Their main function is to ensure the school-to-prison pipeline remains full. Any supply chain interruptions could reduce the profit margins of the privatized prisons.
As a lowly citizen volunteer for emergency assistance* I got training on how crisis management is supposed to work. Pretty much everyone follows the same model, which prioritizes an extremely quick organization structure being set up. For the first agency on scene, the ranking member at the scene is in charge of the scene. If another agency arrives, the ranking member there checks in with the present person in charge, and gets info, and they decide if there is a change in who’s in charge or not, and that’s communicated.
This is true for any kind of emergency. They should be well versed in it.
*I’m part of a volunteer group that can be asked to turn out for various kinds of emergencies, from helping to create a perimeter around a downed power line, to basic local search and rescue in a major earthquake. We would not be called out for a shooting, but it would be bizarre to me if police don’t have the same training as the other first responders and emergency services. If they don’t, they should have.
I could have swore they were identified as police in the story I first read. My fault.
Plus, in this case, the regulations stated Chief Pete was in charge of anything on school grounds. It’s kind of baked in when your title is Chief of Police for the school district. Not that there is a lack of people that screwed up, but he was the pointy end of the response and he fucked up.
My point is that it was the responsibility of every agency that arrived to immediately find out who was in charge and whether the new agency ranking-person was taking over command or not.
So if no one had taken charge, or it was unclear, it was the responsibility of every single agency that arrived to establish who was in charge and set up communications with their own agency. And for that matter, to reassess that if it wasn’t working.
So, yes, Pete Arredondo fucked up badly but so did everyone else there.
And remember that there were hundreds of law enforcement officers there that day.
Something like 400 and who knows how many different agencies. It seems a bit like all the later arriving people were happy not to be in charge once they got the info on what was involved.
I’m not sure anyone on site had authority to take charge over Arredondo. Regulations said he was in charge. Nobody else wanted the responsibility. That’s why the team that breached was mixed force rather than the SWAT units that were already on scene. One of the officers (city police?) even tried to stop the breaching team. Luckily they ignored him or didn’t get the word.
It depends on what we (and the responding officers) define as “take charge”. It would not have been difficult to establish that Arredondo had responsibility for the response, as it was his jurisdiction, and so in that sense, he had “taken charge”. But in the sense that he didn’t actually do anything, despite having the clear authority to do so, he never “took charge”.
Which sense were the other agencies looking for, and was the distinction clear in their training?
That’s what’s so seems so outlandish about the situation. In my experience with events like these, everyone wants to be in charge, and the process of determining the chain of command basically consists of a bunch of alpha primates thumping their chests to establish dominance. I’m never encountered an event where nobody wanted to be in charge.
Which regulations?
And I don’t necessarily mean “taking charge” against the will of whoever was already in charge. I mean part of touching base with whoever was in charge would be a discussion of whether or not the new arrivals could or would take over command.
And, as I mentioned, they should have set up communications between them so that they could advocate for doing what all of them had presumably been trained to do.
The state of Missouri does not use private prisons.
Definitely weird. We know that at least some of the rank and file voiced the opinion that they needed to breach the room as soon as possible. It seems like nobody with any rank wanted anything to do with command. It’s possible that with the info they had, they wanted to stay as far away from command as possible in order to protect their employment. I really don’t have a better guess.
Jurisdiction between law enforcement agencies are pretty well laid out and well known. This was a local situation and “call me Chief Pete” and his people were in charge of school district policing. There was a reason everyone thought he was in charge. Deciding he was dealing with a hostage situation/negotiation rather than an active shooter was his call and it was the wrong call.
That still doesn’t answer the question: which regulations? I find it hard to believe that, for instance, Texas State Troopers (serving under the umbrella of a state level agency) were utterly powerless to insert themselves into a situation run by a podunk school police chief. It’s frankly absurd on its face, and absent clear evidence to the contrary I consider it just one more example of how Texas DPS has sought to avoid scrutiny by casting all blame onto a school district police force that shouldn’t have even existed in the first place.
And I might as well take this opportunity to note—not that I want to defend the school district police force—some of their officers did at least attempt to enter the classroom very early on, unlike Texas State Troopers, and were actually shot at. Where they and everyone in LE failed was in not coming up with an alternative plan to enter after the first attempt failed. I mean the room had freaking windows to the outside! And there were two classrooms together!!!
And all this of course is secondary to the real systemic failure here, which is unfortunately beyond the scope of this thread. I just think it’s important to not get tunnel vision on thinking the fundamental problem here was a failed police response, even as the discussion in this thread is necessarily limited to that issue.
Show us the evidence for that then. I’ll believe you. Jurisdiction is in place for a reason. Outside agencies, statewide or other, generally need to be invited in by the force that has jurisdiction. Since that never happened, and no state or federal agency stepped up, I’m guessing they were either unable to or simply incompetent.
There is plenty of blame to go around. DPS has already fired one officer. I believe all the school police are fired. I think there should be a lot more, as in any responder with rank being thoroughly investigated. But the fact of the matter was the guy with the Chief rank was first on the scene and fucked up from the word go. Everything else followed from his total ineptitude. Most people didn’t know anything other than that he was in charge. Of course, if he had kept his radio rather than leaving it in the car because the antenna may have hit him in the face when he ran, maybe people would have been better informed.
This is correct. The default incident commander is the senior officer on scene for the political subdivision. If there is a local police department, its the ranking member on scene. That may (and does) change as more senior officers arrive. If there is no local PD, its the county PD or Sheriff or whatever agency is responsible for day-to-day policing. If the agreement was that the school police chief was to assume IC duties in schools, then there is no excuse in the world why he should think otherwise. My guess is that he he was in over his head and simply locked up.
You want evidence that I don’t believe something? I should hope my simple statement is enough. You are the one who has cited “regulations” as the reason LE from other agencies, including Texas State Troopers, were apparently powerless to take command. That’s your assertion, your burden of proof.
Which regulations?
I’d go with in over his head. It’s pretty obvious that he was more politician than LEO. His whole “call me Chief Pete” persona is a typical glad-handing political stereotype.
No, I want evidence that jurisdiction rules don’t matter in Texas, as that is what you said. So show me that’s so and I’ll change my mind.
You’re the one claiming it’s because of regulations, and it’s “well known.” Jurisdiction of law enforcement agencies within a state varies by state, so it certainly is not well known to me. You said there were regulations that prevented any other agency from taking charge. I’d like to know which regulations.
Re: @mordecaiB, I have made no such assertion. You, however, have yet to point to which “regulations” must have prevented a state LE agency from intervening more effectively on seeing local LE act ineffectively.
Once more, it’s your assertion, your burden of proof. Which regulations?
So show me that Texas allows agencies to take control over the people that have jurisdiction. Because I have never heard of a place where jurisdiction doesn’t apply. They may overlap sometimes and in that case state will work with local, not just take control. Or locals can concede control to state. But none of that happened here. The school police took control because they had jurisdiction and never asked anyone to take over.
You said you don’t believe that a state agency couldn’t take charge over a podunk police department. That means you think they can take over. The default is that jurisdiction determines who is in charge. So just show me what allows someone to override jurisdiction of an ongoing event and I will admit I was wrong.