Florida Officials Use a Victim's Rights Law To Stop a Newspaper from Printing Deputies' Names
They shot and killed a man they were trying to evict. Doesn’t the public have the right to know who they are?

Florida deputies shot and killed a man during an eviction process, and now a judge is prohibiting a local newspaper from printing the names of the officers involved.
You can blame Florida's Marsy's Law for this unconstitutional censorship. These laws, passed through the ballot initiative process in a dozen states, were intended to detail certain rights for crime victims to be informed about criminal cases and protect their privacy. But in practice, the wording of the laws are often vague enough that police departments have been using them to conceal information about shootings their officers are involved with by classifying the officers as "victims" of crimes.
In Sarasota County, three deputies were sent to a condo in April to help evict 52-year-old Jeremiah Evans. According to Sarasota County Sheriff Department's report, Evans pulled out a knife and threatened the deputies. One of the deputies shot and killed Evans.
Prosecutors determined that the shooting was justified. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune submitted a public records request to the State Attorney's Office, and among the information they received were the unredacted last names of the deputies involved.
Then the Sarasota County Sheriff's Office swung into action, going to a judge to invoke Marsy's Law to try to prohibit the newspaper from publishing the names of the officers involved. On Friday evening a judge granted a temporary injunction preemptively prohibiting the newspaper from publishing the officers' names. Despite failing to redact the names by accident, the State Attorney's Office also supported the sheriff's department and joined the action against the newspaper, essentially attempting to shift responsibility onto the newspaper for the office's own supposed breach of the law.
Florida's Marsy's Law has its own definition of who counts as a victim, and that's part of the problem: "[A] 'victim' is a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed." This definition does not require anybody to actually be convicted of a crime in order for a person to be classified as a "victim" for the purposes of Marsy's Law because part of the law is intended to control how a victim is treated throughout the entire process, even prior to a trial. It also does not exclude police officers or other government officials who may be involved in investigating or responding to criminal activities as part of their job.
One of the rights granted by Florida's Marsy's Law is "The right to prevent the disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victim's family, or which could disclose confidential or privileged information of the victim." Because Marsy's Law does not exempt police officers responding to criminal activity, law enforcement agencies have been using the law to insist they cannot release the names of officers who are involved in responses to crimes, even when the police response is itself violent and people have questions or concerns about what happened, and even when it's possible that the suspect may himself or herself be the victim of police abuse. And the wording of the law does not care that the person accused of the crime in this case is himself dead and cannot harass the officers or the officers' family.
It also shouldn't be the case that the law has the authority to censor what newspapers publish, what with the First Amendment explicitly forbidding the government from doing so, but nevertheless, Fridays' order blocks the Herald-Tribune from publishing the officers' names. The newspaper is fighting the order as unconstitutional prior restraint of the press.
"Freedom of speech means that it's up to the Herald-Tribune to decide whether to report information in its possession, especially facts about such a significant matter as a fatal shooting by law enforcement," said James B. Lake, one of the attorneys hired by the newspaper to fight the injunction. "We fully expect that, once our arguments are heard, the injunction will be set aside."
The names of police officers involved in deadly incidents on the job are not supposed to be kept secret from the public. It's one of the many, many flaws with these Marsy's Laws.
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
Fuck Joe Biden
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (ghj-10) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career & can gain more dollars on-line going this article.
.
>>>>http://jddm.2.vu/1
Surprised they would have any luck with that considering how open Florida's Sunshine Laws are.
Police who kill people claim to be the victims, and thus have their identities held secret. They are the victim. Not the person they killed. Them. Because people might get mad that they killed someone and got away with it. That makes them victims.
If there's anything that could disqualify someone from being a cop, it's shame.
"Ever felt guilt or shame? Ever said you were sorry? Ever been embarrassed? If you answered yes to any of these questions, take a hike. If you said no to them all then you could have a rewarding career in law enforcement!"
A person killed in the course of committing a crime may not be a victim except of their own stupidity, but it is up to court of law to determine otherwise. What if the person who killed him was his intended victim, rather than police?
The issue here is two layered. Were cops responding to a crime in progress intended to be covered by the victim protections? Does free speech rights allow for privacy protections for victims of alleged crimes to be adjudicated? Does such a person have a privacy right to not be doxxed by the press? Shackford is saying no.
What is the purpose of printing their names now other than to instigate a doxing and harassment campaign? Reason proving once again they are more anti-police and pro-criminal than they are about appropriate accountability.
Dude tries to go at them with a knife and Scott's objection is that they dared to defend themselves. Fuck off you leftist POS.
Dude tries to go at them with a knife and Scott's objection is that they dared to defend themselves.
No. Scott's objection is that they're hiding behind a law intended to protect crime victims. Nothing was said about whether or not it was a "good shoot" or not.
The purpose of printing their name is to hold them, and the department, accountable. What if it turns out that the same officer shot 6 other people in the past year? If the names are never published, we'll never know if that's the case.
How about 'the purpose is to hold our government accountable for the actions they take in our names'? You know, one of the major premises built into the Bill of Rights. You think that might be good enough?
Dude is alleged to go at them with a knife and the cops alleged that they had to kill him to defend himself - a set of facts so far only confirmed by a self-interested internal review. You don't think that might merit some investigation?
You have legitimate concerns. How do you prevent the doxing of officers though? The BLMs and other lynch mobs care little about the facts of whether this was a good shoot or not. We need a solution that doesn't have a chilling effect on police doing their job and provides us more oversight than taking their word for it.
A unicorn just slid down a rainbow and handed me that solution.
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (ghj-17) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career & can gain more dollars on-line going this article.
.
>>>> http://xs2g.2.vu/1
Massachusetts allowed police departments to keep secret the names of people arrested on domestic violence charges, allegedly to protect the victims. The law also kept the names of abusive police officers out of public view.
“And the wording of the law does not care that the person accused of the crime in this case is himself dead and cannot harass the officers or the officers' family.”
The law is meant to prevent anyone from harassing a person defined as a victim, not just the accused. In this case it helps prevent local advocates and “concerned citizens” from showing up at an officer's home
Public employees should have zero expectation of privacy for any and all actions and activity that happens on the clock.
All citizens have the right to peacefully assemble to address their grievances with the government, even if it is one governmental employee at a time, and even if said local advocates and concerned citizens show up on the sidewalk in front of an officer's home.
If that's too much heat, then perhaps they would be more suited for a security gig as the night watchman at Home Depot.
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (res-32) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career & can gain more dollars on-line going this article.
.
>>>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com