قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / The Board of Appeal dismisses the trial of Parkland survivors

The Board of Appeal dismisses the trial of Parkland survivors



A federal appeals court has upheld the dismissal of trials against Broward County and five public officials of students who survived the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School 2018 shooting in Parkland, Florida, in which 17 people were killed by an gunman. [19659002] Nikolas Cruz shot and killed the 17 and injured 17 others during his six-minute ravage on February 14, 2018.

Fifteen students present that day sued the county and public officials "on the theory that their response to school shootings was so incompetent "It violates their constitutional rights, according to Friday's ruling of the 11th U.S. District Court in Atlanta in LS ex rel. Et al. V. Scot Peterson, Jan Jordan, et al.

The Shot" caused traumatic injury to many more spectators, including the plaintiffs, 1

5 students who were present and claimed psychological damage, "the decision states. They claim" the Parkland tragedy was exacerbated by government failures before and during the shooting, "it said.

" Broward County Sheriff & The Office failed to act on the "many dozens of calls" it received warning of Cruz's dangerous inclinations, even though Sheriff Scott Israel and Superintendent Robert Runcie knew Cruz could be dangerous. gt and Runcie are warned that the school had insufficient security, none of the officials tried to improve the school's security, the judges say.

"And Scot Peterson, the police officer on the school security charge, was nicknamed" Rod "- short for" retired in service "- for his" flawed … approach. ""

The U.S. District Court in Miami dismissed the case and was confirmed by a unanimous three-judge appeals board

The students did not have a custody relationship with the defendants, according to the appeals panel's decision.

"Generally, there are no custody conditions in the public school system, even if officials are aware of potential dangers or have expressed an intention to provide assistance on the school grounds," the decision states.

In addition, students did not claim anything "arbitrary" or "conscientious" behavior and failed to state a "failure to train", it said, confirming the lower court's decision.

Lawyers in the case did not respond to requests for comment.

Catalog


Source link