{"id":83558,"date":"2018-12-18T12:16:22","date_gmt":"2018-12-18T16:16:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=83558"},"modified":"2022-01-13T20:33:02","modified_gmt":"2022-01-14T01:33:02","slug":"cops-and-schools-had-no-duty-to-shield-students-in-parkland-shooting-says-judge-who-tossed-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=83558","title":{"rendered":"Cops and schools had no duty to shield students in Parkland shooting, says judge who tossed lawsuit\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom ruled that the schools and sheriff aren’t responsible for people traumatized at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School because the students weren’t in custody.<\/p>\n

A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff\u2019s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0Broward Sheriff\u2019s Office<\/a>, as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina.<\/p>\n

Bloom ruled that the two agencies had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas] Cruz, a third party, and not a state actor,\u201d she wrote in a ruling Dec. 12. \u201cThus, the critical question the Court analyzes is whether defendants had a constitutional duty to protect plaintiffs from the actions of Cruz.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs previously stated, for such a duty to exist on the part of defendants, plaintiffs would have to be considered to be in custody\u201d \u2014 for example, as prisoners or patients of a mental hospital, she wrote.<\/p>\n