Did the Uvaldi Cops just destroy the prosecution of Scot Peterson?

SavannahMann

Platinum Member
Nov 16, 2016
14,540
6,820
365
Scot Peterson is the cop who stood outside at Stonebridge High in Parkland while Nicholas Cruz shot up the students and staff inside.


In a move I really have reservations about. The DA has charged him for failing to enter the building to stop the murders. The DA is claiming that Peterson, the School Resource Officer was a Caregiver under Florida Law.

My reservations aside. What I wonder is how can the Prosecution claim that any cop would have gone in. Should have gone in. When they just aren’t going in.

The Defense is going to be a lot easier. Even with Parkland as an example, the cops in Texas waited. For an hour. Before going in.

Also there are two Supreme Court decisions that say that the Police do not have a duty to protect anyone.

I’m not sure how the Jury is going to go. I don’t know enough about the trial to even begin to guess. But my initial response after the last week is that the Prosecutor is going to look mighty silly trying to get Peterson convicted when finding cops who do rush in initially instead of waiting is almost impossible.
 
They didn't hurt the prosecution at all, they probably helped it.

The jury in Florida will see this kind of thing is happening all over, and will be more likely to want to crack down on it.
 
Scot Peterson is the cop who stood outside at Stonebridge High in Parkland while Nicholas Cruz shot up the students and staff inside.


In a move I really have reservations about. The DA has charged him for failing to enter the building to stop the murders. The DA is claiming that Peterson, the School Resource Officer was a Caregiver under Florida Law.

My reservations aside. What I wonder is how can the Prosecution claim that any cop would have gone in. Should have gone in. When they just aren’t going in.

The Defense is going to be a lot easier. Even with Parkland as an example, the cops in Texas waited. For an hour. Before going in.

Also there are two Supreme Court decisions that say that the Police do not have a duty to protect anyone.

I’m not sure how the Jury is going to go. I don’t know enough about the trial to even begin to guess. But my initial response after the last week is that the Prosecutor is going to look mighty silly trying to get Peterson convicted when finding cops who do rush in initially instead of waiting is almost impossible.
An entire police dept. just waited over a hour knowing kids are being shot inside..........

So yeah.........I think it helped that guy.
 
The Uvalde Police Chief was in charge, and he ordered them to wait. I don't have a link yet, but I heard from someone who was there that they were still under orders to wait, but went ahead anyway after a student begged 911 to send the police for the second time. The one in charge has a lot of questions to answer.
 
Here's that link.
They listened to local police according to that. So they didn't go in. CRAZY............Seems the local man in charge is a total fuck up.

They had an assault team on site ready to go and didn't go?

Get's worse and worse.
 
They didn't hurt the prosecution at all, they probably helped it.

The jury in Florida will see this kind of thing is happening all over, and will be more likely to want to crack down on it.

The Prosecutions case hinges on two things. First. STO’s are caregivers under Florida Law. Sure. It has never been used that way. But there is always a first time.

Second. That Peterson should have rushed in. He had a duty to.

First. The law doesn’t clearly state that cops are caregivers. I suspect that even if convicted that is going to work through the appeals process for a decade and a half.

Second. I am not a supporter of policy by ambush. Let me explain that. In Philadelphia two cops rushed to a gunfight between two rival gangs after a football game. The cops opened fire. They did not hit the baddies. But did kill a little girl. They have been charged in her death.

One of the things I have often lamented on is the reckless way police use their weapons. Often firing when they have no clear view of. And sometimes no way to see the bad guy. I have suggested a policy change many times. But a policy change is an announcement. From her on out we do it this way. It requires training. It is not done after the fact. Yeah Bob. That shooting you had last week. We decided a new policy is in effect retroactively. You are under arrest.
 
The Prosecutions case hinges on two things. First. STO’s are caregivers under Florida Law. Sure. It has never been used that way. But there is always a first time.

Second. That Peterson should have rushed in. He had a duty to.

First. The law doesn’t clearly state that cops are caregivers. I suspect that even if convicted that is going to work through the appeals process for a decade and a half.

Second. I am not a supporter of policy by ambush. Let me explain that. In Philadelphia two cops rushed to a gunfight between two rival gangs after a football game. The cops opened fire. They did not hit the baddies. But did kill a little girl. They have been charged in her death.

One of the things I have often lamented on is the reckless way police use their weapons. Often firing when they have no clear view of. And sometimes no way to see the bad guy. I have suggested a policy change many times. But a policy change is an announcement. From her on out we do it this way. It requires training. It is not done after the fact. Yeah Bob. That shooting you had last week. We decided a new policy is in effect retroactively. You are under arrest.
The policy to go after the shooter first, and until the threat is nutralized in a school shooting went into effect after Columbine. That was more than 20 years ago. It's a little late to say he wasn't aware of the policy change.
 
The policy to go after the shooter first, and until the threat is nutralized in a school shooting went into effect after Columbine. That was more than 20 years ago. It's a little late to say he wasn't aware of the policy change.

True. But is it criminal not to follow the policy? We call people in the military who charge the guns regardless of risk as acting above and beyond the call of duty. Becoming a cop isn’t a suicide pact is it?
 
True. But is it criminal not to follow the policy? We call people in the military who charge the guns regardless of risk as acting above and beyond the call of duty. Becoming a cop isn’t a suicide pact is it?
Coward cops need to find another profession.
 
Coward cops need to find another profession.

I agree. Believe it or not I agree. I don’t know where I posted it. But I explained what I see as the problem. The Sheepdogs aren’t becoming cops. The people joining are people who were bullied in High School. Now they have a badge and gun and nobody is going to show them any disrespect.

It is why so many get out of control when someone disrespects them.

I was watching one of those cop ride along shows. They were with the Miami Dade SWAT team. The guy was in the Gym lighting to the usual rock music. Then a training run. And then a warrant service. The guy kept explaining what it was like to be bullied in High School. It still fucked with him years later.

Now he is a cop. More than that a SWAT cop. He is the one using the threats and intimidation instead of on the receiving end. You just know he is getting his jollies doing it.

You also know that he must have the advantage before he will stand up.

But that is the case constantly. We’ve had a lot of examples. Dallas. The gunman targeted cops. They placed explosives on a rover and drove the drone up to the guy and blew him up. None of the cops were going to risk getting shot to get him. He was dangerous. He was targeting them.

California. The manhunt for Dornier. Two cops fired more than a hundred rounds at two women delivering newspapers. That is how scared they were.

Case after case. Incident after incident. Different cities. Different States. The reality is most cops are what we would call cowards. As long as they have the initiative. They have the upper hand. They are brave. But as soon as that is lost. They get so cautious it boggles the imagination.

I worked security after High School before I went in the Army. An older wiser voice told me to be smart. If I saw people fighting. Wait until there was a winner and then jump on him. He will be tired and easy to beat.

That was the Late eighties. What do you think they say now?
 
I agree. Believe it or not I agree. I don’t know where I posted it. But I explained what I see as the problem. The Sheepdogs aren’t becoming cops. The people joining are people who were bullied in High School. Now they have a badge and gun and nobody is going to show them any disrespect.

It is why so many get out of control when someone disrespects them.

I was watching one of those cop ride along shows. They were with the Miami Dade SWAT team. The guy was in the Gym lighting to the usual rock music. Then a training run. And then a warrant service. The guy kept explaining what it was like to be bullied in High School. It still fucked with him years later.

Now he is a cop. More than that a SWAT cop. He is the one using the threats and intimidation instead of on the receiving end. You just know he is getting his jollies doing it.

You also know that he must have the advantage before he will stand up.

But that is the case constantly. We’ve had a lot of examples. Dallas. The gunman targeted cops. They placed explosives on a rover and drove the drone up to the guy and blew him up. None of the cops were going to risk getting shot to get him. He was dangerous. He was targeting them.

California. The manhunt for Dornier. Two cops fired more than a hundred rounds at two women delivering newspapers. That is how scared they were.

Case after case. Incident after incident. Different cities. Different States. The reality is most cops are what we would call cowards. As long as they have the initiative. They have the upper hand. They are brave. But as soon as that is lost. They get so cautious it boggles the imagination.

I worked security after High School before I went in the Army. An older wiser voice told me to be smart. If I saw people fighting. Wait until there was a winner and then jump on him. He will be tired and easy to beat.

That was the Late eighties. What do you think they say now?
When I was in high school, kids fought, but stopped when someone won. Now they might beat the opponent to death, or pull a gun or knife. You can't use 80s tactics today.
 
When I was in high school, kids fought, but stopped when someone won. Now they might beat the opponent to death, or pull a gun or knife. You can't use 80s tactics today.

My point wasn’t the tactics. But that stopping the fight and protecting people from harm wasn’t the priority. Even then.
 

Forum List

Back
Top