As honest John

[Unregistered]

Colonel Kurt Hoffman failed a polygraph test about stealing from multiple victims and from multiple employers. After failing the lie detector test, Hoffman fessed up to stealing pornography from a store, a boat from a citizen, and other things from past employers. While working as a reserve law enforcement officer, Hoffman stole gas from the Charlotte Sheriff's Office for use in his personal car (twice). None of this was ever forwarded to FDLE for certification issues. Some (not all) of these things have been documented in the media. Click here to see more. Knight still promoted Hoffman and he is still employed as the second in command at the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office.

Kurt, here she is for you. She's waiting for you:

[Unregistered]

Kurt, here she is for you. She's waiting for you:

First it was rub-a-chub Larry Dunklee and then it was beatem-up Steve Burnz and now it’s porn-theft Kurt Hoffman. The only central theme is a strange affiliation with women in all the wrong ways. BTW Hoffman is not an honest John, as is evidenced by his documented pattern of thefts. He admits stealing gasoline as a sworn officer. That speaks volumes about his lack of integrity.

[Unregistered]

Kurt, here she is for you. She's waiting for you:

Dunno about the “honest” part, but the “John” part is accurate.

[Unregistered]

Colonel Kurt Hoffman failed a polygraph test about stealing from multiple victims and from multiple employers. After failing the lie detector test, Hoffman fessed up to stealing pornography from a store, a boat from a citizen, and other things from past employers. While working as a reserve law enforcement officer, Hoffman stole gas from the Charlotte Sheriff's Office for use in his personal car (twice). None of this was ever forwarded to FDLE for certification issues. Some (not all) of these things have been documented in the media. Click here to see more. Knight still promoted Hoffman and he is still employed as the second in command at the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office.

Ethics and morality are sorely lacking at the senior levels of the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office. As Ken Dudding described Kurt Hoffman after he got caught lying during his polygraph test: “A leopard doesn’t change its spots and a liar keeps on lying.”

Then we have the illustrious John Walsh case. Yea it’s an old case, but it’s accurate. Walsh lied multiple times while he was being interviewed during an investigation. Walsh told bold faced lies – corruption lies – just like his brother, who by the way is a convicted felon. It obviously runs in the family and not just at the senior levels of the SSO. Plus John Walsh encouraged another deputy to lie for him. That’s about as low as you can get in a public corruption sting. John Walsh and Tom Knight are basically identical twins, which is why Knight loves Walsh so much. Walsh lies to Knight and Knight admires his ability to lie under pressure.

And do you remember when Tom Knight teamed up with Eric Robinson to “intentionally sink the school budget,” just to get revenge against school superintendent Todd Bowden? Once again, we’ve reached rock bottom because the top men are unethical and connivingly deceitful.

So now we have Tom Knight, Kurt Hoffman and John Walsh – all leading the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office. All of them are unethical liars who have no legitimate business being in a law enforcement (let alone in leadership positions). Alas, there they are, breathing the same good oxygen as the rest of us – lie after lie.

And the absolute worst thing about this post is that it is truthful – and you know it’s true. Every dog has his day and the liars will be no different. Yep, that’s a fact.

[Unregistered]

After the Hillsborough sheriff lost the court case, when he sued to get the names of posters at leoaffairs, Hoffman urged the SSO sheriff to sue for a second time. That was actually very stupid legal advice, just like it was stupid legal advice when Hoffman advised Knight to challenge the chief judge on courtroom security issues (Knight lost that court case, of course). If the SSO sheriff had listened to Hoffman’s bad legal advice to sue leoaffairs for the names of posters, it would have subjected the sheriff (and Hoffman) to probing questions in a legal venue, which they would be legally obliged to answer. Some probing questions would include:
* Knight’s arrest for drunk and disorderly conduct when he became emotional over “woman issues.”
* Hoffman’s failing the lie detector test over stealing from multiple employers.
* Why are deputies discussing these and other issues in a public forum?
Sure, employees talk about that crap, but at least it’s not being discussed in a courtroom setting. Hoffman’s advice to sue in court would have brought a lot of dirty laundry into the open in a legal setting.

[Unregistered]

After the Hillsborough sheriff lost the court case, when he sued to get the names of posters at leoaffairs, Hoffman urged the SSO sheriff to sue for a second time. That was actually very stupid legal advice, just like it was stupid legal advice when Hoffman advised Knight to challenge the chief judge on courtroom security issues (Knight lost that court case, of course). If the SSO sheriff had listened to Hoffman’s bad legal advice to sue leoaffairs for the names of posters, it would have subjected the sheriff (and Hoffman) to probing questions in a legal venue, which they would be legally obliged to answer. Some probing questions would include:
* Knight’s arrest for drunk and disorderly conduct when he became emotional over “woman issues.”
* Hoffman’s failing the lie detector test over stealing from multiple employers.
* Why are deputies discussing these and other issues in a public forum?
Sure, employees talk about that crap, but at least it’s not being discussed in a courtroom setting. Hoffman’s advice to sue in court would have brought a lot of dirty laundry into the open in a legal setting.

The newspaper article about Hoffman's proclivity to steal had not yet surfaced when all that went down --- and Knight had not yet flunked his FBI background check for a TS security clearance. A lot has happened since then.

[Unregistered]

Back when I got my TS clearance (yrs ago in the Army) the FBI guys talked to neighbors, ex teachers, former co workers and people that had known me. They seemed to be concerned about honesty, if you are inclined to live beyond your means. They wanted to know how easy you would be to bribe, blackmail or coerce. When they went to do car one's background somebody they questioned must have said something which was enough to get the "no". I don't recall a lot of people being denied, so who do you think they talked to?

[Unregistered]

Back when I got my TS clearance (yrs ago in the Army) the FBI guys talked to my neighbors, ex teachers, former co workers and people that had known me. They seemed to be concerned about honesty. They wanted to know how easy you would be to bribe, blackmail or coerce. When they went to do Knight's background, somebody that they questioned obviously said something, which was enough for Knight to be denied a favorable clearance. I don't recall a lot of people being denied, so who do you think they talked to?

Denial of a federal security clearance is not based on the single word of a lone interviewee during a background investigation. It is based on multiple interviews that expose or corroborate a systemic pattern of moral turpitude. The reason "moral character" issues are evaluated by the FBI in a background investigation is because people that lack moral character are:
- easier to bribe
- easier to influence for money or prestige or “reputation”
- more inclined to assassinate the reputations of others, when it suits their own political agenda.

As a classic example, look at how Knight secretly tried to assassinate the moral character of the current school superintendent (Todd Bowden). However, the Sarasota-Herald Tribune exposed Knight's dirty behind-the-scenes actions. Also, Knight's dirty actions were exposed AFTER he was denied a federal security clearance. That proves that the prior federal denial of a security clearance for Knight was 100% accurate. The feds accurately deduced Knight's lack of moral character BEFORE he could do any damage to national security - although Knight will obviously be able to continue to do local damage in Sarasota County, when he believes he can do it without getting caught.

Knight will NEVER be granted a TS security clearance by the federal government because he has documented systemic moral character flaws that are corroborated by multiple credible witnesses.

[Unregistered]

Denial of a federal security clearance is not based on the single word of a lone interviewee during a background investigation. It is based on multiple interviews that expose or corroborate a systemic pattern of moral turpitude. The reason "moral character" issues are evaluated by the FBI in a background investigation is because people that lack moral character are:
- easier to bribe
- easier to influence for money or prestige or “reputation”
- more inclined to assassinate the reputations of others, when it suits their own political agenda.

As a classic example, look at how Knight secretly tried to assassinate the moral character of the current school superintendent (Todd Bowden). However, the Sarasota-Herald Tribune exposed Knight's dirty behind-the-scenes actions. Also, Knight's dirty actions were exposed AFTER he was denied a federal security clearance. That proves that the prior federal denial of a security clearance for Knight was 100% accurate. The feds accurately deduced Knight's lack of moral character BEFORE he could do any damage to national security - although Knight will obviously be able to continue to do local damage in Sarasota County, when he believes he can do it without getting caught.

Knight will NEVER be granted a TS security clearance by the federal government because he has documented systemic moral character flaws that are corroborated by multiple credible witnesses.

Again....who in has past painted him for what he is? Who? Former employees? Neighbors? Cops? Banks? he apparently came across as a hot potato and they wouldn't risk it. Years back they were pretty thorough. Perhaps they still are.

[Unregistered]

Denial of a federal security clearance is not based on the single word of a lone interviewee during a background investigation. It is based on multiple interviews that expose or corroborate a systemic pattern of moral turpitude. The reason "moral character" issues are evaluated by the FBI in a background investigation is because people that lack moral character are:
- easier to bribe
- easier to influence for money or prestige or “reputation”
- more inclined to assassinate the reputations of others, when it suits their own political agenda.

As a classic example, look at how Knight secretly tried to assassinate the moral character of the current school superintendent (Todd Bowden). However, the Sarasota-Herald Tribune exposed Knight's dirty behind-the-scenes actions. Also, Knight's dirty actions were exposed AFTER he was denied a federal security clearance. That proves that the prior federal denial of a security clearance for Knight was 100% accurate. The feds accurately deduced Knight's lack of moral character BEFORE he could do any damage to national security - although Knight will obviously be able to continue to do local damage in Sarasota County, when he believes he can do it without getting caught.

Knight will NEVER be granted a TS security clearance by the federal government because he has documented systemic moral character flaws that are corroborated by multiple credible witnesses.

Again....who in Knight's past painted him for what he is? Who? Former employees? Neighbors? Cops? Banks? He apparently came across as a hot potato to the FBI and they wouldn't risk granting him a TS security clearance. Years back they were pretty thorough. Perhaps they still are.

Non-SSO employees are safe for telling FBI BI investigators the truth about Knight being an emotionally out-of-control hothead. Current SSO employees would be framed and persecuted, if Knight found out who they are. Just lay low and stay off his vindictive radar.