Lawyers in Parkland School Shooting Litigation React to Arrest of Ex-School Resource Officer
Lawyers representing former Broward Sheriff's Deputy Scot Peterson in civil cases expressed dismay with the 11 criminal charges brought against their client.
June 05, 2019 at 04:02 PM
4 minute read
The arrest of the former school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School has prompted strong reactions from litigators representing those affected by the February 2018 mass shooting that left 17 dead and 17 injured at the Parkland school.
On Tuesday outgoing Broward State Attorney Mike Satz announced Scot Peterson, the former Broward Sheriff's deputy who served as the school resource officer of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School at the time of the tragedy, had been arrested and indicted on 11 criminal counts.
Peterson, who is also facing civil litigation in Broward Circuit Court, has been charged with seven counts of child neglect, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury. Both prosecutors and the families of students impacted by the massacre have alleged Peterson, who was armed at the time of shooter Nicolas Cruz's attack, responded inadequately to the threat, causing further harm to befall those inside on the school.
David Brill, the Weston attorney representing the father of shooting victim Meadow Pollack in a suit against Peterson, referred to the former deputy as “a liar and a disgrace to the badge” on Wednesday.
“He cowered while the din of rifle fire raged near him,” Brill said. “The levying of criminal charges against him doesn't bring back any of the innocent lives that he could have and should have saved. But it validates our position and provides a semblance of accountability and justice.”
Brill's sentiment was shared by Fort Lauderdale lawyer Alex Arreaza, who is representing survivor Anthony and his parents in their civil action against Peterson in Broward Circuit Court. The attorney said Peterson's arrest “has been a long time coming.”
“We're starting to see the accountability we've been seeking for the last 18 months,” Arreaza said, commending the state attorney's office for taking “a brave step forward” in filing the criminal charges against Peterson.
Arreaza contended the criminal case against Peterson bolstered his own clients' lawsuit. “The fact that they're doing this will strengthen the civil argument saying that his actions were willful and wanton,” he said.
Read the motion to reduce Scot Peterson's bond:
Michael Piper of Fort Lauderdale law firm Johnson, Anselmo, Murdoch, Burke, Piper & Hochman represented Peterson in Broward Circuit Court. In an oral statement Piper said he and his legal team were taken aback by their client's arrest.
“Having represented law enforcement agencies and law enforcement officers in civil matters for more than 30 years, from both a legal perspective and a professional perspective we are surprised — to put it as gently as we can — at what transpired yesterday and at the manner in which it was orchestrated,” Piper said. The attorney called the charges against Peterson “astounding” and deferred further comment to Joseph DiRuzzo, counsel in the criminal case.
In a statement provided to the Daily Business Review, DiRuzzo said Peterson cannot face charges because he is legally not a caregiver, an individual such as a parent considered to be responsible for a child's welfare by law.
“Indeed, the definition of 'other person responsible for a child's welfare' expressly excludes law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity,” DiRuzzo said. The attorney cited a lack of precedent for prosecuting police officers responding to mass shootings to contend his client was not criminally negligent in his actions, and the charges against him should be dismissed.
“Let there be no mistake, the actions taken today against my client should concern the American public and every public employee who, under the state's misguided legal theory, could be criminally liable for actions taken as a 'caregiver,' ” DiRuzzo said. “ The individuals who have made this charging decision have taken the easy way out and blamed Mr. Peterson for the actions on Feb. 14, 2018, when there has only ever been one person to blame: Nikolas Cruz.”
In a motion to reduce his client's $102,000 bond, DiRuzzo argued Peterson did not pose a threat to the community and ought to be released on his own recognizance.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250