:

    I’m not defending this coward but I don’t see the charges sticking. A good lawyer can do a lot with the word “reasonable” and Peterson was not a “caregiver”. The law wasn’t written to cover this situation. But it’s OK, let him stew in this for a while, hopefully the legal expenses will bankrupt him.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      His lawyers are gonna have a tough time seating a jury sympathetic to his side of the story.

      He is universally *hated* in Florida…

      1. avatar Jim from LI says:

        Change of venue? Bench trial?

        1. avatar GS650G says:

          They would need to move it to NJ.

  16. avatar billy-bob says:

    Perhaps they should have started with this instead of jumping to more asinine regulations against the civil rights of the law abiding. But hey, can’t let a crisis go to waste, or find a republican with a spine in Florida.

  17. avatar The Huscarl says:

    A step in the right direction. However, I won’t be happy until both he and the sheriff are both hung. Or shot by firing squad. If I’m not mistaken, cowardice before the enemy can carry the death penalty in the military and these two are stellar candidates for identical justice.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      This is a perfect example of what happens when administrators are filling jobs that should be filled with operators.

  18. avatar enuf says:

    Well, it’s a start anyway. Plenty of others deserving punishment of a criminal nature.

    To think this guy was documented as bragging about how was the schools protector. Makes me wanna puke.

  19. avatar GS650G says:

    What goes around comes around. Karma is a bitch. Now if we can get that pension stopped we’ll have some justice.

  20. avatar Alan says:

    His being charged and arrested are things of beauty, to say nothing of coming as a surprise. Of course, it remains to see how the case proceeds.

  21. Each state needs a cop watch militia.
    You tube is filled with stories about crooked and killer cops.
    Local justice may be the best.

    1. avatar Ban wave coming says:

      Yeah. Add a bunch of wannabe cop militia on power trips for vigilante justice, with no accountability or judicial process. That sounds great.

    2. avatar joefoam says:

      Yet you’ll note that all legislation regarding gun control exempts them like they are saints.

    3. avatar Texican says:

      Maybe each state just needs a militia and should get rid of police altogether. Probably work better. Maybe keep an unarmed Sheriff and a few deputies and if they need guns call the militia. I bet crime would go down fast!

      1. avatar Ban wave coming says:

        Except everyone’s too fat and lazy to serve in a militia these days, and the kind of people you get in a militia aren’t exactly who you want enforcing law. After the militia accidentally shoots some innocent people the state will start regulating them just like the police and they’ll just morph back into police.

      2. avatar George Washington says:

        Yes, in a SANE world this is exactly what we need … BUT…. We live under a tyranny and that idea puts the power in the hands of the population…. GOVERNMENT “EDUCATED IDIOTS” WON’T ALLOW THAT FOR ONE SECOND!!!
        Which is why a SHTF scenario is the best thing that could happen to this country .. IT’S TIME TO TAKE THE COUNTRY BACK FROM THE BOURGEOIS AND USE OUR 2A FOR WHAT IT WAS MEANT FOR 😉

  22. avatar former water walker says:

    Meh…he’ll possibly lose his pension. Or not. Something about Scot/Scott Peterson’s. What about the criminal comedy of errors that let the Cruz boy stay around,buy an AR and not get incarcerated after 39(!) altercation’s? Or the RINO governor or a myriad of other scum including Israel?!?

    1. avatar Ing says:

      The rot spreads wide and deep.

  23. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    This is going to be a club to beat the antis with either way which is amusing in its own right. Either he had no duty to protect those children or he was negligent in protecting them which means the police are at times unreliable. Either one is not a good look tbh.

  24. avatar joefoam says:

    As noted above in other comments, he is just fresh meat to be thrown at the parents to satisfy them. The higher ups (sheriff, school board, school administration) are the ones who shielded the shooter so the statistics looked good and they could get some cash, and are ultimately responsible for putting all the students at risk and are the ones who should be tossed out on their ears and prosecuted.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Maybe there are more indictments to come?

  25. avatar strych9 says:

    I have no idea how Florida law deals with this, but I will say that when the state can come after you for your kid’s playing hooky then it’s only fair that you can go after the state when they allow your kids to die a preventable death while in care of the state which forced you to put them in said care.

    If you can force my kid to attend your sub-par school then at least I should be able to legally fuck you if I don’t get my kid back alive when it’s clearly the fault of the state that the kid is dead. Maybe that’s not the law but it fucking well should be.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      I really doubt he’s gonna skate on this one. His best bet would have been for his smart lawyers to tap-dance for a jury.

      He is so universally hated down here I seriously doubt his lawyers want to risk him taking it to trial.

      But, we’ll just have to see…

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        They’ll have to empanel the jury only carrying flaming torches and pitchforks. It’s the prospective jurors carrying nooses and rubber tyres with cans of gasoline are the ones who will be rejected.

  26. avatar Mac Baldwin says:

    People need to consider this the next time they vote down a proposed milage increase to pay for better training and equipment for police officers. They put their lives on the line and even lose many of the freedoms we take for granted every day 24/7. It’s getting harder and harder to find qualified staffing for these positions, there are many more lucrative jobs with less stress and less responsibility.

    1. avatar The Huscarl says:

      Meh. I personally believe being a cop is currently unethical in and of itself. Their service and protection isn’t worth the freedoms they take away through the laws on the books. Between property taxes, civil asset forfeiture and red flag laws, property rights no longer exist. Because the cops refuse to intervene against Antifa, riots break out and free speech is a dangerous activity. There’s more I can list but I’m short on time.

      Granted, it’s not the cops making the decisions to eliminate our freedoms (that’s mostly politicians) but the elimination of our freedoms is only possible because the cops follow their orders. As far as I can see, the only good cop is one that resigns his badge and finds a new line of work.

    2. avatar Jim from LI says:

      Better training and equipment? You can buy courage? I thought only the Wizard could give you that. So if the taxpayers were willing to pay a little more Deputy Peterson could have been issued a pair of balls?

  27. avatar User1 says:

    Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into this or that town and spend a year there and do business and make a profit.” You do not know about tomorrow. What is your life like? For you are a puff of smoke that appears for a short time and then vanishes. You ought to say instead, “If the Lord is willing, then we will live and do this or that.” But as it is, you boast about your arrogant plans. All such boasting is evil. So whoever knows what is good to do and does not do it is guilty of sin.

  28. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “BREAKING: Disgraced Broward Deputy Scot Peterson Arrested”

    Good, he should be tarred and feathered, held in public stocks for 30days then run out of town on a rail…I hope they fry this cowardly bastard…

  29. avatar JohnnyL says:

    The Broward Coward !!

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      He’ll forever be known as “The Coward of the County”.

  30. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

    Well, it’s about time! Now if only the charges stick, and he’s actually convicted… that would make my day! (Hey, I can dream, can’t I?) As others have said, they’ll likely only convict on perjury, not the endangerment charges.

    Otherwise I’m in full agreement with strych, above: “I have no idea how Florida law deals with this, but I will say that when the state can come after you for your kid’s playing hooky then it’s only fair that you can go after the state when they allow your kids to die a preventable death while in care of the state which forced you to put them in said care.

    If you can force my kid to attend your sub-par school then at least I should be able to legally fuck you if I don’t get my kid back alive when it’s clearly the fault of the state that the kid is dead. Maybe that’s not the law but it fucking well should be.

    Amen, brother!

  31. avatar William Ashbless says:

    There are two Supreme Court decisions that decided the police have no obligation or duty to protect, As much as I want to see him be held to account-he shouldn’t face criminal charges.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      This is a good thing no matter what happens.

      The government school system can haul parents up on criminal charges for not sending kids to school, practically owns kids while there, and even punishes them for what they do outside school. A conviction here would slam home the point that government and the people in it damn well better live up to the responsibilities that come with their power over people’s lives.

      And if nothing comes of the criminal charges — as will probably happen — it’ll be a harsh and much needed illustration of the lies we’ve all been told about how we should just let the government protect us.

    2. avatar LKB says:

      And how, precisely, does that line of precedent apply to a perjury count? (Those cases deal with civil liability, BTW.)

      The child endangerment count may indeed be a stretch (will depend on the Florida law in question), but I suspect the perjury count is their firewall.

    3. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Simply not relevant.

  32. avatar David in MA says:

    This guy may very well walk, as I understand it, a previous supreme court ruling is that cops do not have to protect anyone.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Simply not relevant.

  33. avatar jbob says:

    How about arresting the FBI agents that failed in their due diligence where Cruz was concerned or the school counselors and school officials that also failed. This guy is low hanging fruit and they’re stringing him out as the sacrificial lamb when there were people who make real decisions that failed to act.

  34. avatar George Washington says:

    Hold on here… I’m gonna play DEVIL’S ADVOCATE here for a minute…

    DID he actually know it was just one shooter in the building? If not, isn’t there a possibility you might want to FALL BACK AND WAIT FOR BACKUP in an instance such as this?

    I’m NOT a police officer, nor do I play one on TV, but let me know why this wouldn’t be the protocol…. REMEMBER YOU DON’T KNOW HOW MANY SHOOTERS THEIR ARE, ALL YOU HEAR IS MULTIPLE GUNSHOTS AND CHAOS IS REINING….

    I WANT to think I would at least open the door/not hide…. But I’m not sure if I would’ve WENT IN TO THAT SITUATION ALONE!!!!

    1. avatar Heywood says:

      How does it feel to be a yellow bellied coward?

      1. avatar George Washington says:

        Fuck off…. I’M NOT A POLICE OFFICER, DIP SHIT

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          The real George Washington would have went in.

      2. avatar Retired and tired says:

        To all the armchair warriors out there: It is easy to be brave with another man’s blood. You must know exactly what you would have done if in Peterson’s place, perhaps even putting John Wayne’s heroics to shame? This is not to say Peterson wasn’t responsible for the death of innocents. I simply wish to note you might wait until after the thunder of guns is pointed at you before proclaiming his cowardice and implying your personal bravery.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          Maybe some of those here have been in the line of fire and chose to act instead of sitting and waiting for the smoke to clear. Those that possibly have are not in the spotlight because of their actions. This coward is in the spotlight because he chose to do nothing. He deserves to charged, he deserves the public outcry, and he definitely deserves so much more than what he is currently looking at getting.

        2. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          I know exactly how I would (and have) react(ed) the Marine Corps spent months drilling it into us that it is better to turn into an ambush and return fire than it is to get shot in the back running for a place to hide, enemy is surprised by that action and the dumbass shooting up that school was no battle hardened warrior, one round in HIS direction would have had him shitting himself.. And yes I did have occasion to use that maneuver several times in 1968/69/70 and 71…. and yes I still carry that mindset wherever I go, otherwise why bother to carry a concealed weapon…

        3. avatar No One Special says:

          Like I said some of us possibly have been in this cowards situation and acted differently. Again which is probably why this coward is in the spotlight and those that acted differently aren’t. Some of us might not be armchair warriors but past warriors with the same warrior mindset.

          MaddMaxx, thanks for your service.

        4. avatar Huntmaster says:

          My mother would have went in.

    2. avatar MaddMaxx says:

      He held the backup, at least two officers responded he stopped them from entering the building…

      1. avatar George Washington says:

        Yeah, THAT’S messed up….I guess I didn’t catch that part in the story…
        WITH backup, YOU HAVE TO GO IN!!!!

    3. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      “Hold on here… I’m gonna play DEVIL’S ADVOCATE here for a minute…

      DID he actually know it was just one shooter in the building?”

      Since the Columbine massacre some decades ago the cops are trained to go right in guns blazing before more victims die. He knew that yet he chose to stand down and play it safe because he knew he was only weeks away from being retired. He held back other cops just to cover his ass for the aftermath and charges he knew would be leveled against him.

      He is the lowest form of scum cop there is. If it had been my daughter that was killed because of him I would of made sure I met him later in person. You can guess why.

      1. avatar George Washington says:

        I see . . That does explain it better…
        I’m not a cop, obviously…

    4. avatar GS650G says:

      Still got that stuck caps lock key thing going on.

  35. avatar LOL POTG says:

    You just know that he’s a Republican.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      I honestly don’t know any Republican that would do that. Might be a RINO though.

  36. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    The News Media claimed he could get 98 years in prison. Fat chance, he is a Cop and will get off with a slap on the wrist. If a prescient was set and he went to jail then all other cops would be subject to the same justice when they commit identical crimes and the ruling elite count on the cops to keep them in power so this will never happen.

  37. avatar Mikial says:

    The guy is a coward who stood by while children were murdered because he was too scared to fulfill his oath. He is one of those LEOs who perpetuate the stereotype of a useless waste of skin who can’t be relied on to save a victim. No pension and no free walk.

    1. avatar Jim from LI says:

      Agree 100%. However, law enforcement is not governed by the UCMJ. It’s fun to fantasize about what should be done with him but reality is different. And government pension rules are written by government employees with power who (surprise) made sure those pensions are nearly impossible to lose. He’ll, in NY we’ve had politicians that went to jail for corruption and the law says you can’t touch their pension.

  38. avatar DcChristian says:

    As a teacher, I feel sure that no armed teachers would have failed to act. And the effectiveness of several well-trained, highly motivated armed teachers who are familiar with their building, and are zeroing in on one gunman, should not be discounted. Also, if as was quoted, “It’s never too late for accountability and justice,” then the community should demand that plans for teachers to concealed-carry should be started.

    1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

      Florida just passed a law and Gov signed it allowing vetted, well trained teachers to carry on campus, BUT they left it up to individual school districts whether or not to implement, and I’ll give ONE guess as to what school district was one of the 1st to opt out…

      “The school board voted on a resolution against arming teachers more than a year ago,” Robert Runcie, the superintendent of the Broward school district that includes Stoneman Douglas (MSD), said in a statement also sent to parents.
      “We did that because we want our schools to be safe places for teaching and for learning.”
      To be fair Broward did sign up for the Guardian Program even though there really was no choice since State law now requires at least one “police trained” armed person in every school in the state

  39. avatar James W Crawford says:

    How about prosecuting the Los Vegas police officers who cowered in the hallway of the Mandalay Bay hotel outside of Paddock’s room waiting for the shooting to stop?

    How about the Clackamas County Sheriff taking time to bring in their Mobile Command Post so that they would have an excuse to cower in the parking lot while waiting for the shooting to stop even though they share a parking lot with the Clackamas Town Center shopping mall?

    1. avatar George Washington says:

      I assume it’s a states choice whether to file charges in these instances…I guess Florida is going to start the trend of prosecuting LEO who fail to fulfill their oath, as was said earlier…

    2. avatar User1 says:

      There was at least 3 other “law enforcement’ that hid until the shooting was over and the shooter left. Two of them are on video hiding in the parking lot and the other is on video hiding on the road behind the school. They sat there, listened to gunfire and watched kids run for their lives.

      There are many people who should go to prison for the MSD shooting. I can think of 8 government workers, could name them too. They won’t go to prison because American culture isn’t about responsibility and justice anymore.

  40. avatar Hannibal says:

    This is a very interesting development. I suspect that the charges may and probably should be dropped given long-standing caselaw (and lacking specific laws to the contrary- he’s being charged under some vague statutes, and that’s dangerous). That said, it’s hard to feel bad for this guy. He had a nice cushy job where he was paid for what he might never have to do; then, when that time came, he did jack-all.

  41. avatar Mad Max says:

    So the Broward Coward is the fall guy for a dysfunctional and corrupt government – from Obama’s racist school discipline policies right down to the local officials that blocked Scott Peterson’s formal request to have the shooter committed to a mental institution for evaluation in the years preceding the shooting.

    1. avatar George Washington says:

      EXACTLY….. YOU said it…. This guy (peterson) is a symptom of a SICK government system….
      Just like you stated, the RACIST government of that obama FOOL is what got all this started… EXACTLY why we shouldn’t let LOW IQ individuals make LAWS!!!

  42. avatar Wally1 says:

    Although I agree this guy is a coward, any basic lawyer would have no problem defending this guy. Don’t let emotions dictate law. You have no duty to endanger your life to protect anyone. This also applies to law enforcement, this issue has been already decided by SCOTUS numerous times. police are there to investigate crime, not protect you of your children. . What really sucks is (yes this is terrible), however 11 people are killed by distracted driving and 95 seriously injured every day related to cell phone use. Why are we not going after cell phone companies?. I hope this guy sues the crap out of the county and state for malicious prosecution. If this guy gets prosecuted, good luck getting anyone with a brain going into law enforcement.

  43. avatar Ralph says:

    SCOTUS and lower courts have ruled many times that municipalities and police departments cannot be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a Federal law, for failure to protect. SCOTUS has NEVER ruled that individual cops are immune from State CRIMINAL charges for failure to protect, and it is unlikely to do so.

    This isn’t a Federal issue at all. Peterson was arrested under State law and State law will determine his culpability.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      This is a Black Swan event. There. I said it first.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      True, SCOTUS hasn’t ruled on that because nothing like this has ever been fully tried. They have rejected all attempts to hold police responsible because there is no special duty. No Florida law creates a special duty. Federal law will be involved because the defendant will move for dismissal based on vagueness doctrine. He should win.

      The perjury, though, is a different story.

    3. avatar Mad Max says:

      It could be a Federal case because requiring him to endanger his life would be a violation of OSHA regulations (unless there is a LEO carve out for that too).

      Failing to do your job usually results in termination, not criminal prosecution for inaction.

      Cops in large (Democrat controlled) cities frequently don’t act when they observe crimes unless specifically ordered to do so because they get in trouble either way.

      1. avatar John in AK says:

        That’s an interesting angle, one that I never considered. . . OSHA.

        If OSHA doesn’t apply to cops, why should it apply to the guy who grinds hamburger? “Employees of Empire Packing Co. must be aware that, no matter how safe this meat-packing plant may be, and how many safety devices we issue and install, and how well-engineered our machinery may be, it is still highly possible that an employee will be turned into Ground Round from time to time and sold at a per-pound rate, so get used to danger.”

        Why in the Bloody Blue Blazes does ANYbody ever become a cop, fer crissake?! Everybody on the InterWebs thinks that he can do the job better, and is more brave, and more resolute, and smarter, and more honest, yet so few ever become cops. . . Why is that?

        Maybe because they don’t wanna get shot. Or sued. Or shot and sued. Or sued and criminally charged. Or sued, criminally charged, and convicted.

        Makes you wonder.

  44. avatar Ill Bill says:

    The Coward of Broward County will walk free.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Something just changed. This is different.

  45. avatar Sprocket says:

    Someone needs to be hung out to dry and Peterson is a perfect fit for the role. It’s easy to sell to the mob, as he’s on video demonstrating his lack lack of fortitude. Having TV friendly images is important to framing events and creating a narrative.

    Personally I’d like to see the school administrators sent to prison. Peterson showed weakness of character in the face of gunfire. The school administration showed weakness if character in nice safe offices as they enabled the little psycho and protected him from law enforcement.

  46. avatar John says:

    About time……….

  47. avatar Cato365 says:

    I understand both sides talked about here, but feel strongly that peterson should have done more. My questions are: why do we want to have an armed guard in our childrens school to protect them when we know ahead of time that they can’t be held accountable? What do we do, hire a cop with a gun, and hope he uses it to not only protect himself, but also others. In other words, what’s the use for hiring any armed person when we can’t hold them accountable? Is it solely to act as a deterrent to a wanna be killer, allowing him to choose a less risky place to murder?

  48. avatar The Grey Man says:

    “He has forgotten the face of his father”

  49. avatar Alan Potkin says:

    With the exception of that jarhead vet poster above who somehow managed to survive several ambushes in ‘Nam by charging rather than retreating, nobody here is demonstrating that when push came to shove, they personally rose to the challenge. Way too easy to call out a coward by somebody who doesn’t know from firsthand experience that they themselves would have acted heroically…or even marginally honorably.

  50. avatar BusyBeef says:

    Where are my “POLICE LIVES MATTER” Thin Blue Line parrots now?

  51. avatar Philip Twiss says:

    I wonder how they will get around the fact that the Supreme Court ruled “Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone” -> https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

    June 27, 2005 – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

    You are your own first responder and the only one who’s interest is your own protection.

    While the Socialistic look to take away your ability to protect yourself every indecent, every day, every election cycle because the children.

    1. avatar James W Crawford says:

      This prosecution will present SCOTUS with an opportunity to reverse that ruling.

      More importantly, it will reframe the entire gun control debate.

  52. avatar James W Crawford says:

    On a more radical note.

    Screw the prosecution.

    The parents of the murdered children should just abduct him, castrate him, then sodomize him with a loaded 12 gauge shotgun until it ejaculates.

  53. We can condemn Peterson from now till hell freezes over.He has to live with himself the rest of his life, and as hated as he is I wonder how long that might be. But what really sucks is what we will do to the real criminal in this case. All the folks in this country who think there should be no death penalty, There is no punishment of any kind fitting for this piece of shit, but he most definitely deserves to die. Public hanging is the nearest thing to justice that I can think of. After the legal system takes years to try and convict him, maybe some of his prison buddies will take care of business.

  54. avatar Ted says:

    For many organizations, you wait for backup. Prior to our active shooter training, you always had back up, often the SWAT team for known really nasty dudes! So this guy hears gun fire, who what when where and how are all questions he needs answered. For three reasons, his safety, the publics safety and incoming response personnel. Depending on the situation it ay be better to investigate or set up for the long haul. Take a Muti-Casualty Incident for example, for a paramedic (same kind of situation). Many victims one person, His/her duties would help the most by triage and setting up a structure for multiple responders to function under, increasing the survivability of the victims in general. With that in mind, he/she has no duty to one individual but to the group as a whole. Probably similar in Florida. As many have said, he does not have a duty to die and state of mind comes in to play as I have discussed. The biggest sinner here is the school. Hell they let the kid practice shooting, knowing he was into violence and being “covered in blood” then after it all went down, tried to cover it up! Bottom line, a tragedy!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email