Parkland board secretly worked to prevent settlement with survivors, so lawsuit
18 replies, posted
It's just local stations right now, but I really want people to know about this shit.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Parents-of-MSD-Shooting-Victims-Expected-to-File-New-Round-of-Lawsuits-508364751.html
Archive in case the above link doesn't work
NBC 6 obtained a draft copy of one of lawsuits which claims the Broward School District, the sheriff’s office and others were negligent and should be held responsible for the deaths of 17 people inside the Parkland school on Feb. 14, 2018.
Family members said they initially had no plans to sue the school board or sheriff's office, since those agencies had promised to reach a financial settlement with them. They said Wednesday they changed their minds after discovering the sheriff's office and school board were working behind the scenes to prevent any settlement from being approved by the Florida Legislature.
Listed at the top of the lawsuit is the school board as the parents allege the district knew confessed shooter Nikolas Cruz was dangerous, but failed to take any reasonable measures to address the risk he posed to their children. They say the school didn’t have the proper procedures for training and supervising school police and security personnel and didn’t have enough of them.
"Actions speak louder than words and the victims and victims’ families have been very patient," said Todd Michaels of The Haggard Law Firm, who represents the families of Joaquin Oliver and teacher Scott Beigel, in a statement.
"By its actions to date, it has become clear that the School Board has no intention of taking responsibility the families have asked for, so the patience of these families and survivors who have waited to officially file their lawsuits has ended," he added.
The families also claim BSO deputies failed to enter the school, locate and neutralize Cruz even though it had the capability to do so. The parents say deputies on the scene didn’t carry out what’s mandated in active shooter situations.
Former school resource deputy Scot Peterson is also being named in the lawsuit, which alleges Peterson willfully disregarded policies and procedures by remaining outside the school when Cruz was inside the 1200 building, as is campus monitor Andrew Medina, who parents say knew the danger Cruz posed yet he watched him come on the school grounds and followed him in his golf cart but never called a code red on his radio, a call that could have alerted to the imminent danger.
And the Sheriff’s office would probably get off scott free because “police are not legally obligated to protect you”.
I'm rating this Asshole not because of you, but because of the fact that some fuckwit in power actually believes that, and it pisses me the fuck off.
Honestly, if police are not legally obligated to protect me, I should not be obligated to comply with the law, at all
Do you guys think there shouldn't be any line after which police are not obligated to protect you?
That is, regardless of the significance of the threat you're experiencing, would you say the police must make an attempt to save you?
If you do believe there's a line, the question then becomes "what is it?"
In this context the idea of police not being "obligated" to protect the children of taxpayers during a fucking mass shooting is absolutely asinine.
Considering the amount of money that US police tend to get, and the kind of over the top SWAT gear they end up with, responding to a mass shooting should be the one time the police are obligated to fucking respond because it's not just a personal threat to one person, it's a mass scale threat that must be contained.
Jesus christ, Geel, I know you tend to err on the Devil's Advocate side but context really matters, here.
Still a fever dream anytime I hear anything about this, I just walked by the image in the OP yesterday.
Can honestly say myself since I graduated from the school, the school board knew about how dangerous the freshman building was and the senior parking lot and how unguarded it was most of the time. All it would take it a small hop over a waist high bar and you were on the school grounds. (this is how kids skipped school all the fucking time)
My old psychology teacher back in fucking 2011 even sent in multiple complaints about how insecure the school was and how it was basically asking for something bad to happen with how unregulated who came in/out of the school was.
Here's some nice news - the temple of time was constructed here in coral springs to commemorate the 17 kids that died and they are going to burn it in a ceremony later in may to represent moving on in our community. It was made by the artist who made burning man
https://davidbesttemples.org/wp-content/uploads/photo-gallery/52309225_10216967257767405_8651661660114649088_o.jpg?bwg=1550256598
When children are being killed, yes, I very much expect police to protect and commit to the line of duty.
What a nonsense concept, why does this have to be a "line" that we have to conceive of. There's no "line" here to be argued.
The fact is that they've made it so the "line' doesn't exist, period. If your kids are being slaughtered, the police legally have no obligation to do anything. Why have police period, if they aren't there to protect people.
It's very black and white, the line is I expect them to do their job.
When your issue is with the root idea of "police are not inherently obligated to protect any individual American citizen", yes, you do need to ask hypothetical questions to find out how far this concept goes.
The hypothetical is children are being murdered in mass
If this one isn't obvious, then it's hopeless
And the answer to that hypothetical is "If the cops are willing to let a nutbar with an assault rifle murder kids because they're technically not obligated to respond, some heads need to fuckin' roll."
Lets take this concept even further, lets not even use hypothetical questions either, lets answer this broadly.
What if firefighters are not obligated to stop fires.
How about we argue where the line is with doctors healing patients.
Should a hospital have any obligation at all to save someones life?
>The families also claim BSO deputies failed to enter the school, locate
and neutralize Cruz even though it had the capability to do so. The
parents say deputies on the scene didn’t carry out what’s mandated in
active shooter situations.
Why would you risk your life for a job without the fear of getting executed for deserting ? Not trying to be edgy here but would anyone expect their local street cop to disregard his life and solve the problem Die Hard style or just call for backup?
Thing is it is kinda the officers discretion and dept/office policies
from one point of view he could have entered on his own and attempted to engage the subject. However, he is running the risk of not knowing how many shooters, etc. The situation could have been ended or he could have died as a result.
Another point of view is the officer doesn't go in, waits for backup, and enters the building with a team so they can properly cover and sweep through the school until they run into the shooter.
Honestly, as someone who actually worked for a sheriff's office - the decision is really just a reflection on the sheriff and the office as a whole.
Broward’s policy gave deputies discretion on whether to confront a shooter, so as not to get themselves killed needlessly.
So when you look at it from this point of view, the officers really had no policy or guidance on how to handle the situation. They did not technically have to go in and engage. The student resource officer just was not cut out for the event as a responding police officer (Different agencies showed up) said this.
Once outside the building, Cardinale got tapped to monitor a stairway and hallway. While doing that he noticed a sheriff’s deputy nearby, clearly stressed, close to hyperventilating and pacing back and forth. He identified himself as the school resource officer.
There are plenty of statements which show that the Sheriff's Deputies took cover behind their patrol cars, stated that the shooter was shooting outside the windows. They warned other officers who were responding to take cover and to watch out.
Other Coral Springs officers also told of seeing Broward deputies hesitating.
Coral Springs Officer Nick Iarriccio ran toward the school with his rifle, but said he had an “Oh s--- moment” after seeing a deputy behind his car.
“Is he behind the car ’cause he was getting shot at, and I’m running across an open field?” Iarriccio recalled thinking. “I remember saying to myself, ‘You dumbass, you’re a veteran, you should know better.’ But, you know, there was no time — there wasn’t really any time for that.”
The other officers from another agency arrived and immediately sprang into action. Another issue was the following,
Cruz started shooting at 2:21 p.m. and no police entered until 11 minutes later. By then, Cruz had left, but officers responding did not know that.
The confusion was compounded by miscommunication between school officials and police over surveillance video. Radio broadcasts saying Cruz was still inside the school were wrong — the video had been rewound and was delayed.
Basically the entire situation was a gigantic shitshow, miscommunication, Deputies taking cover, other officers from other agencies arriving and just going in, no one was really talking to each other and so forth.
Without a doubt the entire response was mishandled....this is a small synapse.
The Parkland killer arrived at the school at 2:19, fired the first shots at 2:21 with four victims, fired the last shot at 2:27, and was ordering a soda at a Subway restaurant at 2:51.
In contrast to the killer’s seven minutes of hellish fury, confusion marked the rescuers’ response. Campus personnel were responding to a fire alarm (set off by dust from bullet shattered building material) at 2:22. The first radio report of “possible shots fired” went over the air from the school at 2:23 from school resource officer Scot Peterson, who is mercilessly slow roasted in the report. At about 2:25 the first announcement of an assailant – the school’s “code red” was made by one of the schools “campus monitors” over the school’s internal radio system. At 2:32 the first police officer entered the building where the killer had left his carnage and was now hiding in the crowd of students evacuating.
The first law enforcement team was formed and had entered the building at 2:38 and intentional mass evacuation began at 2:40. An active search for the killer continued for 10 more minutes based on the mistaken belief that video images of the killer were in real time until searching officers were informed that video being examined was on a delay. Meanwhile the killer was at a nearby McDonald’s chatting with a student whose sister had been shot by the young man sharing the booth. A joint command was established at 3:21.
At 3:07 the last surviving victim was carried from the school by SWAT members. By 3:17 all of the classrooms had been accessed by police. At 3:21, commanders from both primary law enforcement responding agencies established communication with one another. The killer was apprehended without incident two miles away 20 minutes later.
My opinion on it is I believe the SRO failed act appropriately.
I also believe the arriving sheriff's deputies acted accordingly to the lack of communication and gunfire. They thought shots were coming from inside out.
I believe that the other police officers from another agency did the right thing by going right in, but I think from a tactic standpoint they endangered themselves time. They ran into an area with no cover, could have been gunned down by the shooter, and basically could have got caught in a crossfire situation with friendly units. They did the right thing by going in and trying to stop the shooter as soon as the arrived on scene, but had the attack been more coordinated it would have been deadly.
I don't believe the shooting is on just one specific person or agency though, i think there is A LOT of blame to go around. The biggest factor is the fact that the school and police ignored the shooter as a legitimate threat. Basically this kid was a ticking time bomb and he his threats were really ignored. Morally and ethically I believe it is a officers duty to engage and protect the public, but I think at the same time it has to be sensible. I do not believe it is ethical or moral to set the idea that an officer has to throw his or her life away by responding ignorantly or recklessly.
The whole situation is really downright depressing and I think the whole situation was just so chaotic it anchored down people's decision making process. Hindsight is a bitch and there is a lot to be improved upon. It just sad that the mistake had to be deadly. A lot of people have to live with the choices they made that day and that weight is gonna be a factor in all their decisions later on. That weight is something they will carry till they die.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
In a 4-3 decision, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial courts' dismissal of the complaints against the District of Columbia and individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department based on the public duty doctrine ruling that "the duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists"
Don't be a cop then, there are plenty of safe professions out there. Why would you join a job with the requirement of risking life and limb for the public and go "I just wanted the power and money, not the responsibility and risk"
Could you offer me a case where you don't think it's the duty of the police to protect you?
Just to clear things up, I absolutely think the police have a duty to lawfully make every effort they can to protect civilians. Unfortunately from what I’ve seen, the courts don’t agree and have ended up setting a precedent which takes things to their logical extremes; virtually absolving any member of law enforcement who fails to fulfill their duties regardless of circumstances.
As a result, the quality of law enforcement can be a total crapshoot and cannot be relied upon for public safety. I have absolutely zero confidence in the police as an institution. That doesn’t make individual officers bad people, it’s just the system has failed us so we’re basically left to fend for ourselves when it comes to personal safety. As things are right now, it’s not a good idea to rely upon the police for any level of protection even if they could be everywhere whenever they’re needed.
I don't disagree I just don't think it's realistic. kids begin cop school before they even establish a life to throw away so priorities are going to change when they're suddenly stuck with a family that needs them etc.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.