I would have been fine with either verdict. It was a tough situation for any human to be in. Let's let these victims rip.

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

The school admins have the most responsibility but escaped all scrutiny. They allowed the culture of unlocked entry doors. Not only did teachers keep their classrooms unlocked, but every exterior door of that building was allowed to be unlocked all day. The principal wasn't even fired-she was just moved to another position at a different school in town.

Bocephus said:

---

Got a Natty! said:

---

Depending on what the jury does or what an appellate court does, we could have legislation the next session that establishes and defines what duties LEO must adhere to.

---

We already have that.

I think it would be more impactful if they could put a law on the books stating that if you are an SRO and fail to act in any way during a shooting, then you violate said law and receive said penalty. The issue in Uvalde was not only that the officers did not go in and challenge the shooter, it was that they did nothing. If they had attempted to do ANYTHING else (break windows, enter through neighboring walls, enter through the roof) it could have distracted the shooter and ended the conflict earlier and saved lives. I think a "failure to act" law would be appropriate for mass casualty events. JMo

---

IIRC some did try to get in the room but retreated when the shooter shot at the door and one officer was hit by wood shrapnel. Then the chief (?) ordered everyone back and they sat there for 40+ minutes doing nothing.

GottaRide said:

---

The school admins have the most responsibility but escaped all scrutiny. They allowed the culture of unlocked entry doors. Not only did teachers keep their classrooms unlocked, but every exterior door of that building was allowed to be unlocked all day. The principal wasn't even fired-she was just moved to another position at a different school in town.

---

The lock was broken not left open on purpose as I recall.

If you are referring to classroom 111, it had to be closed correctly to lock, by the teacher's own statement. He never bothered to lock it, just as the other teachers didn't. When the alert went out, the other teachers locked their doors. The male teacher in 111 said that he never heard the alert on his phone so he didn't lock his door. It can't be proven that it was unlocked but it almost certainly was. Bortac commander Guerrero spent all of that time hunting a key for a door that was probably not even locked.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

agracer said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

Got a Natty! said:

---

Depending on what the jury does or what an appellate court does, we could have legislation the next session that establishes and defines what duties LEO must adhere to.

---

We already have that.

I think it would be more impactful if they could put a law on the books stating that if you are an SRO and fail to act in any way during a shooting, then you violate said law and receive said penalty. The issue in Uvalde was not only that the officers did not go in and challenge the shooter, it was that they did nothing. If they had attempted to do ANYTHING else (break windows, enter through neighboring walls, enter through the roof) it could have distracted the shooter and ended the conflict earlier and saved lives. I think a "failure to act" law would be appropriate for mass casualty events. JMo

---

IIRC some did try to get in the room but retreated when the shooter shot at the door and one officer was hit by wood shrapnel. Then the chief (?) ordered everyone back and they sat there for 40+ minutes doing nothing.

---

The chief was convinced that the occupants in the room were actually in an assembly so it was a barricaded person. The fact that the children bled out during those 40+ minutes is why everyone is so up in arms over their inaction.

Please stop commenting on what happened in Uvalde. Everything you say about what happened is wrong. They confirmed within minutes that students and teachers were in those rooms.

GottaRide said:

---

If you are referring to classroom 111, it had to be closed correctly to lock, by the teacher's own statement. He never bothered to lock it, just as the other teachers didn't. When the alert went out, the other teachers locked their doors. The male teacher in 111 said that he never heard the alert on his phone so he didn't lock his door. It can't be proven that it was unlocked but it almost certainly was. Bortac commander Guerrero spent all of that time hunting a key for a door that was probably not even locked.

---

You specifically said "unlocked entry doors" which most would take to mean doors to the building, not the classroom.

The outside door the shooter entered was not 'unlocked'. The lock was broken.

And was school and/or district policy really to have every classroom door locked at all times? I think that would be a huge PITA as teachers would be getting locked out of their classrooms any time they forgot their keys.

The door to the building where the shooter entered was not broken. The locking mechanism just wasn't engaged. The teacher that pulled it closed thought that it was, though. There were three building entry doors to that building that allowed access to the halls and classrooms. Each one of those was unlocked. You can see that in the body camera videos when the cops got there. The shooter walked in through the west door. Many cops went in that same door. Arredondo and many other cops went in through the south doors that were unlocked. The female DPS trooper and several others went into the building from the east door. All were unlocked.

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

I'm not ignoring any facts here. That's why it's different than Chauvin. I know what this man did and didn't do and in my judgment it meets the standard for child abandonment. Free to disagree.

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

You're using AirBud rules to defend this guy.

"There isn't a law specifically requiring him to run in and protect those kids." = "There isn't a rule specifically preventing a dog from playing basketball"

If there is one good thing in all this, it's that we all now know, if we didn't already, that the police are not here to protect us, no matter what they claim. Their first, and highest, value is to return home safely after their shift. Second highest is to retire as early as possible.

Let us correspondingly quit acting like they protect us and paying them as if they put their lives on the line. Some do, but we can see clearly there is no obligation to do so. LEOs can literally stand around outside a classroom of 3rd graders being slaughtered and not suffer consequences.

Quote:

---

LEOs can literally stand around outside a classroom of 3rd graders being slaughtered and not suffer consequences.

---

This is the reason I, several pages earlier, mentioned Article 99 of the UCMJ.

Quote from UCMJ:

" (8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy; or (9) does not afford all practicable relief and assistance to any troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or their allies when engaged in battle;"

Note the actionable part "to do Utmost" and "afford all practicable relief". This should be the standard of care/duty for LEO employed by schools. While the state did not prove child endangerment, they could have proved this.

I quit following this thread after the first day of testimony because there was so much conflicting and misinformation being espoused. But kept up through other sources because I was interested in the outcome.

My law school roommate writes the Texas Pattern Jury Charges for Criminal Law book. I asked him if there is a statutory duty, that he knows of, whereby a LEO is legally required to put his life in jeopardy to protect a citizen. I also have a friend on the Court of Criminal Appeals who I asked that same question. All 3 of us had the same answer that there is no statutory duty that we know of. Certainly though that duty is assumed by everyone, including every LEO I know. Assumed but NOT legally required.

Bottom line is an officer cannot be convicted for being scared and afraid.

Maybe the TX Legislature will attempt to codify a duty on behalf of LE. Still, though, it is almost impossible to mandate courage.

My issue is that it is not a normal citizen. They are children that have been taken into the care of the district with security provided and there is a responsibility to them that has been affirmatively, actively taken on.

As of now that is an assumed responsibility that we all took for granted. Not a legal responsibility. Yet.

It's wild even typing that. Hard to believe a case like this has never been tried before. I was a prosecutor most of my career and know many great prosecutors across the state. NONE of us ever had a case like this where LE lacked the courage to act. And that is why I believe the Lege will attempt to change the law and create a duty. But that bunch can screw up a rock fight.

It was easy to mandate healthcare professionals and educators to report child abuse. A very objective test.
"When you see XYZ you call CPS or LE." Very easy.

Mandating something as subjective as courage might be impossible. Certainly from an objective, constitutional perspective.

How much would YOU have to be paid to work a job where you might not get to go home on any one day ???

For me, there's no amount of money you could offer…

If we expect our police to be held criminally liable in those situations:

1. Gotta pay them a HELLUVA lot more.
2. Gotta arm them TO THE TEETH, just in case that day arrives.
3. Gotta have a HELLUVA lot more of them…

Nobody could get that to happen in today's society..

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

I'm not ignoring any facts here. That's why it's different than Chauvin. I know what this man did and didn't do and in my judgment it meets the standard for child abandonment. Free to disagree.

---

Has anyone else in the history of the state ever been charged with child abandonment, who was not a parent or legal guardian?

When the school takes these children under their care, they are taking that level of responsibility. That's the whole point of my argument. They took these children into their care and owe them a duty - and it's the school and security apparatus of the school now responsible for them. It's not the same as a building full of adults. They want to be a coward and not charge into a building full of adults, ok. But they took responsibility for these kids and left them to be slaughtered.

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

I'm not ignoring any facts here. That's why it's different than Chauvin. I know what this man did and didn't do and in my judgment it meets the standard for child abandonment. Free to disagree.

---

Has anyone else in the history of the state ever been charged with child abandonment, who was not a parent or legal guardian?

---

Lot's of babysitters have.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

You're using AirBud rules to defend this guy.

"There isn't a law specifically requiring him to run in and protect those kids." = "There isn't a rule specifically preventing a dog from playing basketball"

---

I'm not defending the guy. He has to live with his decisions that day for the rest of his life.

I'm just pointing out that case law has been very consistent on this, and the jury agreed with that. That's why it was a waste of time and money.

Misapplying a law bc it feels good is not an effective system of justice.

Agree, is it possible he was criminally negligent as well? I mean sitting there holding everyone back while kids are being killed seems negligent to me. But I'm not a lawyer so…

fc2112 said:

---

If there is one good thing in all this, it's that we all now know, if we didn't already, that the police are not here to protect us, no matter what they claim. Their first, and highest, value is to return home safely after their shift. Second highest is to retire as early as possible.

Let us correspondingly quit acting like they protect us and paying them as if they put their lives on the line. Some do, but we can see clearly there is no obligation to do so. LEOs can literally stand around outside a classroom of 3rd graders being slaughtered and not suffer consequences.

---

Some are there to protect people and some are not. You're welcome to pay them whatever you think the market rate is.

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

I'm not ignoring any facts here. That's why it's different than Chauvin. I know what this man did and didn't do and in my judgment it meets the standard for child abandonment. Free to disagree.

---

Has anyone else in the history of the state ever been charged with child abandonment, who was not a parent or legal guardian?

---

Lot's of babysitters have.

---

Were they convicted?

Google Kelsey Paige Frazier for a notable one.

Bocephus said:

---

agracer said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

Got a Natty! said:

---

Depending on what the jury does or what an appellate court does, we could have legislation the next session that establishes and defines what duties LEO must adhere to.

---

We already have that.

I think it would be more impactful if they could put a law on the books stating that if you are an SRO and fail to act in any way during a shooting, then you violate said law and receive said penalty. The issue in Uvalde was not only that the officers did not go in and challenge the shooter, it was that they did nothing. If they had attempted to do ANYTHING else (break windows, enter through neighboring walls, enter through the roof) it could have distracted the shooter and ended the conflict earlier and saved lives. I think a "failure to act" law would be appropriate for mass casualty events. JMo

---

IIRC some did try to get in the room but retreated when the shooter shot at the door and one officer was hit by wood shrapnel. Then the chief (?) ordered everyone back and they sat there for 40+ minutes doing nothing.

---

The chief was convinced that the occupants in the room were actually in an assembly so it was a barricaded person. The fact that the children bled out during those 40+ minutes is why everyone is so up in arms over their inaction.

---

It's also the fact that the LEO's sat around for 40+ minutes literally doing nothing. You seem to gloss over this fact consistently.

Yeah, I understand the "no duty to actually do the job as charged" legalese BS. Doesn't mean I agree with it and it certainly doesn't give cover to doing absolutely nothing for over half an hour while kids died.

schmellba99 said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

agracer said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

Got a Natty! said:

---

Depending on what the jury does or what an appellate court does, we could have legislation the next session that establishes and defines what duties LEO must adhere to.

---

We already have that.

I think it would be more impactful if they could put a law on the books stating that if you are an SRO and fail to act in any way during a shooting, then you violate said law and receive said penalty. The issue in Uvalde was not only that the officers did not go in and challenge the shooter, it was that they did nothing. If they had attempted to do ANYTHING else (break windows, enter through neighboring walls, enter through the roof) it could have distracted the shooter and ended the conflict earlier and saved lives. I think a "failure to act" law would be appropriate for mass casualty events. JMo

---

IIRC some did try to get in the room but retreated when the shooter shot at the door and one officer was hit by wood shrapnel. Then the chief (?) ordered everyone back and they sat there for 40+ minutes doing nothing.

---

The chief was convinced that the occupants in the room were actually in an assembly so it was a barricaded person. The fact that the children bled out during those 40+ minutes is why everyone is so up in arms over their inaction.

---

It's also the fact that the LEO's sat around for 40+ minutes literally doing nothing. You seem to gloss over this fact consistently.

Yeah, I understand the "no duty to actually do the job as charged" legalese BS. Doesn't mean I agree with it and it certainly doesn't give cover to doing absolutely nothing for over half an hour while kids died.

---

Pointing out that children died bc of their inaction is somehow "glossing over" the fact that they did nothing? Interesting standard you have. How should I have phrased the fact that children bled out and died bc officers did nothing?

Bocephus said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Not remotely comparable to Fent Floyd. I think this man abandoned those kids. Period.

---

His point remains though. Ignoring facts & law bc of feels is why Chauvin is in prison.

---

You're using AirBud rules to defend this guy.

"There isn't a law specifically requiring him to run in and protect those kids." = "There isn't a rule specifically preventing a dog from playing basketball"

---

I'm not defending the guy. He has to live with his decisions that day for the rest of his life.

I'm just pointing out that case law has been very consistent on this, and the jury agreed with that. That's why it was a waste of time and money.

Misapplying a law bc it feels good is not an effective system of justice.

---

An effective system of justice would ensure he lived with that decision every day for the rest of his life in a cage.

maroonthrunthru said:

---

How much would YOU have to be paid to work a job where you might not get to go home on any one day ???

For me, there's no amount of money you could offer…

If we expect our police to be held criminally liable in those situations:

1. Gotta pay them a HELLUVA lot more.
2. Gotta arm them TO THE TEETH, just in case that day arrives.
3. Gotta have a HELLUVA lot more of them…

Nobody could get that to happen in today's society..

---

More pay will bring in more people who aren't up to the job.

There's already too many "cops" on the badge and credential welfare system.

There's a bunch who just think, or hope, it will never happen to them. They need to be weeded out; Like the chief here and some of the other officers.

Arming is no where near as important as training, both skills and mindset.

Got a Natty! said:

---

As of now that is an assumed responsibility that we all took for granted. Not a legal responsibility. Yet.

It's wild even typing that. Hard to believe a case like this has never been tried before. I was a prosecutor most of my career and know many great prosecutors across the state. NONE of us ever had a case like this where LE lacked the courage to act. And that is why I believe the Lege will attempt to change the law and create a duty. But that bunch can screw up a rock fight.

It was easy to mandate healthcare professionals and educators to report child abuse. A very objective test.
"When you see XYZ you call CPS or LE." Very easy.

Mandating something as subjective as courage might be impossible. Certainly from an objective, constitutional perspective.

---

Even though you can't mandate courage or smart decisions, what about deliberate indifference?

Can you mandate that if you take a position as an SRO or in a ISD Police Department, that you have a "special" relationship, requiring a duty to intervene? This seems so much different than the patrol officer not being mandated to become personal security and responsible for every person in their jurisdiction.

I want officers to avoid this job, unless they are prepared to protect the kids in the same way they would want their kids protected.

Definitely a lot of conflicting "facts" as to what happened.

Here's the original ALERRT AAR.
https://news.txst.edu/inside-txst/2022/alerrt-center-releases-first-part-of-uvalde-after-action-report.html
you may have to login now.

I wonder if they will put out a supplementary with any new info from the trial(s).

An alternative source...
https://www.police1.com/active-shooter/articles/analysis-breaking-down-the-alerrt-report-on-the-uvalde-school-shooting-response-6cc7AckL8DFd7lqy/

The fed report, including info on SROs etc, under Resources...
https://cops.usdoj.gov/uvalde

Skip to 12:13 pm (40 minutes into this video) here is the video of The Bortac commander, Guerrero, being told of the calls from inside. The ALERRT report said it was unclear if Bortac knew of the calls.



At 12:21 the four shots are fired inside. They start toward the doors but then back off and wait another 25+ minutes. There is a Uvalde native with a FB page that has documented all of the real information and called out all of the BS. There is no sound in this video but you can hear the shots on other body cam videos.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/18J7MgmsZF/?mibextid=wwXIfr

I understand what you are saying but on a case by case basis it would be very subjective.

In the Uvalde case, would breaking out the opaque windows and then trying to shoot the bad guy be enough?
What if he shot 10 kids while LE was breaking the windows and trying to shoot bad guy?

What if LE tried to breach the door? Would that be enough? What if LE tried to breach the door but failed? Would that be enough?

What if LE tried to come through the ceiling but bad guy heard them and killed all the kids? Would that attempt still count?

Who decides what action or attempt is enough?

All of the above attempts have been suggested on this thread. Like I stated, you can't legislate courage.

And in some circumstances doing nothing is the right thing to do.