Mr Isreals radio interview

[Unregistered]

What a coincidence. Us nitwits are sick of hearing internet lawyers nonsensical explanations of the law too. So why dont you just go away.

Guess what asshole if it wasn’t for cops like me dips!ts like you would be up sh!ts creek without a paddle. So be careful what you wish for. If I ever decide to switch to the other side I would have a field day with cops like you in court.

[Unregistered]

All these graduates of Google Law School!!

[Unregistered]

All these graduates of Google Law School!!

It may not be so funny pretty soon.

[Unregistered]

Hey Jeff can **u hurry up and get us s decent raise before the federal court decision .

[Unregistered]

**u see this is where **u may be wrong. The suspended Sheriff elect may not garner much sympathy in the republican held senate but that’s not the only route he can take. He can take this straight to a Federal Judge who is far less constrained by politics due to lifetime appointments.

A Federal Judge is much more likely to follow he law and not politics. And the legal case for suspension, when **u break it down, frankly isn’t that strong. The key areas the Governor’s team would rely on would be misfeasance, malfeasance, neglect of duty and incompetence. Those are a few of the direct reasons a Governor can suspend/remove a Sheriff. However, it isn’t just a matter of proving these things were present. Rather, **u would have to directly link them to something the Sheriff did or instituted through policy or directive. That correlation or nexus is tantamount to removal. Without it, the Governor loses his case. This isn’t JAG court anymore, the Governor is in the big pond now.

How about he approved the policy that stated the deputy may choose to be a coward! How’s that for nexus Mr. Jailhouse lawyer, or shall I say Queenie.

[Unregistered]

I read all the stupid sh!t **u wrote. Don’t **u get it? He doesn’t have to win that argument immediately to be placed back in charge of the agency.

All he has to show is the governors removal violated his due process rights. The challenge to the state law itself which allowed the removal is a completely separate issue the courts would decide on their own sweet time.

So once again, even if the state law is found constitutional, the removal may not have been constitutional because it violated the 14h Amendment.

I’m going to break it down for **u in another way. If they get a judge who is a strict constitutionalist the sheriff is likely going to prevail in a due process fight. Which is ironic considering the sheriff elect didn’t give much deference to the 2nd Amendment.

But just know this thing isn’t over with yet. I’m not taking sides I’m just trying to explain the law. If **u don’t want the sheriff back **u better hope they get an emotional judge who doesn’t strictly follow the constitution.

**u should probably check out the court ruling regarding Jim Acosta's press badge incident and update **ur legal binder accordingly. Pay particular attention to the part where the judge only found in favor of Acosta because there was no prior rules laid out governing revocation of press passes. In the case of removing elected officials in Florida there are already written rules (State Law) regarding due process in this circumstance. Those rules are being followed. He gets his due process in front of the Senate.

Next **u'll be telling us that every arreat we make is a violation of the Constitution because arrestees are denied their freedoms without due process. I guess according to **u every time we seek to make an arrest we must first call a judge and jury to the scene to give the suspect due process.

If **u are an actual attorney can I know **ur name, if only so ai don't actually hire **u for anything.

[Unregistered]

How about he approved the policy that stated the deputy may choose to be a coward! How’s that for nexus Mr. Jailhouse lawyer, or shall I say Queenie.

Shall to May? **u think Hays gonna cover it. OK buddy.

[Unregistered]

**u should probably check out the court ruling regarding Jim Acosta's press badge incident and update **ur legal binder accordingly. Pay particular attention to the part where the judge only found in favor of Acosta because there was no prior rules laid out governing revocation of press passes. In the case of removing elected officials in Florida there are already written rules (State Law) regarding due process in this circumstance. Those rules are being followed. He gets his due process in front of the Senate.

Next **u'll be telling us that every arreat we make is a violation of the Constitution because arrestees are denied their freedoms without due process. I guess according to **u every time we seek to make an arrest we must first call a judge and jury to the scene to give the suspect due process.

If **u are an actual attorney can I know **ur name, if only so ai don't actually hire **u for anything.

I would guess the basis of the suit will that the removal was politically motivated and so **u can see where that’s going. The Senate is republican lol. That’s **ur idea of due process, perhaps **u should move to Russia.

God **u guys are dumb. Ok stay tuned. This isn’t over guys. **** not going to be that cut and dry.

[Unregistered]

First, there aren't any violations of "due process". However, the Executive Order states the cause of suspension to be "neglect of duty" and "incompentance". "Neglect of duty" as defined by the Florida Supreme Court effectively would require the consitutional offer to not be doing their job at all, such as a no show. Just because someone or some people believe the job isn't done to their satisfaction does not rise to the level of "neglect of duty" as so definded. "Incompenance" as defined by the Florida Supreme Court requires a "condition" that's "onset occured post election". "Incompentance" for the purposes of suspension/removal of a constitutional officer basically requires a serious pyshological condition to have developed post election.

Basically, Isreal was suspended under claims to which the facts do not fit.

This doesn't make it past the courts as the governor did not have the lawful basis to suspend in the first place.

Please notice I'm not advocating for or against Israel. I'm just stating the legal reality. I suspect Israel should be in circuit court shortly on an expedited basis. Two years ago Governor Scott issued an Exeuctive Order of suspension in Broward and it was overturned in 3 weeks from the filing.

Most in the legal community schooled on this process fully agree. The suspension was what it was....politically motivated to appease the Parkland families, NRA and its' membership.

DeSantis also claimed on the campaign trail he would have vetoed the post MSD gun lesislation. A state rep from the panhandle has filed legislation to repeal that legislation. Will DeSantis sign the repeal if it passses the legislature and then face the ire of the Parkland families or veto it and face the ire of the NRA and its' membership. Politics makes strange bed fellows but DeSantis will need to select whose bed he will ultimely select as he may end up without any support.

This story is far from over.

Let's see if we can avoid the nasty, childish and totally ignorant comments but rather initiate a conversation based on facts and the law; not emotion. Unfortunately, I doubt that will happen which is why we have the agency we have today.

[Unregistered]

Duh,duh,duh i aint did nuttin wrong.