Sun Sentinel opinion piece on Scot Peterson misused my words

I was saddened to read that Mark Eiglarsh, the attorney for former deputy Scot Peterson, purposely provided the Sun Sentinel with inaccurate and false information regarding what I allegedly testified to in a deposition. So that there is no misunderstanding regarding what I think and how I feel about Peterson’s inactions on that horrible day, please know this: I never stated that Peterson did not know where the killer was. I never stated that Peterson’s actions consisted of him taking up a tactically sound position. I clearly stated that I cannot testify as to what Peterson was thinking. I certainly never exonerated Peterson, as Eiglarsh writes. I feel, along with countless law enforcement professionals, that Peterson failed to act with courage on Feb. 14, 2018, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Anything to the contrary is just not true.

Scot Peterson chose a course of observation. Peterson acknowledged on the police radio that he felt gunfire was emanating from the 1200 building. He clearly remained outside of the building and took a position of cover. Peterson should have been searching for the shooter. I presume he was gripped by fear and froze. He did not attempt to protect anyone. Far from exonerating Scot Peterson, as Eiglarsh fictionally stated, I felt just the opposite. I directed that an internal investigation immediately commence, analyzing Peterson’s performance, or lack thereof.

Eiglarsh should be ashamed of himself for purposely taking words out of context and using sophomoric legal tactics to try a case in the media. Whether Peterson’s actions were illegal or legal is for a jury to decide.

By Scott Israel