Broward Sheriff’s Dept. Peter Peraza: Was His Shooting Of African-American Mental Patient Justified?






Everybody agrees that the police shooting of Jermaine McBean was a tragedy.

The question is whether the shooting on July 31, 2013 at Green Tree Apartments in Oakland Park was manslaughter.

Or was the shooting justified because Broward Sheriff’s Dept. Peter Peraza saw McBean turn and point a rifle at him?


Peter Peraza

Peter Peraza


The case has become highly polarized and representative of the tensions between the police and the black community. McBean was African American.

There also is another element in this election year: politics.

Some charge that Peraza is the victim of a cynical ploy by State Attorney Mike Satz to win votes for his re-election campaign in the African American community.



Mike Satz


Criminal defense lawyer Brian Silber says it is no coincidence that the Grand Jury indictment of Peraza came two years after the shooting amid the nationwide protests from #Blacklivesmatter.

“Why do you think not one single police shooting in Broward County has ever produced an indictment since 1980 – that is, of course, until the State Attorney was confronted by the national movement against law enforcement in the same year he is up for re-election. Do you mean to tell me that the picketers in front of the courthouse did not enter into his judgment when deciding on a course of action in this case?” Silber wrote in his courthouse blog. 

Satz’s spokesman Ron Ishoy bristled when asked if the case against Peraza was prompted by politics.

“The statement that this case was politically motivated cannot be further from the truth. Such a preposterous statement is offensive to the grand jurors, the prosecutors involved and the community in general. The facts are the facts, just like in every police-involved shooting that our office has handled in both election years and non-election years,” Ishoy e-mailed to

Critics say that Satz’s tough enforcement of minor charges fall heavily upon African Americans and thus his support in the black community is weak.

Satz, whose re-election is being managed by an African American, has repeatedly denied that he has any weakness in the black community. He pointed in these earlier interviewes to his repeated re-elections with black majorities since 1976.

But the indictment of a sheriff’s deputy in a shooting is unusual for Satz.

Peraza is only the eighth cop to be indicted out of more than 170 police-involved shooting cases presented to the Grand Jury, according to the Sun-Sentinel.

The last cop indicted in a shooting was in 1991 – 25 years ago. That officer, who was off duty at the time of the shooting, was acquitted.

The last cop indicted in a shooting while on the job was in 1980.  That officer was acquitted, too.

This latest indictment came in mid-December, roughly a week after white former prosecutor Teresa Elizabeth Williams launched a campaign against Satz’s re-election.


The Shooting



The Grand Jury heard extensive testimony on the shooting, including from Peraza, before issuing its indictment. Grand Jury proceedings are orchestrated  by prosecutors.

The case began routinely for a Broward County Sheriff’s deputy. There were several calls to 9-11 at roughly 4 p.m. reporting that a man waving a rifle was walking in the street in Deerfield Beach.

Driving a patrol car, Peraza quickly found McBean walking down a traffic lane of Dixie Highway toting a menacing looking rifle.

McBean was headed for the Green Tree Apartments, according to Grand Jury testimony.

He entered the project still carrying the weapon.

Peraza and a BSO sergeant who arrived on the scene followed  him yelling, “Stop, Broward Sheriff’s Office. Drop the weapon.“

McBean headed toward the pool.

“At this point, we can hear people in the pool area, and that kind of heightened the anxiety,” Peraza testified.

McBean still had the weapon on his shoulder as he passed the pool and headed father into the development.

More patrol cars arrived at the scene. Peraza estimated that he and the sergeant were 10 to 15 feet behind McBean.  The two cops continued to shout warnings over the voices of residents that came from pool and other parts in the complex.

Both officers had their weapons in their hands.

All of a sudden, McBean stopped.

“He stood there for about maybe a second or two and then that’s when he very quickly took the rifle from his shoulders, put it in his hands, turned, and pointed it at us,” Peraza told grand jurors.

Believing he was in danger of being shot with a high caliber rifle, Peraza shot McBean dead.

Later it was found that McBean was carrying an air rifle. Earlier in the day, McBean was thwarted in an attempt to buy a shotgun and settled for an air rifle.

Later it was found McBean was wearing ear buds. Deputies testified they never saw the ear buds.

Later it was discovered that McBean had mental problems.

So that afternoon Peraza faced a mental patient wielding a weapon at an apartment complex where people were gathered outside. Those facts figured in the award of a bravery medal to Peraza by Sheriff Scott Israel a few months later.



The Testimony


When lead BSO detective John Curcio interviewed witnesses, they told him that McBean looked like “a crazy person, zombified, high on drugs” and that he looked as though “he was on a mission.”

Curcio came to the conclusion that the shooting was justified. He opined that it was possibly “suicide by cop.”



John Curcio


An officer in Broward since 1980, Curcio is no apologist for the police. He is a brutally honest investigator who won an award in 2014 from the Innocence Project of Florida for exposing faulty police work in his own department at the time, the Fort Lauderdale Police. His work freed a man with an IQ of roughly 50 who had served 22 years in prison after falsely confessing to six murders.

Yet despite Curcio’s role as the lead investigator in the McBean case and the fact that he is a nationally renowned homicide detective, he was

never called to testify before the Grand Jury. He later told a court that he was told by prosecutors to discontinue his investigation and back off. ???

“As for questions that relate to evidence or procedures, we have consistently avoided defense efforts to litigate this case in the media,” Satz’s spokesman Ishoy wrote
There is another element to this case. Satz’s prosecutors have been extremely helpful to Schoen, McBean family’s civil attorney who is suing over his death. Extremely helpful.

Prosecutors shared information with Schoen before taking it to the Grand Jury. At least one prosecutor warned that giving Schoen the documents could taint the Grant Jury process.

These documents are being provided to you in the interests of justice, recognizing that you are representing Mr. McBean’s next of kin. We ask that you not disclose these document… so as not to impugn the integrity of the future Grand Jury presentment,” an e-mail from assistant State Attorney Carolyn McCann states in a August 2014 e-mail to Schoen.

“The State Attorney’s Office did not gratuitously provide materials and case information to the civil attorney in this matter. Our office recognizes that while we are investigating a criminal case, the two- year statute of limitations to file a civil case by the next of kin is running. Information in this case was provided to the civil attorney after a request for information was made. That information was provided to the civil attorney  in the interests of justice, recognizing the right of the next of kin to pursue civil remedies.  Since 2010, we have provided materials and case information for police-involved shootings to civil attorneys 10 times prior to our office presenting an investigation to the grand jury. This case was handled no differently,” Ishoy wrote

A Broward police captain first got me interested in this case, contending it wasn’t being “fairly” covered in the media. He asked that his name not be used.

The truth is that a bad police shooting of an innocent victim is a good story. A good police shooting is not because it is just the cops doing their job.

The captain also is no automatic defender of everything the cops do. He has been around decades.

“There are plenty of questionable police shootings,” the captain said.  “This is not one of them.”

I’m sure some of you will tell me what you think.



36 Responses to “Broward Sheriff’s Dept. Peter Peraza: Was His Shooting Of African-American Mental Patient Justified?”

  1. Stormwatch says:

    Did the 911 callers say that a man was “waving” a rifle or “carrying” a rifle? What manner was he carrying it? Was it behind his neck, across his shoulders? Was the gun wrapped in paper when he bought it or when he was shot? Was anyone else besides the police yelling at him and what were they yelling? Was he “heading for the pool” or heading for home, which emcompassed walking past the pool? What was he listening to with the earbuds? Who removed the earbuds and placed them in his pocket after he was shot? Why were they removed? We know what the deputy told the grand jury. Do we know what the other witnesses said? Did Detective Curcio speak with McBean’s doctors? Anything in their notes indicating suicidal tendencies? Did the same witnesses that the detective interviewed also testify before the grand jury? Why did only one officer fire on McBean? Shouldn’t all police shootings be reviewed by a grand jury?

  2. Howard the Moron says:

    Satz is just another sleazy, pandering politician jumping on the O’bama war on police bandwagon. Satz must go!!! Holy moly batman, I agree with pandering Help me Howard. The experts did their investigation, but when the facts don’t fit the political agenda, the facts be damned.

  3. Howard the Moron says:

    oh and BTW Buddy…it matters not what race the mental patient was. So why is it important to have that information in your column title? All this racial shyte is out of control.

  4. Stormwatch says:

    Did detective Curcio interview Michael McCarthy and if so, does he consider his testimony credible? According to published reports, Mr. McCarthy was one of the 911 callers and an eyewitness to the shooting, and his testimony contradicts the officer’s account. He is the reason the deputy is on trial. He’s a main prosecution witness. Again, was he interviewed by Detective Curcio? And did any of the witnesses at the complex say that McBean pointed the weapon?


    Testimony indicates that Michael McCarthy told investigators that McBean turned around with his weapon. Then, after meeting with members of the family’s legal team, McCarthy changed his testimony to say that he partially turned around.

    McCarthy’s testimony is questionable. He will be impeached for changed his story. Remember I’m not a lawyer. Then again, jurors are almost all non-lawyers.

  5. Howard the Moron says:

    Stormwatch media warrior, I will help you out…

    Did the 911 callers say that a man was “waving” a rifle or “carrying” a rifle?

    Does not matter. A psycho with a rifle can kill you

    What manner was he carrying it? Was it behind his neck, across his shoulders?

    Does not matter unless he was shot in a non threat position.

    Was the gun wrapped in paper when he bought it or when he was shot?

    What? Who cares how it was wrapped when he bought it.

    Was anyone else besides the police yelling at him and what were they yelling?

    No they retreated as they should.

    Was he “heading for the pool” or heading for home, which emcompassed walking past the pool?

    Does not matter. Would it be more acceptable to you of he killed people at his home instead of the pool?

    What was he listening to with the earbuds?

    Does not matter. You can hear through earbuds even with other noise.

    Who removed the earbuds and placed them in his pocket after he was shot?

    Good question.

    Why were they removed?

    Probably already answered when asked why the pictures were different.

    We know what the deputy told the grand jury. Do we know what the other witnesses said?

    Nope, but is it really relevant IF ALL THE FACTS WERE PRESENTED to the GJ?

    Did Detective Curcio speak with McBean’s doctors? Anything in their notes indicating suicidal tendencies?

    We know he was Baker Acted. That is what investigators call a clue.
    Even though an attempt was made to hide that fact (wonder why)???

    Did the same witnesses that the detective interviewed also testify before the grand jury?

    Don’t know.

    Why did only one officer fire on McBean?

    Really stupid question. Too bad you were not there to make that decision. You know…walk in my shoes…blah blah.

    Shouldn’t all police shootings be reviewed by a grand jury?

    Questionable ones ….absolutely.

    Say hi to Howard for me.

  6. Truthiness says:

    A simple fact: if McBean was white, Peraza would never have been charged. Satz is a scared white politician and hevseemingly sacrificed a decent cop to the politics of the day (Black Lives Matters protesters). There may be injustices and wrongful police shootings but — as Howard Finkelstein wrote in the Sentinel a few months ago — this one was not one. This was a justifiable police shooting.

    This indictment should have a disclaimer at the bottom: Paid political advertisement by the Mike Satz Campaign.

  7. More Facts says:

    Who removed or moved the earbuds?

    A. The State Attorney’s own investigation determined the paramedics did.

    Did Curcio interview McCarthy?

    A. Yes. Not only did he give constantly changing accounts, but his location only gave him a partially obstructed and very distant view. His account was also wrong: he said he saw a dozen cops confront McBean. There were only 3.

    A bigger question: why did Satz give the family’s civil lawyer a copy of their file pre-grand jury when they were withholding the same from the detectives on the case? Why did Satz let the family’s civil attorney’s private investigator interview witnesses with Satz’s investigator? Even after the private investigator started inviting the witnesses our for fancy free dinners?

  8. Leo says:

    It is about time that someone in the media told the whole story.

  9. Stormwatch says:

    First off, let me say that I have no dog in this fight. I simply want the truth, and can relate to both sides of the story. My maternal grandfather was NYPD. In August of 1978, my uncle Robert Milligan was a BSO employee who was gunned down while serving an eviction notice in Lauderhill. There’s a bronze statue of him in the BSO lobby. My nephew just graduated the police academy not long ago and is going to work for PBSO while he attends law school at night. So I come from a family of police officers, one of which was killed in the line of duty. This, after surviving 2 previous gunshot wounds. So I fully comprehend the danger. On the other hand, I once watched a PBSO officer point a gun at my 78 year old mother for no legitimate reason other than he felt like it.

    The NY Times reported that none of the homicide detectives asked witnesses at the pool whether McBean pointed the gun at anyone. They also reported that detectives did not interview McCarthy until after the civil suit was initiated. They also reported that McCarthy is not the only witness to contradict the deputy’s account.

    Howard the moron.. have you ever been to a bass Pro Shop? What about the firearm section at Walmart? Ever go to a gun range, or hunting with a group of friends? You can see people all day long “carrying” around rifles. There’s a big difference between carrying a rifle, and pointing a rifle at someone in a threatening manner. And just how does somebody
    wave” a rifle, as compared to a handgun? The reason it matters what manner he was carrying it is because there is a proper way to carry a rifle in what’s considered a non threatening manner. It usually consist of placing the rifle behind your neck, across your shoulders. Much different than holding it pointed up in a marching position or pointing it at someone. The accounts that I have read state that he was carrying the gun behind his neck and across his shoulders. The reason it matters whether the gun was wrapped in paper is because reports have said that before McBean left the pawn shop, the clerk wrapped the gun in paper. If McBean removed the paper, that was not a smart thing to do. It could indicate he intended to use it. The reason it’s important to ascertain whether anyone besides the police were yelling at McBean is because if they were and he didn’t hear them, then he obviously did not hear the police commands either. And when several people are yelling at someone at the same time, one person’s voice can drown out another’s. You cannot hear too well with earbuds on, and it would also depend on the volume of what he was listening to. Is it against the law to drive with earbuds on? Of course it is. And why is that? Because you would not be able to hear sirens and such. Also according to the NY Times, a nurse who lived at the complex and witnessed the shooting attempted to render aid to McBean and deputies prevented her from doing so. The fact that McBean was Baker Acted works as much for him as against him. He was released within 72 hours, which means the doctors did not perceive him as a threat to himself or anyone else.

    I have seen no reports other than someone here saying that paramedics removed the earbuds. I call BS on that one. I also believe that the removing of the earbuds is part of the initial cover-up. Not until the neighbor took the picture and released it did the earbuds become an issue. The deputy stated no less than 6 times under oath that there was nothing to prevent McBean from hearing the commands. The reason it’s important to consider why no other officers fired on McBean is because they all had their weapons drawn. If the other officers did not fire, perhaps they did not perceive the same level of threat that Peraza did. One officer said that he handled the gun in a “menacing” manner. But he didn’t say “threatening” manner.

    I have a lot of respect and admiration for John Curcio. He has done a tremendous amount of good exposing police ineptitude and freeing innocent people. He and FLPD detective Doug Evans (RIP friend) knew years ago who the “rape man” really was. I just hope he hasn’t gone too far out on a limb on this one, to the point of tarnishing his otherwise perfect record. Also, I’ve never met our public defender. As a matter of public policy, all police shootings should be reviewed by a grand jury.

    As stated earlier, I have no dog in this fight. I just want the truth. It appears as though the grand jury doubted the truth of Peraza’s testimony, and that’s why he’s on trial.

  10. Stormwatch says:

    5 days after the shooting, homicide detectives repeatedly asked the deputy if he noticed anything about McBean that would prevent him from hearing the commands. Why did detectives keep grilling him about any possible hearing impairment? Probably because they knew about the earbuds. But he answered no every time. Then, months later, the deputy told the grand jury investigators that the first time he knew anything about earbuds was when he read about it in the newspaper. Who believes that? Anyone? Does anyone with a lick of common sense doubt that at the very least, the deputy knew shortly after the shooting about the earbuds. Would he not have surveyed the dead body of the guy he just shot? Even if he didn’t see the earbuds before the shooting, he certainly would have seen them shortly afterward. So why tell investigators for the grand jury that the first he ever knew about earbuds was when he read it in the paper, many months after the shooting?

    Peraza got tripped up telling multiple lies. That’s why he’s indicted.

  11. Howard the Moron says:

    Stormy….so much hate for the po po from a supposed police family. Nothing you wrote shows you can relate to the deputy’s side. You have no evidence that Peraza lied. Why would you make that claim? You obviously have never been in a life or death situation. I have. Your memory in critical situations can be a tricky thing. You can have blackouts, you can think you did something you didn’t, you can think you didn’t do something you did. There is scientific evidence that explains that, if you are interested. Satz is a pandering azzhole for this whole tragedy. and yes it is a tragedy for McBean too. That is called relating to both sides.

  12. Dick Tracy says:

    Mark my words, this is witch hunt by Satz and the Deputy will walk.
    The Jury will not convict and Peraza will be back. Satz on the other hand will reap what he has sewn. Hopefully this is the case that sends him into retirement.

  13. VoR says:

    It’s a shame there is a percentage of people out there like Storm who will soak up whatever the media dishes out, with such a strong opinion, with no facts to back it up. So let’s get started here:
    1-If you have no actual previous law enforcement experience, you only really understand one side of the story.
    2-McCarthy was interviewed by detectives the day of the shooting. He’s since changed his story. This is a fact my friend.
    3-Why would detectives ask witnesses if they saw McBean point the weapon if witnesses stated they attempted to hide as soon as they realized he was walking around with a rifle? They hid from a possible threat they described looked crazy and ‘zombified’.
    4-He was warned by the pawnshop owner to take the weapon home in a vehicle, not to walk out of the store with it. The bag was wrapped and McBean took the time to unwrap it and brandish it before the general public. No bass-pro’s or Walmart’s anywhere in the vicinity.
    5-A trajectory expert hired by Channel 10 news stated based on the wounds, McBean was facing deputies slightly bent, possibly in a threatening manner. In that same news article, the medical examiner states McBean could not have had the weapon on his shoulders. If you have even a small amount of law enforcement experience, you’d know there was only a split second for deputies to react to a weapon being pointed in their direction. And if I recall correctly, training does not dictate to take a shot before reacting.
    6-After removing the wrappings and deciding to brandish the weapon in public, this highly educated man decides to cover his ears rather than be fully aware of his surroundings. Sounds like a mental patient creating a very bad situation.
    7-If you read the news articles correctly, this man was in the hospital for approximately 120hrs (5 days), 48 hours longer than the standard 72 hour baker act. Anyone in law enforcement who has dealt with a baker act call will tell you its alarming to, say the least, that this man had to stay any longer than the maximum time of 72 hours.
    8-Once the shooting occurred, there are scene safety protocols that need to be followed. The nurse could have been stopped for her own safety while deputies made sure there were no other armed suspects in the area. Further, how long did it take fire rescue to arrive on scene. I’ll estimate between 3-5 minutes from when the shooting occurred. Any cop will tell you as soon as the first 911 call came out, fire rescue was on the way as well. But you are looking at it from both sides, so I’m pretty sure you knew that already.
    9-I’ll be the second person to comment and say that the SAO’s own investigator discovered it was a paramedic that removed the earbuds, but you prefer to believe the tabloids. This is proof your connections with law enforcement is far removed.
    10-Why didn’t any other officer’s fire their weapons? Crossfire. This is hindsight speculation, but if you have such close ties to the law enforcement community, I’m sure someone would have mentioned that to you already.
    11- How could Peraza have not scene the earbuds after the shooting occurred? You already know, based on you extensive knowledge of what’s been written in the tabloids, that the two other deputies on scene were a sergeant and lieutenant. At that point, do you think he was given an order to go feel up McBean? Or maybe a more sensible explanation is that he was immediately removed from the scene while his superiors took control of the situation.
    12- If Peraza was indicted because he lied, why was he only charged with manslaughter? Why wasn’t he charged with perjury as well? The manslaughter charge itself doesn’t make sense, and that’s just based on the tabloids.
    13- How was he indicted? You should know Storm, having such close ties to the law enforcement community. Just about every cop in Broward is talking about the grand jury proceedings and leaks coming from the SAO itself. There were no expert witnesses called to testify on use of force, tunnel vision, mental health, bullet trajectory, etc. Well someone was allowed to give testimony on McBeans mental health, his mother. Hmmm, now does it really sound like this deputy got a fair shake? I’m sure you will have a lengthy tabloid filled explanation to refute what I have written. It will only continue to prove you not only have no law enforcement experience, you are also pretty far removed with your interactions with cops on a personal level.
    I have a family member who is an accountant, that doesn’t mean I go around giving people advice on how to do their taxes.

  14. Karma says:

    Hey Stormwatch,

    Why was ASA Tim Donelly in the Grand Jury room when the case was presented? This was homicide prosecutor ASA Alberto Ribas’s case for over 2 years.

    Why? To insure they got their indictment.

    Somebody should investigate the SAO’s conduct in this case as compared to the 25 years of not indicting a cop. No coincidence this is a re-election year for Satz and he NEEDS the African Americn vote.
    The worst thing a prosecutor can do is play politics with cases and people’s lives. let’s throw the black community a bone, who cares if we ruin one man’s life.

  15. Ha Ha Ha says:

    As I’ve said before, Satz is only interested in APPEARING to fight corruption. He is not there to actually win cases against corrupt authority figures – all he wants is the Kabuki dance, the Potemkin village, the show trial; he only wants an event which is full of sound and fury but signifies nothing and which only ends in a whimper.

    In this situation, I don’t even see any meaningful evidence that Peraza did anything seriously wrong. Although police departments are often very justly criticized for using lethal force when non-lethal methods could have and should have been used instead, the specific situation here is one in which it’s hard to imagine a good non-lethal alternative approach – even in hindsight. So unless there is some important new evidence to be presented, I predict that this case will end up like virtually every other Satz case against an authority figure – with a “Not Guilty” verdict.

    Mike Satz is dysfunctional and has been very dysfunctional for decades, yet somehow he keeps getting re-elected – even though I keep voting against him every time.

  16. Stormwatch says:

    It’s hard to say with certainty how any lawsuit is going to turn out. I would not be the least bit surprised at any outcome.

    There’s a lot of stuff being written by a lot of different outlets. I would suggest that anyone really interested in the case go to PACER and download all the pleadings from both sides. That will help shed some light.

    I don’t believe Deputy Peraza’s testimony that he had no knowledge of the earbuds until many months after the shooting when he read about it in the newspaper. I think that both he and the other deputies on scene knew immediately after the shooting that McBean was wearing earbuds. I think that more than one witness told investigators that immediately after the shooting, several officers converged on the body and were standing over it while he went into convulsions and said “It was just a bee bee gun.” I think it’s impossible for 3 police officers to be standing over a dead body and not notice that the corpse has earbuds on. I think that the nurse who told investigators that she told officers on the scene that McBean was wearing earbuds and may not have heard their commands was truthful in her testimony. The same lady who snapped the picture that the New York Times got a hold of. And speaking of New York Times, I believe that they’re the reason the case was reopened. Neither Satz not Israel wanted to get embarrassed.

    I’d also like to see some Cellebrite mobile forensics from McBean’s phone. What was he listening to and how loud was the volume.

    Yeah, I think it’s looking like Peraza is a liar. But who cares what I think. People a lot smarter than me will have to get to the truth.

  17. Howard the Moron says:

    This case reeks of prosecutorial misconduct. Hopefully after this travesty injustice Mike Satz ends up like Mike Nifong. That would be justice served.

  18. Caroline says:

    Fact: We are tired of all the dirty cops planting evidence and lying.

    Fact: We support honest law enforcement.

    Law Enforcement needs to get honest…

  19. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:

    1. An indictment TWO YEARS AFTER a shooting shows a lousey State Attorney’s Office
    2. Leaving a Police Officer “hanging” for TWO YEARS compounds 1.

    I have no opinion on active legal matters that belong IN COURT NOT IN THE MEDIA OR ON THE STREET. But Delays in the legal process ARE OPEN TO PUBLIC CRITICISM.

  20. Sun-Sentinel, TV Lies says:

    The newspaper stories and especially the slanted TV has had a PC agenda. The police are always wrong and poor innocent African Americans are always right. That happened in this case, too.

  21. zigy says:

    @ Stormwatch
    I can not imagine you are a lawyer, let alone a criminal lawyer.
    Yes, you cannot predict the outcome of any trial, but there are reasonable predictions and most criminal lawyers worth their salt will tell you this case is a 5 minute not guilty.
    This indictment is political shenanigans by State Attorney Mike Satz’s office because of pressure from the press and because this is an election year for Satz. He has an opponent, Teresa Williams.
    Stormwatch – just take a deep breath and ask yourself one thing:

  22. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:

    @20 is right about the Sun Sentinel although the Miami Herald is a WORSE PC RAG.
    NOT to be misunderstood my point 1. @19 means
    The two year delay n decision before a Democratic Primary looks like cynical politics. Sorry if my comments could be misunderstood.

  23. City Activist Robert Walsh says:

    Ok after reading above mentioned comments. Key players here are the other deputies that were a the crime scene(get them up on that witness stand in front of jury). Th e911 dispatch call(yep get that person on th ebox-play the dispatch call). Get the pawn shop dealer who sold the deceased on the stand. Get the nurse up there as well. Let the jury hear from Florence Niteingale. Lastly you have to put Peraza on the stand. Do all this , you connect all dots , he walks, gets his job back, we move on. I told you before the ear buds was this whole case.

  24. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:

    In court cases you have witnesses. You have eye witnesses. You have technical witnesses. In this case the primarily witnesses would be the eye witnesses at the scene NOT OTHERS NOT THERE.

  25. Stormwatch says:

    I saw 3 people out in public this past weekend wearing earbuds. It was pretty obvious.

    Someone help me out on this. How long after a deputy kills someone is the sheriff advised of the shooting? How well briefed is the sheriff? What sort of information is relayed from those on scene?

    Why did a BSO detective email McBean’s mom and tell her that her son was not wearing earbuds at the time of the shooting?

    The only way the deputies on scene could not see the earplugs on a dead body is if they were blind. They had to know immediately about the earplugs.

    I guess what I’m asking is what did the top dog know and when did he know it?

  26. Howard the Moron says:

    Eyewitness testimony is the worst testimony. Hey Count, I agree with your @22.

    @18 Caroline…cops are tired of uniformed liberals jumping to conclusions or manipulating facts to further some bogus agenda.

  27. Stormwatch says:

    This is not the first time that a police officer has shot someone who was wearing earbuds. Do a quick Google search on Dillon Taylor. One can actually see the officer’s bodycam footage. The state attorney on that case said it was justified. That was until the bodycam footage got leaked to youtube.

    Everything was fine with this case too. Until that picture of McBean wearing earbuds got leaked to the New York Times and a civil suit was filed. Then the sheriff and the state attorney went into CYA mode.

    Maybe the reason it took 2 years to get an indictment was because thats how long it took for the photo to be leaked, the civil case to get filed and the cover up exposed.

    How experienced was Peraza? A search of the clerk’s website shows 200 cases that he’s associated with. 199 of them are traffic tickets he wrote. The other remaining one is his foreclosure where final judgment was entered on July 2, 2013, just 3 weeks before the shooting.

    Why is this state manslaughter case not listed on the clerk of courts website? Is Peraza getting preferential treatment from the clerk’s office? Shouldn’t the public have the same access to the pleadings and reports on this case as they do with other felonies filed in Broward?

    And can anyone explain how all of those officers on the scene somehow missed the fact that the guy who was shot dead was wearing earbuds? Or why the sheriff’s office would tell McBean’s mom via email that none of the officers on scene saw earbuds? Is that truthful?

    And finally, why would any lawyer tell the press that he’s walking his client out the door “In a New York minute.” That’s a pretty bold statement to make. Maybe Peraza should have called Mike Dutko. Isn’t he the go to guy when a cop screws up?

  28. VoR says:

    Storm is on a fishing expedition, hahaha! Looking up foreclosures and every other aspect of Peraza’s life. But as much as you’d like to cry earbuds, they play absolutely no roll in the outcome of either the civil or criminal case. This is just a ploy from the McBean family civil attorney and the tabloids to taint public opinion. You cant hindsight the incident buddy. Actual evidence shows this man facing the deputies with the rifle is somewhere other than his shoulders. So what you are saying is while McBean has the rifle pointed at deputies, they should ask first if he can hear them, then make sure he’s not having any type of mental breakdowns and finally assure he has no other disabilities? At that point, all the deputies are dead and most of the people in the pool area. That’s what those earbuds mean in this case. And cops are just not trained that way when dealing with milliseconds to make a decision. I’m willing to bet any armed citizen in a similar situation (having a gun pointed in their direction) will make the choice to try and go home that day instead of taking a bullet.
    Another leak is that the earbud picture was recovered by the civil attorney’s investigator a few months after the shooting, but the civil attorney decided to release the picture during the election year. The picture was not to show perjury or cover-ups, because as mentioned in a previous post, Peraza was never charged with perjury. The timing of the earbud photo was to taint public opinion during an election year and scare the SAO, which it did.
    It’s pretty sad you have no cop friends to get this information from and instead are digging pretty hard to scrap up pieces of this man’s life that have absolutely nothing to do with his case. You are a stand up individual.

  29. Stormwatch says:

    The clerks website doesnt reference the case by defendant Peraza’s name, but if you use the case number 15015844CF10A you can find it and download all the pleadings and exhibits. Makes for some interesting bed time reading.

    Why were none of the witnesses asked about earbuds? Why was the one witness who did mention earbuds to the deputies on scene not get interviewed?

    The sheriff initiated an IA investigation on how Peraza was prematurely given the award. How about an IA investigation on how the deputies on scene and the detectives tried to cover up the earbuds.

    Is the FBI investigating everything to find out what people knew and when they knew it? I bet a few people at BSO are losing sleep at night and walking on egg shells during the day.

    All the questions that the detectives were asking were custom tailored to councide with Perazza’ narrative.

    Seems like McBean passed several people on the street that day who walked right by him on the sidewalk while deputies followed him and none of them seemed threatened, nor did the police give him any commands until he got to his apartment complex.

    Was McBean buying the BB gun as a present for the 16 year old kid who lived below him and had watched his cats while he was hospitalized? Read the kids deposition.

    Go to PACER and read the federal suit. Go to the clerks site and check out the state manslaughter case. You’re gonna find some interesting stuff.

    McBeans family has one kick ass lawyer.

  30. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:

    @28 VoR seems to have the facts as shown on news sites right.
    @27 Stormwatch seems to be biased against our BSO making statements assumptions allegations I can find NO CREDIBLE SUPPORT IN INTERNET SEARCHES. He seems to writing a short novel, i.e. fiction

  31. Stormwatch says:

    I’m not biased against BSO. I just want the truth. If you download the pleadings and attached exhibits you will find the interview that McCarthy gave to Detective Foster at around 5:23 the day of the shooting. He clearly tells the detective that McBean had partially turned towards the officers with the gun across his shoulders behind his neck?

    Did you know that Peraza was standing 6 to 8 feet from McBean when he shot him and that his first shot missed? The second shot entered McBean diagonally across his chest and came to rest on his side and the third shot hit him on the top of his shoulder. Then Peraza’s attorney alleged to the court that McBean was shot 3 times after he had the autopsy report which clearly indicated only 2 bullet wounds.

    I have no clue how this case will turn out and I am very interested in it. I’m not making up anything. Go and read the stuff for yourself. A lot has been written by many different outlets. The pleadings and exhibits will shed much light. So before anyone accuses another of making stuff up or writing fiction, maybe someone needs to do some homework.

  32. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:


  33. VoR says:

    Stormwatch references that McBean was just buying his neighbor a ‘gift’, based on questions that were answered by a 16y/o during a statement. Let’s think about this for a second if you want to pick and add things together.
    First off, it is a FACT that McBean originally attempted to purchase a SHOTGUN and flipped out on the pawnshop owner when advised they did not sell firearms and settled on purchasing the bb-gun.
    The minor is the daughter of the neighbor who lives below McBean. The neighbor stated she was afraid of McBean and often witnessed McBean yelling and arguing to himself. This neighbor did not want her children around McBean.
    At the time the minor was about 13 or 14y/o.
    By a show of hands, who in their right mind would attempt to purchase a shotgun for a neighborhood child that you barely know? Was McBean, during his mental breakdown going to attempt to use the weapon on his neighbors?
    It looks like deputies thwarted what appeared to be a forced entry armed occupied burglary / false imprisonment / murder type incident unfolding.
    No one will ever know what was going through this man’s head during his final moments. But any reasonable person can clearly see that he was not acting normal.

    Also, it seems you found the first McCarthy statement after you mentioned detectives never spoke to him. The problem with McCarthy is that the man can’t tell the same story twice. Clear proof the man has been prepped by the civil attorney and is lying about what he witnessed, if he even witnessed anything at all. At this point, from what I’ve heard, the statements given to the SAO and then the defense attorney, are so completely different he will quickly be impeached when he testifies.

    Peraza’s attorney never says McBean was shot three times. The attorney stated Peraza only fired his weapon three times until he felt the threat was neutralized. He was making the point that in a life and death situation Peraza reverted back to training. In other words, he didn’t empty his weapon, reload and empty it again. He did exactly what he was trained to do.

  34. Stormwatch says:

    I read the statement that the pawn shop manager gave detectives the day of the shooting. At no point did McBean “Flip out” on the Pawn shop manager. I don’t know where you are getting that from. The only peculiar thing the manager observed was that McBean had almost left without his wallet and had to be reminded that it was still on the counter as he made his way to the door.

    Are you sure the minor in question is a female?

    Why would you think that McBean would try to buy a shotgun for a minor? As opposed to a bb gun?

    The neighbor upstairs never said she was afraid of McBean. She said she knew he had some mental issues and suspected he was bipolar. She was fine with her kids watching his cats. He was even in her apartment thanking her kid for watching the cats. That was shortly before heading out for the pawn shop.

    McCarthy has always been consistent in his statements. His story has not wavered. He did not change his story after talking to McBean’s family and civil lawyers.

    Notice how so many people were questioned by detectives shortly after the shooting. But not the nurse who attempted to render aid, and who claims she told police on scene about the earplugs. Not only was she not questioned by detectives, but have you noticed that of all the people questioned that day (people by the pool, the 911 callers, the pawn shop manager, the sign holder outside of the pawn shop), not one was asked if they noticed McBean was wearing earbuds. Go through all the detectives questioning, and try and find one instance where anyone was asked any of the witnesses if they saw earbuds or if they saw McBean point the weapon at anyone. One witness did tell a detective that she noticed that McBean frequently wore earbuds, but she was not asked if he was wearing them that day.

    I did not say that McBean was buying the neighbor above him the bb gun. I asked if that was a possibility since shortly before going to the pawn shop, McBean told the kid he was going to go out and get them something. It’s also important to know McBean’s frame of mind that day. The kid he spoke to shortly before heading to the pawn shop said he was “calm.”

    Yes, Peraza’a lawyer did say McBean was shot 3 times, after he had an autopsy indicating only 2 entrance wounds. Where did that third bullet land? Why did one bullet enter horizontally at the top of his shoulder (That’s when he probably yelled out “OW”), and one bullet enter horizontally through his chest? How is that possible if McBean is facing someone and pointing a gun at them.

    I think it happened exactly the way the eyewitness McCarthy described it and the autopsy backs up his observations. McBean never took the gun off of his shoulders and was turning around when Peraza shot him before he turned all the way around. He was partially turned around and that’s why Peraza’a bullets struck him horizontally rather than straight forward. Then once the officers on scene noticed earbuds, they freaked out. Rather than just make notation of the earbuds and go with the suicide by cop scenario, they stupidly tried to cover up the earbuds, and that why we’re at this point. But what the hell do I know?

    I’m going to refrain from further comments on this thread and just let the people in a much higher pay bracket figure it all out.

  35. Count LF Chodkiewicz Chudzikiewicz says:

    Courts decide cases NOT BLOGS OR THE PRESS

  36. VoR says:

    Pretty sure the minor in question is a female based on the states supplemental discovery filed on 4/14. And according to the pawnshop owner he in fact did originally attempt to purchase a shotgun and then settled for the bb gun. A gift is very fetched indeed. I believe he was going to attempt to use the weapon he purchased either on the minor, someone else, himself or all in that order.