OUR VIEW

Marsy’s Law ruling calls for transparency

OUR VIEW: A judge’s ruling that Marsy’s Law does not protect the names of law officers who shoot and/or kill civilians supports our view.

The argument that names of law officers who shoot someone in the line of duty are exempt from public record was shot down recently by a Leon County Circuit judge.

The judge ruled “the public has a vital right to evaluate the conduct of our law enforcement officers, who are empowered to arrest people and use deadly force.”

In other words, we all should be able to learn which cops are shooting and killing people — even if they have done everything according to the book and their conduct is perfectly acceptable.

The judge’s ruling was to settle a lawsuit filed in the case of a Tallahassee police officer who shot and killed Tony McDade and another unnamed officer involved in separate case. The suit argued their names should not be shielded by Marsy’s Law, which calls for eliminating the names of victims in crimes from all reports to protect their identity. The law, which has been passed in numerous states, was championed by a man whose family was not aware the alleged killer of his sister was out on bail. The idea behind the law is to protect the family from harassment or the possibility of having to deal with any threat from the criminal.

Law enforcement agencies in Florida, including the Charlotte County and Sarasota County sheriff’s offices, have interpreted that law to include officers who are involved in a gunfight, or who have been threatened, and shoot someone in self defense.

There are two specific incidents in Charlotte County where the names of officers have not been released in a shooting death.

Bradley Rundle, a 61-year-old Englewood man, was killed in 2019 by deputies who responded to a family

disturbance, after Rundle began firing at them. Rundle had served 20 years in the military and suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, according to his family.

More recently, Sean Constance, 37, of Sarasota, was shot and killed by a deputy in training in February after he got out of a car during a traffic stop and immediately pulled out a gun, reportedly firing at the deputy and his trainer.

We have no reason to believe officers did anything wrong in either case. In the Rundle shooting, they may even be in line for kudos by short circuiting an incident that could have evolved into a deadly shooting of innocent relatives.

Our argument has always been that officers have a job to do and these incidents are part of that job. Categorizing them as victims is a stretch used to keep them out of the public spotlight. Naming them is also important so the public can be aware, for example, if an officer is involved in multiple shootings or use of force arrests. A history of such actions could suggest there is a problem.

The Florida Police Benevolent Association will appeal the judge’s decision. The union wants to continue to protect the names of officers involved in deadly shootings.

The judge’s ruling was a win for First Amendment rights. It is our belief that any appeal should, and will be, denied and hopefully, in the near future, the names of officers who make the delicate decision to use deadly force will be available to the public.