Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Judge rules Parkland deputy had legal duty to confront gunman

Well...that is new!

Cowardice under fire. Pretty simple.

That is surprising

Good. Maybe something positive will come from it for the future.

Police just won't put officers on school grounds for fear of being sued is all that will come of this.

along with dereliction of duty.

The whole thing was a epic clusterfuck from A to Z by law enforcement.

I suppose he thought the protect and serve he swore to was talking about his own best interests.

The SC has already ruled that LEO have no obligation to "protect".

This case will go nowhere.

Deserting post while on guard duty, in combat this could be deemed a capital offense punishable by firing squad.

Like living to collect his pension.

True that,and honestly there would be a lot of situations that if I were a cop I wouldn't go into,like a bunch a gang bangers shooting each other,but I would run into anywhere where innocent kids were being hurt,even without a badge and gun.

He is not military and not on guard duty.
He was just a cop. A cop that has no legal obligation to "protect".

The title of the thread and the title of the article are misleading. CBS decided to leave out the judge's exact words, and in this case it matters.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...rgument-that-he-had-no-legal-duty-to?amp

But Englander Henning ruled that Peterson had an "obligation to act reasonably" during the shooting.




It's a civil case. The bar is lower than it is in a criminal case, and it is Florida, so anything can happen. It will be interesting.

I have talked to a few LEOs who have had active shooter training. The philosophy has changed from waiting for back-up to taking immediate action. I doubt that means that the officer is supposed to charge for gunfire without getting a reasonable assessment of the situation. An officer will always be given the discretion to make an initial assessment. If the officer moves with absolute haste and without employing good tactics and is killed, he has cost the kids their opportunity. In addition, he has given the shooter another weapon.

I am not defending the inaction of the deputy. I am touching on a few of the questions that will be probed deeply during the trial in order to arrive at the reasonableness of the deputy's response.

Police are the worst freakin option for school protection, its not law enforcement., Blackwater type security would be much better.

Plus it leaves pigs free to write tickets to old couples on their way to church.

I could not imaging being that coward and having to look in a mirror every day. Retired from being a State Trooper after 25 years 4 years ago. Local school was searching for a school police officer. I ended up with the position and have been on the job for two weeks. Very satisfying knowing that if some ass hat comes to my school and intends harm to the children, they not going to like it. Very rewarding knowing that there is a line of defense between the kids and evil.

I saw a possible explanation on another forum. While cops don't have a duty to protect society as a whole, since he was assigned to the school, that may change it. His only duty was to protect the students. Why else would he be there?

One way to handle this would be for ALL L. E. Agencies to allow for individual officers to volunteer for “ hazardous duty “. Only those volunteers would serve as security for schools and they WOULD be required to confront danger or face disciplinary action.

Increase the donut allotment for those volunteering.

Find another line of work.


...or turn in your batman toys and ride a desk.