The families of the victims of the 2022 Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Texas, are incensed over a report absolving the police of wrongdoing in their response.
Jesse Prado is a private investigator and retired Austin Police Department detective. The city reportedly paid him $100,000 to investigate the police response to the shooting. He presented his findings at a special meeting of the Uvalde City Council on March 7.
In his presentation, Mr. Prado said the police followed department policy and “acted in good faith” on the day of the shooting. He said the problems that day resulted from a lack of training, experience, and equipment, and from poor communication, but the families of the victims disagreed.
Widely circulated footage from security cameras and police body cameras during the shooting show police officers retreating from gunfire and standing in the school’s halls for more than an hour, waiting for more officers and equipment.
Kimberly Rubio, whose 10-year-old daughter, Lexi, died in the shooting, addressed Mr. Prado and the city council following the presentation. She mentioned three senior officers in particular who failed to take charge of the situation and instead retreated from the gunfire despite being members of the department’s SWAT team and having proper training for an active shooter situation.
“They chose their lives over the lives of children and teachers,” Ms. Rubio angrily told the council. “Do what’s right, terminate them.”
Alexandria “Lexi” Rubio and 20 other people were killed by a gunman who stormed the school armed with a semiautomatic rifle on May 24, 2022.
Brett Cross, legal guardian of shooting victim Uziayah Garcia, angrily accused the police of cowardice. He compared the actions of the officers to those of another child who survived the shooting. The child was wounded early in the incident and waited in the classroom for help while the shooting continued.
‘There Were No Solutions’
Before the shooting ended, hundreds of police had converged on the school. Still, it was 77 minutes from the time the killer entered to the point that police killed him.Mr. Prado said that Uvalde police Sgt. Donald Page, Lt. Javier Martinez, Detective Louis Landry, and Staff Sgt. Eduardo Canales violated no policies and acted in good faith.
Mr. Prado only investigated officers who were still with the Uvalde police. Many who were present during the shooting have left voluntarily or were fired.
Lt. Mariano Pargas, who was acting chief when the shooting occurred because Police Chief Daniel Rodriguez was on vacation, has retired. Mr. Prado said he would have recommended that Mr. Pargas be exonerated after his investigation.
According to the city, Mr. Prado was commissioned to investigate only the Uvalde police.
He said the shooter had set himself up in a darkened classroom with children in a position that enabled him to shoot people as they came through the classroom door. He said this is known as a “fatal funnel.”
He added that the officers on the scene did not have a rifle-rated ballistic shield.
“I believe there were no solutions given because there were no solutions,” Mr. Prado said.
Mr. Prado’s statement that officers were distracted by having to control the crowd that had gathered at the school particularly angered many people at the meeting. One woman, identified as Ms. Martinez during public comments, spoke through tears as she took Mr. Prado and the council to task. She said the crowd had to be controlled because of the police’s lack of action.
“We were willing to go into that school and get our children out,” she said.
When he opened the meeting, Mayor Cody Smith told the group that the council would make no comments and that Mr. Prado would not answer any questions. But after the presentation, some council members spoke up.
District 2 Councilman Hector Luevano said that, with 30 years of law enforcement experience, he expected more than a report that held no one responsible. He agreed with the community members who spoke.
“I am insulted. These families are insulted,” Mr. Luevano said.
District 5 Councilman Ernest “Chip” King III agreed. He said he was so angry that he was shaking throughout the meeting.
Reports Highly Critical
Mr. Prado’s report is at least the third investigative report on the mass shooting in the city of just over 15,000 people situated about 83 miles southwest of San Antonio.According to the DOJ, responding agencies failed to set up an incident command, did not designate an on-scene commander, and failed to follow protocols established after the Columbine High School shooting.
“The most significant failure was that responding officers should have immediately recognized the incident as an active shooter situation, using the resources and equipment that were sufficient to push forward immediately and continuously toward the threat until entry was made into classrooms 111/112 and the threat was eliminated,” the report reads.
Five law enforcement officers lost their jobs after the shooting, including a Department of Public Safety officer and the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was acting as the incident commander, the DOJ report said.
Mr. Arredondo came under particular scrutiny for stopping officers from entering classrooms 111/112, where the shooter was, so that the school building could be evacuated. According to the DOJ report, while that evacuation was ongoing, the shooter killed more students.
“There is no one to whom we can attribute malice or ill motives. Instead, we found systemic failures and egregious poor decision making,” the state House report said, noting “shortcomings and failures of the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District and of various agencies and officers of law enforcement” and “an overall lackadaisical approach.”
In the nearly two years since the shooting, there have been multiple investigations. There is an ongoing criminal investigation, and Christina Mitchell, the district attorney for Real and Uvalde counties, convened a special grand jury in January. Several police officers have reportedly been called to testify, but Ms. Mitchell has not said if the grand jury is focusing on any specific allegations from that day.
