Disgraced Parkland SRO Gets $104k Pension for Life

[UCFWayne]

https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/16/deputy-who-failed-to-engage-parkland-sho

another reason this country is having financial problems. that is an insane amount of money. especially for one that failed to do his job when it mattered most.

 

[Crazyhole]

Ridiculous on a lot of levels.

 

[Knight_Light]

God Bless Unions! Helping the worst to prevail.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

Why do you people hate cops?*

 

[knightbeer]

Hate cowards, not cops. That guy had a duty. Do your job or quit. If he cant take it FINE....but dont collect checks and be a fraud. Guy is a piece of shit. At least the parents know his income and can sue him. Just a piece of walking shit.

 

[NinjaKnight]

I don't know how you could live with yourself, let alone take money after allowing those kids to die by being a coward.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Hate cowards, not cops. That guy had a duty. Do your job or quit. If he cant take it FINE....but dont collect checks and be a fraud. Guy is a piece of shit. At least the parents know his income and can sue him. Just a piece of walking shit.

I agree with every word you said. The problem is, as far as I know, pensions for most police agencies are based upon tenure and time served, not having anything to do with how well you did your job. There are also tons of ways to game the system which many cops I know have done.

I guess they could go after him to claim he's not entitled to that pension for his gross negligence while on the job but that'd take a legal battle.

 

[chemmie]

If only this cop would have shot an unarmed black guy. Then you guys would be fully supportive of his pension.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

If only this cop would have shot an unarmed black guy. Then you guys would be fully supportive of his pension.

I wouldn't. Government pensions are insane.

 

[Crazyhole]

If only this cop would have shot an unarmed black guy. Then you guys would be fully supportive of his pension.

Nah, it would take 4 or 5 to earn that kind of retirement.

 

[chemmie]

I wouldn't. Government pensions are insane.

Yea, people who choose to be cops for 30 years should have to scrounge around like the rest of us in retirement, not have a great pension.

 

[UCFWayne]

Yea, people who choose to be cops for 30 years should have to scrounge around like the rest of us in retirement, not have a great pension.

i dont want people to be poor after they retire, but $100k is a little crazy. why not the amount they made in the last year on the job?

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Yea, people who choose to be cops for 30 years should have to scrounge around like the rest of us in retirement, not have a great pension.

Never said they should have to scrounge around but 100k a year is pretty excessive and more than he was making working.

 

[UCFKnight85]

i dont want people to be poor after they retire, but $100k is a little crazy. why not the amount they made in the last year on the job?

100K is easily the amount he was making. Sheriff agencies in south Florida get paid really well and a guy with his tenure surely pull down $100K or more a year.

 

[chemmie]

Never said they should have to scrounge around but 100k a year is pretty excessive and more than he was making working.

So, you don't give a damn about corporate executives making 500-times the salary of their average employee, but a cop who risks his life daily for the public has no business negotiating an "excessive" $100k a year pension?

Get your priorities straight, Boob.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

So, you don't give a damn about corporate executives making 500-times the salary of their average employee, but a cop who risks his life daily for the public has no business negotiating an "excessive" $100k a year pension?

Get your priorities straight, Boob.

They chose to be cops. If they wanted to work their way up a banking firm and make millions they could have done that too.

 

[btbones]

So long as those pension amounts are sustainable for the future I have no problem with it .

 

[chemmie]

They chose to be cops. If they wanted to work their way up a banking firm and make millions they could have done that too.

Blue Lives Matter. Right, redneck?

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

So long as those pension amounts are sustainable for the future I have no problem with it .

That's the problem though, they aren't sustainable. Government pensions are under water by trillions.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Blue Lives Matter. Right, redneck?

The insults took longer than I expected.

 

[CommuterBob]

i dont want people to be poor after they retire, but $100k is a little crazy. why not the amount they made in the last year on the job?

In the FL retirement system, depending on when you start participating, your monthly benefit is equivalent salary to the average of your five or eight highest earning years in the system. If he's getting $104K, he's likely averaged that for the last five years.

 

[chemmie]

The insults took longer than I expected.

You really earned it this time, Boob.

 

[UCFWayne]

In the FL retirement system, depending on when you start participating, your monthly benefit is equivalent salary to the average of your five or eight highest earning years in the system. If he's getting $104K, he's likely averaged that for the last five years.

ok well that makes sense. i didnt realize sro's made that kind of money. had a friend that was an orange county sherriff and he was no were close to $100k.

 

[UCFWayne]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-charged-staying-outside-school-shooting.html

PARKLAND SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER WHO FAILED TO ENTER SCHOOL DURING LAST YEAR’S SHOOTING HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH CHILD NEGLECT AND NEGLIGENCE FOR HIS INACTION
by Kevin Ryan

The former Parkland deputy who failed to enter the school to confront a gunman during last year's Parkland shooting has been arrested on 11 criminal charges related to his actions.

56-year-old Scot Peterson faces child neglect, culpable negligence, and perjury charges that carry a potential prison sentence of nearly 100 years.

Peterson was on duty as the school resource officer when the shooting began, but never went inside. Seventeen people died and 17 others were wounded.

The charges follow a 14-month investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

“The investigation shows former deputy Peterson did absolutely nothing to mitigate the shooting that killed 17 children, teachers, and staff,” Commissioner Rick Swearingen said in a statement. “There can be no excuse for his complete inaction and no question that his inaction cost lives.”

The shooter, Nikolas Cruz , 20, faces the death penalty if convicted of the first-degree murder charges. His lawyers have said Cruz would plead guilty in return for a life sentence, but prosecutors have refused that offer.


i hope this guy rots in jail

 

[Crazyhole]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-charged-staying-outside-school-shooting.html

PARKLAND SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER WHO FAILED TO ENTER SCHOOL DURING LAST YEAR’S SHOOTING HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH CHILD NEGLECT AND NEGLIGENCE FOR HIS INACTION
by Kevin Ryan

The former Parkland deputy who failed to enter the school to confront a gunman during last year's Parkland shooting has been arrested on 11 criminal charges related to his actions.

56-year-old Scot Peterson faces child neglect, culpable negligence, and perjury charges that carry a potential prison sentence of nearly 100 years.

Peterson was on duty as the school resource officer when the shooting began, but never went inside. Seventeen people died and 17 others were wounded.

The charges follow a 14-month investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

“The investigation shows former deputy Peterson did absolutely nothing to mitigate the shooting that killed 17 children, teachers, and staff,” Commissioner Rick Swearingen said in a statement. “There can be no excuse for his complete inaction and no question that his inaction cost lives.”

The shooter, Nikolas Cruz , 20, faces the death penalty if convicted of the first-degree murder charges. His lawyers have said Cruz would plead guilty in return for a life sentence, but prosecutors have refused that offer.


i hope this guy rots in jail

I cant believe the DA isn't taking the plea deal. They really want this guy dead.

 

[UCFWayne]

I cant believe the DA isn't taking the plea deal. They really want this guy dead.

if he goes to prison, he doesnt last a week.

 

[NinjaKnight]

They really want this guy dead.

Honestly I'm surprised he's still alive. I personally wouldn't be able to live with myself knowing I shirked my duty like that.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I cant believe the DA isn't taking the plea deal. They really want this guy dead.

They are rightfully wanting to string him up by his balls and make an example of him for every other SRO in this country.

 

[chemmie]

Police: the only job in America where killing unarmed black people gets people protesting in support of you, but failing to protect white kids gets you jail time.

 

[Crazyhole]

Police: the only job in America where killing unarmed black people gets people protesting in support of you, but failing to protect white kids gets you jail time.

Whoa. You actually went there.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Whoa. You actually went there.

Not whoa. He always writes stupid shit that he considers to be so edgy and witty. When in reality it's just stupid, and pathetic.

 

[sk8knight]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-charged-staying-outside-school-shooting.html

PARKLAND SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER WHO FAILED TO ENTER SCHOOL DURING LAST YEAR’S SHOOTING HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH CHILD NEGLECT AND NEGLIGENCE FOR HIS INACTION
by Kevin Ryan

The former Parkland deputy who failed to enter the school to confront a gunman during last year's Parkland shooting has been arrested on 11 criminal charges related to his actions.

56-year-old Scot Peterson faces child neglect, culpable negligence, and perjury charges that carry a potential prison sentence of nearly 100 years.

Peterson was on duty as the school resource officer when the shooting began, but never went inside. Seventeen people died and 17 others were wounded.

The charges follow a 14-month investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

“The investigation shows former deputy Peterson did absolutely nothing to mitigate the shooting that killed 17 children, teachers, and staff,” Commissioner Rick Swearingen said in a statement. “There can be no excuse for his complete inaction and no question that his inaction cost lives.”

The shooter, Nikolas Cruz , 20, faces the death penalty if convicted of the first-degree murder charges. His lawyers have said Cruz would plead guilty in return for a life sentence, but prosecutors have refused that offer.


i hope this guy rots in jail

I agree with the sentiment of wanting Peterson to pay for not charging in and trying to save those kids. I'm not sure that this prosecution is going to achieve that end. The perjury is a slam dunk and I believe that they can remove his pension for that. As for the rest of it, the prosecutor is stretching and they are going to have a hard time proving the other 10 charges. Especially the culpable negligence charges as that requires Peterson to be considered in loco parentis and the SRO's don't assume that responsibility. Even if they are able to establish that Peterson had legal responsibility for care of the students, they also have to establish that his inaction caused their deaths whereas actions that he was legally responsible to perform would have prevented their deaths. Given that there is no way to prove that he could've prevented any one of the deaths even if he had charged in firing, I'm not sure that they are going to be able to legally meet the standard for those charges. IOW, since it was Nikolas Cruz's actions that actually caused the deaths and not Peterson's inactions, they are going to have a hard time with the negligence.

I do have to wonder if they going to go down the line and charge everyone with negligence, from the BCSO for not providing good active shooter training to the FBI for ignoring the warning signs? Otherwise, you could make a case that this is political scapegoating and, although we can all agree that we want this guy to pay for his non-response, I'm not sure that it's justice nor that it's solving any issue.

Also, even if they get a conviction, the US Supreme Court established a precedent in Castle Rock v Gonzales in 2005 that there was no mandate on the police to enforce a restraining order and there is no individual right of a person to compel the police to protect them. Paraphrasing (perhaps poorly), the police don't have a responsibility to defend human life from deadly attacks. So, this could drag out for years with no satisfactory resolution.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

I agree with the sentiment of wanting Peterson to pay for not charging in and trying to save those kids. I'm not sure that this prosecution is going to achieve that end. The perjury is a slam dunk and I believe that they can remove his pension for that. As for the rest of it, the prosecutor is stretching and they are going to have a hard time proving the other 10 charges. Especially the culpable negligence charges as that requires Peterson to be considered in loco parentis and the SRO's don't assume that responsibility. Even if they are able to establish that Peterson had legal responsibility for care of the students, they also have to establish that his inaction caused their deaths whereas actions that he was legally responsible to perform would have prevented their deaths. Given that there is no way to prove that he could've prevented any one of the deaths even if he had charged in firing, I'm not sure that they are going to be able to legally meet the standard for those charges. IOW, since it was Nikolas Cruz's actions that actually caused the deaths and not Peterson's inactions, they are going to have a hard time with the negligence.

I do have to wonder if they going to go down the line and charge everyone with negligence, from the BCSO for not providing good active shooter training to the FBI for ignoring the warning signs? Otherwise, you could make a case that this is political scapegoating and, although we can all agree that we want this guy to pay for his non-response, I'm not sure that it's justice nor that it's solving any issue.

Also, even if they get a conviction, the US Supreme Court established a precedent in Castle Rock v Gonzales in 2005 that there was no mandate on the police to enforce a restraining order and there is no individual right of a person to compel the police to protect them. Paraphrasing (perhaps poorly), the police don't have a responsibility to defend human life from deadly attacks. So, this could drag out for years with no satisfactory resolution.

That ruling favored a town and an entire police department, however (read, Government entities). I am wondering if because he is an individual that it makes a difference. Might not, but worth noting. In other words, if he was individually instructed to go in and protect these kids and his defense is, "Nah, don't have to," I can't imagine a greater dereliction of duty and cause for prosecution.

And now I have to say, if the police don't have a responsibility to defend people from deadly attacks, then BY GOD the second amendment kind of matters. Just a little?