Facebook

[Unregistered]

is the "SSO" acronym tainted in the mind of the second floor??

Nope. Not at all.

Many years ago (when the snowbirds were here in winter), the voters abolished the Sarasota "elected" sheriff during a referendum and replaced it with an "appointed" sheriff/director. When the sheriff realized that the county commissioners can fire an "appointed" sheriff/director for incompetence or negligence, he orchestrated another voter referendum (when the snowbirds were gone in summertime) and the "elected" sheriff was reinstated.

[Unregistered]

If they are deleting critical comments but leaving up comments of praise, it would be a content bases restriction which is presumptively invalid.

If they block you from commenting it is a prior restraint the most serious and least tolerable intrusion onto the 1st Amendment.

The records have a minmum 2 year retention schedule. Even if they shut down their page they are required to keep the records. Even if the comment deleted was improper (i.e. profain, threat, etc.) They would still have to keep records for two years.

File the request. If they say they don't have it ask for the destruction logs.


Seems someone is about to be in big trouble.

[Unregistered]

If they are deleting critical comments but leaving up comments of praise, it would be a content bases restriction which is presumptively invalid.

If they block you from commenting it is a prior restraint the most serious and least tolerable intrusion onto the 1st Amendment.

The records have a minmum 2 year retention schedule. Even if they shut down their page they are required to keep the records. Even if the comment deleted was improper (i.e. profain, threat, etc.) They would still have to keep records for two years.

File the request. If they say they don't have it ask for the destruction logs.

Seems someone is about to be in big trouble.

No SSO employee in his right mind would file a public records request because it would be career suicide.

[Unregistered]

You can also request a copy of the sso policy that governs the sso facebook account. And if there is no policy covering it, then there will be eventually. The sso G.O. Manual is getting to be huge!!!!

We have general orders (or policies) on just about everything. My favorite G.O. is the one that says, "No employee will sit, loaf or be idle." Getting back on topic: Is there a policy that covers the SSO Facebook page?

[Unregistered]

Kurt Hoffman forced Wendy Rose to resign, so now Tom Knight can put all of the legal blame on her. However, since Hoffman is an attorney, how come he didn't catch all of this and document in the past? Maybe Knight can create a bogus memo and falsify the date on it ( to cover his tracks), just like his brother Chris Knight did when he got kicked out of FHP.

[Unregistered]

If they are deleting critical comments but leaving up comments of praise, it would be a content bases restriction which is presumptively invalid.

If they block you from commenting it is a prior restraint the most serious and least tolerable intrusion onto the 1st Amendment.

Does the "content-based" rule apply because the SSO Facebook page is maintained by paid SSO civilian/government employees?

The records have a minmum 2 year retention schedule. Even if they shut down their page, they are required to keep the records. Even if the comment deleted was improper (i.e. profain, threat, etc.) They would still have to keep records for two years.

That is certainly not being done.

File the request. If they say they don't have it ask for the destruction logs.

What are destruction logs?

Seems someone is about to be in big trouble.

There will not be any political or legal issues unless:
(a) the media prints a story on it or
(b) someone files a public records request for that stuff and:
1. the 2nd floor is unable to respond
2. or the 2nd floor is unable to supply the requested material
3. or the 2nd floor refuses to comply with the PRR

[PRR]

Does the "content-based" rule apply because the SSO Facebook page is maintained by paid SSO civilian/government employees?

Yes, that is correct. If the SSO Facebook page was privately run, updated and maintained by a private citizen, then it would not be subject to Florida's Sunshine Laws. However, it was originally created by a SSO media employee (who was hired by Sheriff Tom Knight). Since it's creation, it's been operated, updated and maintained by SSO media employees, which makes it subject to Open Records Laws. It would be nice to do a PRR to ascertain exactly which SSO employees have (or have had) editorial and password access to the SSO Facebook page.

[Unregistered]

One thing about the facebook page that is amusing is the Sheriff is making deputies famous. By letting deputies become famous he could make a deputy more popular then himself or Kurt. Dangerous game to play. We have seen this before. The Sheriff or Kurt if (he ever wants to be Sheriff) should be making all the public safety announcements to maintain popularity and the political edge. Dangerous game. All you need is one viral video and you make a common deputy more famous then Kurt.

[Unregistered]

One thing about the facebook page that is amusing is the Sheriff is making deputies famous. By letting deputies become famous he could make a deputy more popular then himself or Kurt. Dangerous game to play. We have seen this before. The Sheriff or Kurt if (he ever wants to be Sheriff) should be making all the public safety announcements to maintain popularity and the political edge. Dangerous game. All you need is one viral video and you make a common deputy more famous then Kurt.

That is true. However, Kurt Hoffman's egregious and unscrupulous past has also been exposed in the media, regarding several incidents of theft and then lying to cover it up. Unfortunately, Larry Dunklee's past also caught up with him.

[Unregistered]

Yes, that is correct. If the SSO Facebook page was privately run, updated and maintained by a private citizen, then it would not be subject to Florida's Sunshine Laws. However, it was originally created by a SSO media employee (who was hired by Sheriff Tom Knight). Since it's creation, it's been operated, updated and maintained by SSO media employees, which makes it subject to Open Records Laws. It would be nice to do a PRR to ascertain exactly which SSO employees have (or have had) editorial and password access to the SSO Facebook page.

What kind of verbal directions has Knight given employee(s) about the facebook page? Hey Hoffman, what's your legal advice about all of this?