enough facts that we should call for a criminal grand jury. why do i say that? these officers had all they needed, they had it up front when were still hearing over 100 rounds being fired and still hearing the screams of children bleeding, dying, those initial responding officers heard that, i saw that on the video and then minutes later they had the ballistic shields and the heavy weaponry and enough bodies to do what every cop in america has been trained to do. and then i found two applicable texas statutes. the first one is called abandonment or endangerment of a child and it is simply met. all you have to do is place a child recklessly or by omission in a place of imminent danger, death, physical, bodily harm. the second statute is when the injury to the child actually occurs and again it allows for
texas. report states there was an overall lackadaisical approach to the shooting and no real law- enforcement command, despite many offices being on the scene. law-enforcement analysts reacted to the report. the widely accepted, widely trained approach to these active shooter incidents as the first responders on scene, whether it is the chief of police for the lowliest beat comp, grab the weapon that you have in your car, coordinate with whoever else is there with you. if you are by yourself then you go to the sound of the gun and try to take that shooter out. you try to kill that person before they can kill or hurt other victims. it is inexplicable that this massive team of law enforcement from multiple agencies with heavy body armor and long guns, ar 15s and eventually, multiple ballistic shields never took
killed, begging for help. saying please, somebody was inside! they did but they were supposed to do, even though children aren t supposed to have to call 9-1-1 from their school for help when an acid to shooter is inside. something like this is not supposed to happen. we re supposed to feel safe in an institution like a school. officers outside that classroom, arms with ballistic shields. an unlocked classroom, armed with ballistic shield, armed with automatic weapons, armed with handguns. but did nothing. if you are a parent who lost a child you want someone to be held responsible. it won t bring your kids back, but something has to be done. this is what these parents are saying. and they have not been purposeful, their lack of action but certainly negligence. shouldn t negligence be a reason why someone should be held responsible?
happening here in uvalde? certainly. i mean we ve all been involved in situations not as tragic as this, but similar, where there were firearms and people shooting at police and you have to respond to it. you establish your perimeter. as i said before, you try to get eyes on the suspect. you try to get as much information as you can so the decisions you re making are valid because different people see things differently, and witnesses will tell you different things. you need to have a reliable source giving you reliable information. that s when you start to pull together your teams, and you need to have the equipment. so you need to have long guns. you need to have ballistic shields. you need to have a medical team standing by in case anyone is injured. there s a great likelihood that someone s going to be injured in something like this. and the technical component. i know about this because i did some of this work. you have the ability to get eyes