Uvalde Cops Reportedly Tried To Silence the Mom Who Rescued Her Kids and Criticized the Police Response
"She was holding back from sharing her story until now."
Angeli Gomez is the mother of two kids who attend school at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. On the day of the horrific mass shooting there that claimed the lives of 19 children and two adults, Gomez's kids both had graduation ceremonies. Gomez is a farm worker; she attended the ceremonies, hugged her kids, and then went back to her job.
Shortly thereafter, she learned that an armed gunman—18-year-old Salvador Ramos—was attacking the school. She sped back, going 100 miles per hour.
In an interview with CBS that aired this weekend, Gomez explained how she was able to enter the school and rescue her two children despite the cops' active efforts to thwart her. The entire interview is a damning indictment of law enforcement's mishandling of the shooting, but one new detail bears particular emphasis: According to Gomez, the police subsequently contacted her and said that the media attention she was generating for criticizing them could lead to obstruction of justice charges. (Gomez is on probation for unspecified though decades-old charges.)
"She was holding back from sharing her story until now because a judge told her she was brave and her probation would be shortened," reported CBS's Lilia Luciano.
So not only did the police fail to do anything meaningful to stop the shooter for more than an hour, and not only did they obstruct, handcuff, and arrest parents who understandably tried to take matters into their own hands, but they also allegedly tried to cover their tracks by intimidating this mother into silence.
Peter Arredondo, the Uvalde school district police chief who coordinated the pathetic police response, is no longer cooperating with the investigation into what went wrong.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Would
Haría madera! (“Would wood!”)
And make sure to get that taillight fixed, Ms. Gomez.
/This will happen.
Unfortunately, you are likely correct.
I wonder if the police will be charged with criminal threatening. After all, they threatened to arrest her for saying things they didn’t want her to say. That’s a direct threat of force against lawful activity.
Oh yeah, those who enforce the law get to ignore it. A perk of the job. You know, cooks eat for free, theater workers see movies for free, and law enforcement flouts the law.
+19 loiterers in an active shooter situation.
And some of them made prank 911 calls.
And the dog ate the chief’s radio!
Good point. It’s called SLAPP, and it’s a racketeering charge. I don’t think the cops get “qualified immunity” for that. Plus if more than one member of the police force collaborated in issuing the th read to her, it fulfills the criteria for “conspiracy to deprive” her of Constitutional rights.
That’s a felony.
So she has both civil and criminal charges to play with–against the cowards. Kinda reminds me of the opening scene in the 30+ year old movie, Roxanne….
Should have deported her.
No, we should leapfrog illegal immigrants over her so the wage prices in her economic sector collapse.
That’s fine too. As long as her life is ruined for the grave act of saving her child’s life without proper permissions.
My plan is the compassionate one.
+1 “Chaos neutral means never having to say you’re sorry.”
The entire interview is a damning indictment of law enforcement’s mishandling of the shooting
I am a big believer it is best to be patient and let the facts find their way to the surface after a crisis. Usually details emerge in the ensuing days showing the initial rush to judgement was ill-conceived. What amazes me about the Robb Elementary shooting is two weeks later law enforcement and their responses are looking even worse almost daily.
Dunno if you read it, but the 911 dispatcher in Buffalo was canned. She hung up on the 911 caller because she was whispering in the hopes of not attracting the shooter’s attention.
I’d say she got off easy.
Interesting.
I usually wait too. But within a day or two we saw the LEOs we’re lying about a lot. So while we weren’t sure what happened, it was clear the cops were hiding something.
We know what happened: a shooter (or a psyop pretending to have a shooter) killed (or pretended to kill) some kids in an effort to grab guns. Cops were either told to stand down for an hour, or this is just what has been reported.
I think this was a psyop – no level of incompetence can account for the cops’ alleged (in)action that day.
I think incompetence coupled with cowardice and herd mentality could account for it just fine.
Yep, and it being a grand conspiracy requires a huge amount of competence that is not in evidence.
“…requires a huge amount of competence that is not in evidence.”
This includes the big guy, droolin’ Joe.
I’m certainly not denying that one.
One of the poor kids smeared the blood of a classmate on herself to play dead just to survive the attack. I would hardly call that a “psyop.”
Uvalde student says she covered herself in classmate’s blood, played dead to survive
https://news.yahoo.com/uvalde-student-says-she-covered-141844706.html
I am a big believer it is best to be patient and let the facts find their way to the surface after a crisis.
Yeah. To the point that I think this should be overlooked in favor of actually fixing the door that won’t lock and nailing the incident response commander to the wall. Almost certain we’ll never get the name of the city/county/state official who contacted her, much less any clarity about whether they said, “Watch out for defamation, also be careful not to perjure yourself.”, “We’re investigating and if we’re going to bring charges, broadcasts to the public about how these morons can’t do their job will taint a jury pool.”, or “Shut the hell up if you want to stay in this country.” Not that I consider the former to be highly likely, but a seemingly favorable judge looked at the evidence and granted leniency rather than, again seemingly, notifying the State’s AG or whomever about witness tampering.
“…fixing the door that won’t lock…”
There’s a lot of incentive to lie about this, so I remain skeptical that this might well be a ‘dog-ate-my-homework’ excuse by someone who was too lazy to go back for the keys.
The shooter could notice a propped open door, but not likely one with a faulty auto-lock.
Yeah. I’m the building manager for a charter school, and one of my big things starting was making sure doors were set to automatically lock. The sheriff’s office is now double checking my work. When the kitchen staff temporarily blocks a door open to throw the trash it screws everything- but is 100% understanderful and normal. Schools shouldn’t have to be high security facilities. And most of the day doors are open and kids are outside anyway because of recess and lunch. Hardening schools helps but is not a very good answer for most of the school day.
One of the facts you can find is that this woman, despite the impression that is left, did not “save” her children from the room, in which the shooter was barricaded, as with other parents, who “saved” theirs.
The children “saved” by their parents were among the other 500, or so, that school authorities and police were evacuating.
Don’t be fooled into thinking the parents faced down the shooter.
The police were trying to keep parents out, in general, because it would have disrupted the practiced evacuation drills schools run, on a regular basis, for things like fire alarms.
You’d have a point if an evacuation had actually taken place, but the only evacuations that occurred in that 45 minutes were done by people acting as private citizens, not the police.
Nobody said or even implied that the parents “faced down the shooter”.
And no, there was NO “practiced evaluation” of any sort in process.
You’re a Uvalde cop. Arent you?
Granted, I wasn’t in there and have never been in that situation. If you know people are being shot on the other side of the building, why not gather the kids, out the fire escape or wherever, and run like hell?
Teachers are gov’t employees. They followed their training and expected other government employees to rescue them.
In defense of the teachers, you don’t (and can’t) know that people are being shot “on the other side of the building”. Shots are loud, echo weirdly and are very hard even for experienced people to place accurately. Nor do you know how many shooters there really are. Yes, you could be leading your kids to safety but it’s also possible that you’re leading them into the very danger you’re trying to escape.
Teachers don’t need defense (maybe the one who failed to get the door locked). They followed policy. The policy needs defense. ‘Shelter in place’, especially in the case of delayed support/response, guarantees the ‘fish in a barrel’ outcome. Unless you plan to harden your hideout or mount a counteroffensive, neither of which really applies to a surprise attack on a gun free zone, ‘shelter in place’ just creates a target rich environment.
My son went through the shelter in place drills at school. I truly believe the primary purpose is to train a generation to fear guns and feel helpless without the government to rescue them.
I’m not saying that ‘hide’ is the best policy. I’m just saying that it’s not a completely irrational policy.
My training is ‘when ambushed, charge’. But most people don’t have the advantage of that training.
My training is ‘when ambushed, charge’.
Yeah, that may be the training for people paid to die. For everyone else, they generally get things like, “Don’t draw from the drop.” and “Don’t reload out of cover.”
“Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country…”
Credited to Patton:
‘It’s not your job to die for your country; it’s your job to make the other guy died for his country’
Cops had the power to make this thug die for his beliefs and didn’t.
Nobody gets “paid to die”. Don’t advertise your ignorance more than necessary.
“When ambushed, charge” is the answer because it’s the least-bad way out of the kill zone of a properly prepared ambush.
Nobody gets “paid to die”.
Now complete your fictional war hero bubble and tell me that no one ever dies needlessly.
I never like the idea of lockdowns. Better to prescribe that children escape if hey can and run until they reach a safe place, then call parents and 911. Accounting for everyone can take place later, life and safety come first.
There are two types of guidance out there. The first is, “Shelter in place until relieved by authorities.” This gets people killed. It got people killed here, likely, and got kids killed at Sandy Hook. Keeping your safe space barricaded is fine for many (most) cases up until your space is breached.
The second guidance is “Shelter in place until relieved OR your space is breached, at which point flight or fight”.
“Avoid, Deny, Defend” and part of “Avoid” is getting yourself and others out of the line of fire. “Deny” and “Defend” should be only in cases where access to exits is impossible.
“Deny” and “Defend” should be only in cases where access to exits is impossible.
Or where “Avoid” would knowingly lead to overall greater losses. Not all choices are knowable up front but the policy is in the correct order for valid reasons.
There were no fire escapes – 1 story building.
Which leads to the question – did any cops try to get to the shooter from outside?
Two cops armed with sniper rifles. One to break the glass, the second to make the kill shot. The first guy doesn’t even need to be that great a shot. You want to break the glass so to eliminate the possibility that the glass would deflect the round. It’s a small chance but in that kind of situation it’s best to be safe.
I was under the impression that the rooms were interior. Either to the building itself or to all the buildings on the campus. Not that you couldn’t sling rounds in to keep the perp under pressure and/or distracted by the/any windows. Just that short of air lifting shooters onto the scene, this wasn’t really an option.
Shotgun to both hinges. Toss in a flashbang. Dynamic entry, high low, double tap to the head. Shit they were doing this stuff in Iraq and a nearly daily basis. Doesn’t take an hour to set up and plan.
Yeah, there’s a risk of collateral injury, but probably not as much as leaving a psycho unengaged for over an hour full of a room of targets. Shit, my son was practicing this shit his first drill with the Guard.
I’m betting this is very similar to what the Border Patrol guys actually did without authorization.
Yeah, I wasn’t broadly speaking that there was nothing to be done (kinda the opposite) and agree that these officers have almost certainly been through at least one dynamic entry drill and I can’t imagine that out of everyone on the scene none of them had the right equipment. Just clarifying that (again my understanding) this solution was not a/the solution.
They undoubtedly were evacuating kids form the other side of the building, and other buildings.
It just gets in the way of the “cops are cowards” narrative to mention it.
Gonna need a cite for that; not a single news story I’ve seen makes any mention of an evacuation.
Right; but apparently the local police didn’t want anyone doing anything that might make them look worse than they already were.
Right now all across Texas cops are running their annual Click-it or Ticket campaign to crack down on motorists who are not wearing seatbelts. Dispatcher:”Attention all units, active shooter reported at (location). Wait, wait disregard Disregard-there’s a guy driving 17mph to the Quick Sack to get a six pack of beer and not wearing a seatbelt. All units please respond.”
Hey, one of those crimes results in a few hundred dollars to the department’s bottom line. The other isn’t going to get you anything but sued.
Good momma.
for years Texans have been talking tough about they BLM, Antifa and shooters better not try that here. Well Texas just shat on themselves someone did and proved it was all a bluff except for this little lady.
Yes, if BLM/antifa takes a bunch of little kids hostage it might go well. But this was one LE incident in one town. Texas is pretty big. Regardless, much like where I live, a bunch of leftists are going to fare poorly if they start rioting out in the open house there.
Also, as dumb as BLM was, they weren’t so stupid as to march around lighting schools on fire. I don’t think I’m crazy to say that if they marched on a school in TX, the world would be watching Biden fuck up American Civil War II right now.
Only way Uvalde cops could have helped the shooter more would have been to shoot the parents trying to get in, instead they only tazed and cuffed those trying to do what the cops wouldn’t — stop children from being murdered.
De facto new First Amendment is Officer Safety, everything gets sacrificed to officer safety, including our children.
Yep. You don’t need guns because the police are there to protect you – except when the are just there to intimidate you – in which case you might need guns more.
Meanwhile former politicians like HRC have men with fully automatic weapons protecting her
This is the story of our times. Our would be masters are obsessively focused on narrative control. Control the images on the TV and “create reality” to their preferences
While I would never advocate for mob violence, vigilantism, or any other thing of the sort, I would remark that the days when public servants were scared of public unrest seemed a bit… less fucked up.
I wish our governments did something for single moms with kids rather than shutting them up. I am not married yet, but I read https://icycanada.com/three-popular-love-stories-with-nhl-players/ because I am really inspired by those celebrity stories. I know that when you have money, you can afford any beautiful wedding and marriage. But when you are lonely, or are a single parent, you are so really alone and hopeless!
Wasn’t Ramos’ (the shooter) mother a single parent?
the police subsequently contacted her and said that the media attention she was generating for criticizing them could lead to obstruction of justice charges.
She should respond by filing federal charges against them for civil rights violations under color of authority. If they actually charged her with obstruction of justice for saving her kids while cops stood around with their thumbs up their asses, any jury in Texas would tell the DA to sit on a Saguaro.
-jcr
Bingo, and file with media present.
‘…. a sheriff’s patrol sergeant in Uvalde makes up to $85,400. That’s nearly double the local median household income of $45,936. In Uvalde, ….the police are well paid to stand around….’ and they have dozens of cases holding they have zero obligation under the law to protect the public, under any circumstance, unless and until they take one them into ‘custody’. So when Barney Fife cuffed the mother, then and only then did he have an obligation to protect HER but not her children who were in the school.
Every institution’s first loyalty is to itself. The only people who are wrong are those that believe this type of failure is endemic to law enforcement specifically rather than every institution we create.
We need more transparency, more ombudsmen, and more accountability. The best first step to create this is getting rid of police unions. Better management cannot happen with unions whose primary function is preventing accountability.
First off a hearty well done to the two real men who went against the instructions and ended this. Sometimes big shots need to be defied. The same goes for Ms. Gomez. She did what any parent has the right to do. When one notices complete incompetence or illegal behavior by the authorities and your kids, not the gov’t’s kids. One has the parental right and perhaps even duty to defy the authorities and take action. Very well done. I hope to shake your hand one day.