Jury Weighs Cop’s Duty in Uvalde Horror

At a Glance

• Jurors began deliberating Wednesday in the trial of former Uvalde schools officer Adrian Gonzales
• He faces 29 counts of child abandonment or endangerment for the 2022 Robb Elementary massacre
• Prosecutors say he had a duty to act while children were slaughtered inside
• Why it matters: The verdict could set a legal precedent for police accountability during mass shootings

A jury is now deciding whether a police officer who was among the first on scene at Robb Elementary School had a legal duty to confront the gunman who killed 19 fourth-graders and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas, making Gonzales the first officer to stand trial over the hesitant police response to the 2022 massacre.

The Charges

Adrian Gonzales, 52, has pleaded not guilty to 29 counts of child abandonment or endangerment covering the 19 students killed and 10 others wounded. Each count carries a potential two-year prison sentence.

Prosecutors argue Gonzales failed in his duty to protect the children, while defense attorneys contend he cannot be held responsible for the actions of the teenage gunman.

Prosecution’s Case

Special prosecutor Bill Turner framed the case bluntly in closing statements: “This is a failure to act case.”

Key prosecution points:

• Gonzales was the first officer on scene
• He had completed active shooter response training two months earlier
• Body camera footage shows him entering the hallway with other officers
• He abandoned his training and did not try to stop the gunman before he entered the school

“We’re expected to act differently when talking about a child that can’t defend themselves,” Turner told jurors. “If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while a child is in imminent danger.”

The prosecution called 36 witnesses over nine days, including teachers who described the terrifying moments when the 18-year-old gunman entered the school.

Defense Arguments

Defense attorney Jason Goss shifted responsibility away from his client, telling jurors: “The monster that hurt those kids is dead. It is one of the worst things that ever happened.”

Gonzales’ legal team argued:

• He never saw the gunman during the chaotic early moments
• Three officers on the other side of the school saw the gunman outside and didn’t fire
• He risked his life entering the “hallway of death” when others hesitated
• A conviction would tell police they must be “perfect” and could make them more hesitant

“They are trying to feed you a coward sandwich and telling you Adrian is the one who gave it to you,” defense attorney Nico LaHood told jurors.

Gonzales did not testify in his own defense. His attorneys presented only two witnesses, including a woman who worked across from the school and testified she saw the shooter ducking between cars.

Emotional Testimony

The courtroom held family members of several victims, some crying as prosecutors read the names of children killed and wounded.

Teacher Arnulfo Reyes, who survived being shot, described seeing “a black shadow with a gun” enter his classroom before all 11 of his students were killed.

Other teachers testified about young students grabbing safety scissors to defend themselves, following school shooting training protocols.

Broader Context

The trial was moved from Uvalde to Corpus Christi after defense attorneys argued Gonzales couldn’t receive a fair trial locally. The proceedings began January 5 and are in their third week.

Gonzales was among 376 federal, state and local officers who responded to the school. It took more than an hour for a tactical team to breach the classroom and kill the gunman.

Only Gonzales and former Uvalde schools police chief Pete Arredondo face criminal charges for the delayed response. Arredondo was indicted on similar charges in 2024, but his trial date hasn’t been set.

Legal Significance

This marks a rare case of a police officer charged with failing to stop a criminal act to protect lives. Prosecutors emphasized the broader implications, with Turner telling jurors their verdict will set “the bar over whether it’s appropriate to stand outside, hearing 100 shots, while children are being slaughtered.”

Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell argued the case represents accountability for police training standards: “We’re not going to continue to teach children to rehearse their own death and not hold (police) to the training that’s mandated by state law.”

The jury must determine whether Gonzales’ actions, or lack thereof, constitute criminal negligence under Texas law governing child endangerment charges.

Timeline

The jury began deliberations Wednesday afternoon, weighing whether Gonzales fulfilled his legal duty to protect the children under his care or whether his response, while perhaps flawed, does not rise to the level of criminal conduct.