Families of Crandon Shooting Victims Sue Forest County and City of Crandon
Save Email Print
Bookmark and Share
Updated: 10:50 PM Mar 16, 2010
Families of Crandon Shooting Victims Sue Forest County and City of Crandon
The families of the Crandon shooting victims are suing Forest County and the city of Crandon.
Posted: 10:10 AM Mar 16, 2010
Reporter: Amy Pflugshaupt
Email Address: apflugshaupt@wsaw.com

Suit Filed in Crandon Case
Crandon Lawsuit
Font Size:

The families of the Crandon shooting victims are suing Forest County and the city of Crandon.

They're asking for money and a change in the way prospective law enforcement officers are screened before being hired.

In 2007, Tyler Peterson shot and killed 6 people and wounded a seventh at a house party, before taking his life.

Peterson was a Forest County deputy and a Crandon Police officer.

Now, the lone survivor, Charlie Neitzel and the victims' families are looking for justice.

Their attorneys are trying to prove that the Forest County Sheriff's Department hired Peterson without having him take any psychological tests.

They also claim both city and county leaders ignored warning signs, including allegations of domestic abuse with a former girlfriend.

They believe if Peterson had a mental evaluation, the sheriff's department would have discovered what they call a "narcissistic personality."

Families claim the combination of his mental health, ego, and county-issued gun, which became the murder weapon, proved to be lethal.

"During the party, when he was being obnoxious, they said 'we are going to call the cops' and he said, 'I am the cops," says Jim Olson, the attorney for the victims' families.

The defense, however, says Peterson passed all required screenings.

That included an examination by a Wisconsin licensed doctor, an interview with a civilian board, and he did not have a felony record.

The attorney says Peterson even had a recommendation from the step father of his ex-girlfriend, Jordanne Murray, who was one of the victims.

They also claim Peterson's actions had no connection to his law enforcement job - since he was off-duty, and drove his personal car to the scene.

The judge has not ruled yet if the case will go before a jury.

He wants to review documents in the case before making his decision.


Latest Comments

Posted by: equally concerned Location: Florida on May 24, 2010 at 09:13 AM

What political party does this judge belong to? Dem, Repub, or Independent is he an R.
Posted by: Rose Location: Crandon on Mar 17, 2010 at 04:44 PM

You just don't move on when UR loved one was murdered not an event..but murder.The taxpayers do not assume any of the liabilities.. Thats called insurance. I pray the laws change so that no other family has to suffer the way these familys are. And the victims did not do anything to cause their deaths..lets get that straight. If Peterson was repirmanded for his actions prior to this, he may have had to get the help he so badly needed. He would have not had the police issued assault weapon. No lessons have been learned I fear...
Posted by: Anonymous Location: Central Wisconsin on Mar 17, 2010 at 03:02 PM

Hindsight is always 20/20; however, taxpayers will be the next victims of this unfortunate event. Everyone of the original victims probably lost it at some point and regretted the consequence(s) (Obviously nobody died); however, unless it can be proven beyond the a reasonable doubt the guy wasn't guilty of anything to warrant dismissal. And if they did dismiss him from his duties, it probably would not have changed the outcome but inferiorated him further. The victims families need to move on...
My Local TITAN - Click Radar for More Maps
NEW: Launch Interactive Weather Map
Stock Indexes
  • .DJI
  • 12801.23
  • -89.23
  • -0.69%
  • .INX
  • 1342.64
  • -9.31
  • -0.69%
  • .IXIC
  • 2903.88
  • -23.35
  • -0.80%
  • NYA
  • 7992.03
  • -89.22
  • -1.10%
Enter Ticker Symbal to get quote:
Quotes updated every 15 minutes
  • FL
  • 26.93
  • SF
  • 36.48
  • VZ
  • 37.69
  • WY
  • 20.02