Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cops and schools had no duty to shield students in Parkland shooting, says judge who tossed lawsuit
orlandosentinel ^ | 12/17/18 | Lisa J. Huriash

Posted on 12/19/2018 9:50:09 AM PST by blueyon

A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom dismissed a suit filed by 15 students who claimed they were traumatized by the crisis in February. The suit named six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office, as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina.

Bloom ruled that the two agencies had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody.

“The claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas] Cruz, a third party, and not a state actor,” she wrote in a ruling Dec. 12. “Thus, the critical question the Court analyzes is whether defendants had a constitutional duty to protect plaintiffs from the actions of Cruz

(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: banglist; blackrobedclown; broward; clownbammyjudge; dncjudicialactivist; education; fedjudgepresident; florida; guncontrol; guns; jailforjudges; juckthefudge; obamajudge; parkland; protection; secondamendment; selfdefense; skidmarkjudge; thelawisinmymouth; theskidmarkjudge; trump; unfitforthebench
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-113 next last
To: lastchance

And what repercussion ever arose from even failing to “protect the public”?


21 posted on 12/19/2018 10:06:03 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (May Jesus Christ be praised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Not exactly.

The real meaning of this is that sleazy, scummy lawyer cannot sue the person protecting us from harm or their employers for massive amounts of money.

This is a very good ruling.

Disbar the scummy lawyer who brought the lawsuit.


22 posted on 12/19/2018 10:06:12 AM PST by Pikachu_Dad ("the media are selling you a line of soap)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

>Only you, the individual, can protect yourself. Which should nullify almost all gun laws.

Only you can nullify gun laws.


23 posted on 12/19/2018 10:07:23 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

As long as we have no duty to send our children into gunfree, unprotected government shooting galleries.


24 posted on 12/19/2018 10:07:33 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

The state REQUIRES attendance at public schools (unless they are homeschooled). The state will also step in and remove children from a home where physical abuse is found.

But they have no duty to protect minors?

That is some garbage.


25 posted on 12/19/2018 10:07:45 AM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikachu_Dad

What recourse is there when the “person protecting us from harm” doesn’t do so when it was eminently possible?

Thanks to sleazy scummy unions (why can’t they be disbarred first) that person can’t even be fired or undergo forced retraining!


26 posted on 12/19/2018 10:07:47 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (May Jesus Christ be praised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

There is no duty or ability to protect this judge 24/7 for the rest of his life either.


27 posted on 12/19/2018 10:09:57 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik

The Supremes have ruled on this before. No duty to protect any one individual. DemocRATS will never acknowledge this as they try and disarm Americans while they put more felons on the streets who have more rights than law abiding Americans.


They overstep so far this will be their undoing. Youcant have it both ways. Either you want the public to wholly disarm, only butter knives allowed in the home, or you can defend that police are not bound to help them. Can’t have both.


28 posted on 12/19/2018 10:10:14 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

They make up the law as they go.


29 posted on 12/19/2018 10:11:22 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: blueyon
Could those students legally leave school or could their parents legally keep them away from school?

If not, then those students were in the legal custody of the school and those whom they appointed over them to keep them there disarmed including Deputy Scott Peterson. How often have we heard the term in loco parentis?

30 posted on 12/19/2018 10:12:30 AM PST by Swordmaker (My pistol self-identifies as an iPad, so you must accept it in gun-free zones, you hoplaphobe bigot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Suppose they failed to protect the judge?


31 posted on 12/19/2018 10:12:48 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: JBW1949

To collect evidence of crime.


32 posted on 12/19/2018 10:13:32 AM PST by coaster123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

The government gets to have both.
Unless you overthrow it.


33 posted on 12/19/2018 10:14:18 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Not guilty.

By reason of incompetence.


34 posted on 12/19/2018 10:16:23 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Nope, those “No Gun Zone” signs will do the job.


35 posted on 12/19/2018 10:18:04 AM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide

Only you can nullify gun laws.


I wish that were true.


36 posted on 12/19/2018 10:18:07 AM PST by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Yet, ‘they’ continue to ask ‘me’ - with a straight face -

“Why do you feel the need to carry?”

Damned mind boggling.

The ‘law’ requires you to send your kids to school and now they say once they get there it is NOT their responsibility to protect them YET, I am committing a felony by bringing my concealed weapon on school property.
(New change says OK if I am in vehicle BUT once I step out of vehicle if weapon in my possession or not COMPLETELY secured in vehicle, the law is being broken (VA))

I pay absolutely no attention to the signs inre concealed carry, the ONLY time I get concerned is if there is a metal detector.


37 posted on 12/19/2018 10:19:00 AM PST by xrmusn (6/98"Getting rich as a Politician means doing something illegal''(trunc) HS Truman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon
So police to not have to defend us,

No ... nothing new about that.

38 posted on 12/19/2018 10:19:23 AM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the peopIe to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
They only have to clean up the crime scene and catch the perpetrator.

Uh, no. They don’t. Havving had to clean up several crime scenes, including one extremely blood soaked crime scene, they don’t even do clean-up. The crime victim is also responsible to clean up after the criminalists have gone through the scene and left everything the victim owns covered in fingerprint dusting powder. Nor is there an actual duty to really catch the perpetrator, only to take a report.

39 posted on 12/19/2018 10:20:10 AM PST by Swordmaker (My pistol self-identifies as an iPad, so you must accept it in gun-free zones, you hoplaphobe bigot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JBW1949

re: “..In this judge’s eyes, why do we even have police departments????”

Statistics collection.


40 posted on 12/19/2018 10:20:14 AM PST by _Jim (democrats create mobs. Republicans create jobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-113 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson