•

Former sheriff's deputy Scot Peterson did not confront the Parkland school shooting which claimed 17 lives. Should he be jailed?

Scot Peterson did not confront the Parkland school shooting. Should he be jailed?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65994768

A trial of a police officer for failing to protect Parkland students raises legal and moral questions.

A Florida jury is currently deliberating whether Scot Peterson, 60, is guilty of 11 counts that include felony child neglect and culpable negligence. He has pleaded not guilty.

Mr Peterson's case has added a legal and moral dimension to a fraught national debate over law enforcement's responsibility to protect students during school shootings, which are a common occurrence in the United States.

10 comments

kuontom

•

Update: Scot Peterson acquitted of all charges

balisada

•

The guy hid in an alcove and didn't even try to help kids evacuate. I have no idea how the jury reached the conclusion that they did. The New York Times article said that prosecutors had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Peterson, who did not testify, should be considered someone “responsible for a child’s welfare.” If the school resource officer is not responsible for a child's welfare, just what is their job?

kabe

•

I watched a fair bit of the trial and it's not really fair to say that Peterson just "hid in an alcove".

There were various factors that meant that he couldn't get an exact location of where the shooter was, so he hesitated and spent a good deal of time trying to decide where to go. Should he have just taken his best guess and gone to that location, even if that meant potentially going to the wrong place? In hindsight, probably. But that doesn't mean that he was criminally negligent to not do so.

This is a 60-year-old guy who is out of shape and possibly not the brightest bulb in the box. Are there other officers who would have done a better job? Absolutely. But is failing to get a hold on the situation quickly enough and take decisive action a crime? The jury were not convinced by the prosecution that it is.

nicktron

•

That jury of his peers is the same peers that overwhelmingly voted in the same buffoons that allowed this shit to happen in the first place. Uvalde as a whole id a pretty awful bunch of people.

sadreality

•

Funny how they don't have the same issue when killing unarmed civilians.

jdfmcok

•

Cops do not have an obligation to protect you.

SirEDCaLot

•

I'm not sure this guy should be held guilty.

The one who SHOULD be charged is the commander who showed up on scene, left his radio in his car, failed to take command, and spent most of the next hour or two wandering around while innocent people were killed and nobody was giving any orders. And he says he 'didn't realize he was in command' fucking bullshit dude that is your job to know that you are a part of the chain of command. When you, a command officer, shows up on scene you should establish where you fit in that chain- if someone else is in command report to them, if nobody else is then take command. That's your DUTY. You personally don't have to rush the gunman, you just have to take command of your men.

In the absence of orders, 'do nothing' became the de facto order until a border patrol team (different chain of command) showed up and said fuck you all we're ending this.

Let's charge that commander with gross negligence.

Heresy_generator

•

Ah, America, where this happens so often that this type of mistake is common and understandable:

You've got the wrong mass slaughter of school children by gun violence there. You're describing the events that happened at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas in 2022; this case is about the events that happened at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida in 2018.