Florida Judge Dissolves Injunction Blocking Paper From Publishing Names Of Officers Who Killed A Man

Free Speech

from the oh-that-pesky-First-Amendment-what-will-it-do-next dept

About a week ago, a Florida judge decided a local law superseded the First Amendment. The judge granted an injunction to law enforcement officers, barring a Florida newspaper from publishing their names.

The names were of public interest. The officers, deputies for the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office, had arrived at an apartment to serve an eviction notice on the resident. It did not go smoothly. The 58-year-old, soon to be ex-resident, greeted the deputies wielding a knife. One officer tased the man but it seemingly had no effect. According to the deputies, the man then “advanced” towards them while holding the knife in a “threatening manner.” One deputy (“Deputy Doe,” according to the ruling) shot the man, killing him.

The Herald-Tribune followed up its reporting on this shooting by filing public records requests. One of those resulted in records being obtained from the state attorney’s office. These records contained the unredacted last names of the deputies involved in the shooting.

The Sheriff’s Office went to court to prevent these names from being published. The agency cited the state’s “Marsy’s Law” in support of its arguments. These laws, among other things, prevent publication of the names of crime victims. The Sheriff’s theory was that the deputies were victims of a crime (the “threatening advance” noted above) and, therefore, it was illegal for their names to be published.

The judge somehow agreed, granting an injunction against the newspaper. This happened despite the unlawful disclosure being made by the state attorney’s office. All the newspaper was doing was publishing information it had acquired legally. All of this — including the newspaper’s First Amendment rights — was ignored to allow a victims’ rights law to be abused by some of the most powerful people in the state: law enforcement officers.

Fortunately, as PBS/NPR affiliate WGCU reports, this injunction has been struck down. Chief Circuit Judge Charles E. Roberts granted the injunction. Another, better judge (Charles E. Williams for those keeping score at home) has dissolved the injunction.

The ruling [PDF] (posted by WGCU, which earns it the link above, rather than other outlets who didn’t post the ruling, including [disappointingly] the Herald-Tribune and the US Press Freedom Tracker) says this is impermissible prior restraint, citing none other than the Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker case that ultimately shut down the news/gossip site.

As in the Gawker case, the information was lawfully obtained. And there’s nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to prevent publication of lawfully obtained information.

Under the unique facts of this case, particularly the fact that the State Attorney, albeit mistakenly, divulged identifying information of Deputy Doe #1 and Deputy Doe #2 to Respondents, who, by lawful journalistic means then ascertained the identities of the deputies, the Court finds that the temporary injunction entered in this case is an unconstitutional prior restraint that must be dissolved.

This order was temporarily stayed to allow the Sheriff’s Office to respond (a privilege not extended to the Herald-Tribune by the original judge, who granted the motion without any involvement from the paper whatsoever), but it appears the Florida Center for Government Accountability (FLCGA) has already published one of the deputies’ names. This article appeared June 23, nine days after the judge blocked the Herald-Tribune from publishing its information.

The identified deputy is Stephanie Graham, a veteran of at least 18 years on the force. Sheriff’s Office spokeswoman Kaitlyn Perez said in a press conference that a female deputy pulled the trigger, but FLCGA News hasn’t been able to independently confirm whether it was Graham or the other deputy at the scene who fired the fatal shots.

Like the Sarasota Herald Tribune, FLCGA News came by Graham’s identity in an entirely legal fashion, in this case old-fashioned digging through public documents.

The sheriff’s office disclosed that the same deputies involved in the shooting had served eviction papers on Evans’ door on March 31, the day before he died. The writ of possession served on that day shows it was signed by a deputy with the initials “SCG” with badge number 1515. Further checks of similar publicly available writs conclusively show that Graham’s badge number is indeed 1515.

The information is out there. Even if the injunction goes back into effect (and it really shouldn’t), at least one deputy involved in the incident has been identified via legal means. But this whole debacle makes it clear the state’s Marsy’s Law needs to be reassessed by legislators. When a law is abused by public officials to withhold information clearly of public interest, the law becomes nothing more than another weapon to be wielded by those who already hold a significant amount of power.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, florida, injunction, police, public records, sarasota, sarasota county sheriff's office, transparency, victims rights