SOCNET

Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > Law Enforcement

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #261  
Old 5 June 2019, 16:46
Shadow's Avatar
Shadow Shadow is offline
Problem Solver
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverbullet View Post

...They could have charged him with sodomy and I wouldn't care...
Considering how badly he fucked those kids over, maybe they should have...
__________________
"If you force me to do violence, I shall be so savage and so cruel, and hurt you so badly that the thought of revenge shall never cross your mind" --Machiavelli

"Oderint, dum metuant" ("Let them hate, so long as they fear") - Caligula

"Those that know don't talk and those that talk don't know."
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 5 June 2019, 19:45
bobofthedesert's Avatar
bobofthedesert bobofthedesert is offline
RIP SOTB, Cass, Hognose
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: E.U.
Posts: 4,284
[QUOTE=bobmueller;1058798182] When does an officer become a caregiver?

From now on, starting with this guy, when he's an SRO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
When is that relationship established?
When he/she is on shift at that fixed location.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
Are all SROs now considered caregivers?
That's the way it would have to go for this standard to fly, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
Are all officers standing a fixed post assignment now caregivers?

Probably not. Schools will wind up being a special case. Because the children.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
I think it's going to fail on the "duty to protect" aspect.
Well, the USSC decision on that is an overall one IIRC. Sort of a "They're on patrol" or "they're being dispatched in response to a call" thing, as opposed to a "SRO is on site" thing. I don't see a suit succeeding based on "on site" alone, I think everyone agree's the standard here is going to be, "Did he do anything? Did he try to do anything? Failure to run to the sound of the gun will be the determining factor.

It will be interesting to know what happens to the lawsuits against LVMPD for the other "Coward of the County" case, where the officer just hung out in the stairwell the whole time. If the standard is going to be "no legal duty to protect" when he's standing right fucking there, that is BS and I don't see it being considered to be the same as the SCOTUS "no duty to protect" thing. If it is that's absolute BS.
__________________
RIP Stevie D. 1964-2012
U.S. Army Veteran of OIF 2003
"Gone But Never Forgotten"

"Let us return to old times and that will be progress." - Verdi
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 5 June 2019, 20:23
Dangerous's Avatar
Dangerous Dangerous is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,632
Hey, I need a LEO to babysit the grandkids tomorrow since they are now considered “caregivers.”

I want this f-stick to live a very long life so everyone can point, laugh, shame, and call him a coward.

I will be pleasantly surprised if he pays for his actions/inactions.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 6 June 2019, 10:34
Kip Kip is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by leopardprey View Post
I think that is what irked people, after the disgusting fact he did nothing, but then was retiring with a pension that exceeds most people’s salary. A police officer earns his salary and also earns his pension, in this case most believe he earned neither.
It hit the media after he retired that his pension was $100k or so and people were super pissed. Can't find the article now, but I did find one that says his monthly pension - $8,702 - is at stake now because he has been charged.

Dude's a shithead and deserves nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 6 June 2019, 12:05
bobmueller bobmueller is offline
Did...did I do that?
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Green Country, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,146
His pension is at stake because of the felony child neglect charges. I think the culpable negligence charges are misdemeanors, and I know the perjury is.
__________________
This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 6 June 2019, 12:34
Dino0311 Dino0311 is offline
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northeast
Posts: 13,153
I don't know Scot Peterson but I know his type. Fuck him and let his fate be a warning to the others.
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 6 June 2019, 13:41
cj's Avatar
cj cj is offline
Sub Rosa
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 1,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Massgrunt View Post
I think they're going to argue that due to his position he had a "special relationship" with the kids which would be outside the scope of that Supreme Court case which applied to society at large.
This. He was the assigned school resource officer. His specific assigned task tied into the special relationship with the kids. Argument is similar to corrections officer or an officer that has secured custody of a detainee. At that point, the officer is responsible for the safety and security of his detainee or in this situation the school children and adults in the school, and is held accountable due to his specific assigned task. The same school resource officer does not have the same responsibility nor liability beyond the school's physical location. The sad fact is that had he merely entered up the stairs in a minimal effort to confront the shooter and still failed to stop the shooter, he'd probably not face these charges, but, he didn't even do that, hence this situation.
__________________
"error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it." Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 6 June 2019, 14:47
Polypro's Avatar
Polypro Polypro is offline
BTDT
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: A Noisy Bar In Avalon
Posts: 14,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerous View Post
Hey, I need a LEO to babysit the grandkids tomorrow since they are now considered “caregivers.”
I agree. This caregiver crap is "making shit fit" - not a fan of it, even when a douchebag could get hammered - cuz then the next time, it may be a good egg getting fried instead.

But if the gov wants you, this is what they do - "Can I see your 1040, Mr. Capone?..."
__________________

"It's A Long Way, To 61,000 If You Want To Rock And Roll"

"Team Apocalypse"
COVID-19 Deaths: 14,784 (NY )

Economy Wasn't Destroyed For:
2017/2018 Influenza 61,000 KIA
1957 "Asian Flu" 70,000 KIA
'68-'72 "Hong Kong Flu" 100,000 KIA

2017/2018 Health Care System "Shock": 45 million people getting sick with influenza, 21 million people going to a health care provider, with 810,000 hospitalizations.

twitter.com/AlexBerenson

Unemployed Americans: 16,600,000 So Far

Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 6 June 2019, 14:51
Mars's Avatar
Mars Mars is offline
Living The Grunt Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: The Arena
Posts: 8,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polypro View Post
...This caregiver crap is "making shit fit"...
I have a problem with "massaging" a law to loosen it to the point where "it fits." It can be massaged so much that it "breaks" and then you have horrendous precedence being set. If it doesn't fit on its face value -- leave it alone and move on. Don't work to make it happen.
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 6 June 2019, 15:09
morelocks's Avatar
morelocks morelocks is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NM
Posts: 834
After Peterson arrived at the building and heard the gunfire, there were 11 more individuals shot. Charging appears to match up with when he arrived and had the opportunity and duty to take action.

He was not charged for all 34 just those when he had opportunity and duty.
__________________
Make Peace or Die 1/5

“Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.”
― Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 6 June 2019, 15:28
bobmueller bobmueller is offline
Did...did I do that?
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Green Country, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,146
I think he was just charged for the minors, not for the students who were over 18.
__________________
This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 6 June 2019, 15:39
Dino0311 Dino0311 is offline
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northeast
Posts: 13,153
I'm not done reading the warrant but it says out a very thorough case. Oh, and he was a certified "Active Killer" trainer.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 6 June 2019, 16:43
WGH0922 WGH0922 is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Massgrunt View Post
I'm not done reading the warrant but it says out a very thorough case. Oh, and he was a certified "Active Killer" trainer.
That's like being a Tan Belt instructor in MCMAP right?
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 6 June 2019, 19:19
Dino0311 Dino0311 is offline
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northeast
Posts: 13,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by WGH0922 View Post
That's like being a Tan Belt instructor in MCMAP right?
LMAO that can be a very apt comparison. Although unlike MCMAP, an active shooter/killer/threat instructor at least has been educated on the facts. There are quotes from his training in the warrant and it's right in line with current best practices.

I can't believe MCMAP still exists.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 6 June 2019, 19:48
hdjohn hdjohn is offline
Important nobody
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Pa.
Posts: 422
Dont the teachers have a responsibility as “caregivers” too? Or am I way offbase? Whats to prevent all of them from being charged?
__________________
Interstate 78, the best thing to come out of Jersey.........glad I took it......
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 6 June 2019, 20:14
bobmueller bobmueller is offline
Did...did I do that?
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Green Country, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by hdjohn View Post
Dont the teachers have a responsibility as “caregivers” too? Or am I way offbase? Whats to prevent all of them from being charged?
I asked the same question. If he's a caregiver, then so is every adult who was there that day. The only reason they're charging him this way is to get his pension.

I've said before I thought he was a coward. But I don't think you can show a special relationship to the kids who were killed and wounded.

The perjury charge is only a misdemeanor, so that won't get his pension.

Even if he's found guilty, I think this will fail on appeal due to Warren v District of Columbia "duty to protect" grounds.
__________________
This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 6 June 2019, 21:02
Dino0311 Dino0311 is offline
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northeast
Posts: 13,153
Are the teachers also armed police officers specifically charged with protecting the kids?
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 6 June 2019, 21:13
256's Avatar
256 256 is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Massgrunt View Post
I'm not done reading the warrant but it says out a very thorough case. Oh, and he was a certified "Active Killer" trainer.
I think this is what will fuck him. There’s an argument to say if he’d never been trained for that situation you can’t expect him to just “do” something he’s never been “shown” how to. Especially under what I would call “combat.”

Bet he told all his buddies at the bar he was “active killer” certified.

I’ve heard those that don’t talk do and those that talk don’t so much do...
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 6 June 2019, 21:19
RemTech RemTech is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Jax Bch FL
Posts: 1,248
I posted this in the other thread when I should have posted here:

If he is culpable of negligence, then what is the culpability of those officers who also didn't engage. Was not it the policy of the SO not to engage or 'may' engage? I don't have any sympathy for what is about to befall Peterson but it seems like some others should 'swing' with him or is it the fact that his position/duties as a SRO demanded action on his part. Additionally, if the SO policy is to not actively engage does this not provide him with a defense to the charges?

So if other officers were also trained and did not engage does that make them criminally culpable? How about the school personnel who underwent training and did noting? No matter how good the plan the human is the weakest link when the rubber meets the road.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 6 June 2019, 21:22
Dangerous's Avatar
Dangerous Dangerous is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Massgrunt View Post
Are the teachers also armed police officers specifically charged with protecting the kids?
One does not need to be armed to be a protector of the kids (caregiver).

This is a very slippery cliff I don’t think they thought about.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:09.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
© SOCNET 1996-2020