Sheriff Tom Knight's courthouse security policy: Legal gunbattle brewing

[Unregistered]

• We have been providing weapons checkpoints at those court facilities for decades, ever since they were built and when the County was first chartered.

• In Hoffman and Knight's original memo, they bragged that they were saving money by abandoning the weapons checkpoints.

• Sarasota County commissioners gave Knight money to fully staff those weapons checkpoints. Knight kept the money, but is not providing those services. Knight abandoned his fiduciary responsibilities, as well as disobeying a court order to staff weapons checkpoints.

None of this passes the smell test.

County commissioners (or Ms. Karen Rushing) could initiate a financial clawback of Mr. Tom Knight's budget to:
- recoup taxpayer dollars that were paid to him to perform specific duties
- which he agreed to perform
- and has historically been performed
- but Mr. Knight is now refusing to provide.

Mr. Knight cannot legally take the money to provide services: and then refuse to provide the services. That is either theft or incompetence.

Knight's Chronology:

1. Knight said he disobeyed the judges orders because he "suddenly" discovered that citizens can legally carry guns into court buildings.

2. Knight abandoned security checkpoints in court buildings. Refer to #1 above.

3. The chief judge court-ordered Knight to reinstate security checkpoints in court buildings -- or else be arrested for contempt-of-court. Knight publicly disobeyed the judge's order. In lieu of arresting Knight, the judge sent the case to the appellate court.

4. It appears that the appellate court is going to unanimously rule against Knight. Once that happens, Knight must reinstate security checkpoints in court buildings -- or be arrested for contempt-of-court.

5. Knight's attorney's (Kurt Hoffman and Pat Duggan) are now claiming that it's too expensive to provide security checkpoints at court buildings. However, that is not a legal reason for Knight to:
a. abandon security checkpoints
b. disobey a court order to resume security checkpoints

The Florida governor should be contacted immediately and notified of these inconsistent and bizarre decisions -- and the governor should intervene by removing Knight from office because Knight's decisions are erratic, unpredictable and are a danger to public safety.

[Unregistered]

Knight's Chronology:

1. Knight said he disobeyed the judges orders because he "suddenly" discovered that citizens can legallyy carry guns into court buildings.

2. Knight abandoned security checkpoints in court buildings. Refer to #1 above.

3. The chief judge court-ordered Knight to reinstate security checkpoints in court buildings -- or else be arrested for contempt-of-court. Knight publicly disobeyed the judge's order. In lieu of arresting Knight, the judge sent the case to the appellate court.

4. It appears that the appellate court is going to unanimously rule against Knight. Once that happens, Knight must reinstate security checkpoints in court buildings -- or be arrested for contempt-of-court.

5. Knight's attorney's (Kurt Hoffman and Pat Duggan) are now claiming that it's too expensive to provide security checkpoints at court buildings. However, that is not a legal reason for Knight to:
a. abandon security checkpoints
b. disobey a court order to resume security checkpoints

The Florida governor should be contacted immediately and notified of these inconsistent and bizarre decisions -- and the governor should intervene by removing Knight from office because Knight's decisions are erratic, unpredictable and are a danger to public safety.

[Unregistered]

This is directed at Knight’s staff nimrod who said that very few shootings happen in court buildings and therefore, CCW permit holders should be allowed to wear guns inside court facilities. That’s ridiculous. The reason there are very few shootings inside court buildings is because they are sterile areas (controlled areas) where guns are prohibited. Guns are seized or turned away at security checkpoints and are now allowed inside. Duh! Using Hoffman’s ridiculous argument:

• There are very few shootings inside police department. Therefore, CCW permit holders should be allowed to wear guns inside police buildings.
• There are very few shootings inside jails. Therefore, CCW permit holders should be allowed to wear guns inside correctional facilities.
• There are very few shootings inside passenger aircraft. Therefore, CCW permit holders should be allowed to wear guns inside passenger planes.
• Etc.

The appellate court needs to make a ruling against Knight as quickly as possible to end this madness.

[Unregistered]

Knight is exhibiting paranoidal Napoleonic tendencies. However, in lieu of arresting Knight for contempt-of-court, the judges should court-order him to undergo a mental health examination to ensure that he is "of sound mind." It would be strictly for his benefit, as well as for the benefit of the public who visits the courthouse complex. For example, Knight's complete abandonment of weapons checkpoints endangers public safety at the courthouse complex.

The Sarasota Sheriff's Office has a legal precedence for evaluating employees to see if they are "of sound mind." For example, Pelfrey was ordered to be examined by a mental health doctor to see if he was "fit for duty." Incredibly, Pelfrey's mental health examination results were published by the Herald-Tribune.

Knight has been experiencing similar issues. However, by abandoning weapons checkpoints in court facilities, Knight is now endangering the public.

Who in their right mind would completely abandon weapons checkpoints at court buildings. That kind of nutty decision making is a danger to the public. The Tom Knight and Kurt Hoffman dancing duo ordered Mike Pelfrey to get evaluated by a shrink. It's now time to get the judge to court order Knight to be evaluated by a shrink because he has become a danger to others.

[news of the weird]

Sarasota sheriff’s Col. Kurt Hoffman wrote in a memo that Capt. Mike Pelfrey was exhibiting mood swings, disobeying orders and experiencing anger issues.

A doctor was hired who determined that Pelfrey was unfit for duty, according to records obtained by the Herald-Tribune. He underwent counseling sessions and monthly medical evaluations. He was eventually reevaluated and reinstated as captain.

Hoffman said the doctor’s evaluation was for Pelfrey’s welfare.

Full story:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20...checkered-past

Some of Knight's dirty and underhanded shenanigans are coming back to him, such as allegations of having temper problems and being emotionally disturbed. The exact things that Knight does to others are coming back to him -- but it's all in public view (this time).

This time, Knight has a public dispute with not just any judge, but with the chief judge of the entire 12th Judicial Circuit. Seriously, who would have ever imagined that Knight wold get into a public argument with a judge? And that it would be documented in the newspaper?

All of these weird ongoing incidents are a public knightmare for the reputation and good standing of the Sarasota Sheriff's Office.

[Unregistered]

A lot of very weird things have been happening. Normally, when an SSO employee disagrees with Knight, then he will openly ridicule him in front of everyone else. That’s his typical MO. However, the last couple of incidents have been with other elected public officials, who are not so easily pushed around.

• For example, we had the tit-for-tat when Knight publicly ridiculed Caroline Zucker and said that he was going to file a formal complaint against her with the Florida ethics commission. That public threat totally backfired.

• Now we have the tit-for-tat with Knight publicly arguing against Judge Charles Williams. When the judge did not arrest Knight, instead of showing humility, Knight threatened to appeal the judge’s ruling against him to the appellate court. However, it looks like that public threat is also backfiring bigtime.

In this current very public legal fiasco with Knight, he has finally bitten off more than he can chew. It’s just so weird how he attacks and argues against people in public. He has no humility or shame. To this very day, he blames VPD for arresting him for disorderly conduct. Again, he has no humility.

[Comprehension is key here]

This is directed at Knight’s staff nimrod who said that very few shootings happen in court buildings and therefore, CCW permit holders should be allowed to wear guns inside court facilities. That’s ridiculous. The reason there are very few shootings inside court buildings is because they are sterile areas (controlled areas) where guns are prohibited. Guns are seized or turned away at security checkpoints and are now allowed inside. Duh!

I still have nothing to do with anyone in Sarasota, so your first assumption is wrong. I realize it is troublesome when facts get in the way, but below is the relevant quote you summarized above. The allegation involved court buildings that do not have functioning courtrooms. These would include clerk of court offices not within a courthouse. Your second assumption was also wrong.

You are clearly a genius and seem to know everything, so where is the crime data? You never cited one case, so here is your chance to justify why you are so afraid of people that have passed a background check and have training carrying guns. I'll make it easier Mr. genius and open it up to ALL government buildings since permit holders can carry guns into all sorts of government buildings. How many have people have been shot or threatened by a permit holder in any such building? How many gun crimes of any nature committed by a permit holder have taken place at any such building? Can you name even one in the past 20 years?

Sorry Mr. genius, you could not identify one then and you still cannot find one now. You probably think half or more of the population of Florida has a gun permit. In fact it is under 10 percent have one with about 1.7 million permits for a state with over 20 million people. How about overall gun crime genius? As a genius, I'm sure you've heard about the FDLE. They do things like collect & publish crime data. According to them, Florida gun crime fell by over 50% from 1989-2011, from 49K to 24K. During this time the number of gun permits rose from 49K to 800K, and population swelled from 12 million to 18 million.

It does not take a genius to figure out that based on crime data, gun permit holders pose no threat to the public using government buildings, to include places like clerk's offices that are not in a courthouse. Keep deputies at actual working courthouses, not other buildings.

Since you brought it up, let's look at evidence. If there were a track record of permit holders committing gun crimes in court buildings that do not have functioning courtrooms, then I'd be in total support of a ban on the entire government building. Can you identify even one where a permit holder was involved in the criminal use of a firearm at a court building in Florida?

Crickets are chirping. Where is all of this permit holder gun crime you are so worried about Mr. genius? I really want to read about it. Oh, and I'll stipulate you hate Tom Knight. For the sake of argument I hate him also. He sucks. He's worse than Hitler, Stalin, and Bin Laden combined. He kicked my dog once.

Now that is out of the way, how about providing some facts?

[Prudence v. Fear]

Oh, and I'll stipulate you hate Tom Knight. For the sake of argument I hate him also. He sucks. He's worse than Hitler, Stalin, and Bin Laden combined. He kicked my dog once.

This writer does not hate Tom Knight, although everyone else does. In every mealtime conversation (or while x56ing), the common thread is that:
- Nobody trusts him. He is absolutely NOT to be trusted.
- He is vengeful and extremely vindictive (watch out Judge Williams!!!)
- He is “emotional” with a powder keg temperament.
- Etc.

This writer definitely thinks that his behaviors are very odd, but there is absolutely no hatred on this end. This writer also agrees that a court-ordered mental health evaluation of his “fitness for duty” is needed for the safety of the public (and for the safety of SSO employees).

The allegation involved court buildings that do not have functioning courtrooms. These would include clerk of court offices not within a courthouse.

And your point is exactly what?

This is not Little House on the Prairie in 1835 where a judge comes into town and uses a one-room building as a courthouse. Since the tiny shack only has one room, please feel free to call it whatever you like: a courtroom, a court house, a court building or a court facility. However, in the 21st Century, things have changed a lot and we now have giant judicial operations that encompass several multiple-story buildings (some are 10 stories tall) requiring huge judicial facilities.

You never cited one case.

The appellate board is going to review all of the “cited” cases.

Open it up to ALL government buildings because permit holders can carry guns into all sorts of government buildings.

• How many have people have been shot or threatened by a permit holder in any such building?
• How many gun crimes of any nature were committed by a permit holder have taken place at any such building?
• Can you name even one in the past 20 years?

You cannot find one.

Those are excellent points! However, it is not prudent to allow CCW permit holders to wear their guns:
- Inside court buildings (or court rooms, court houses or court facilities).
- Inside police, sheriff or highway patrol stations.
- Inside state, county and city correctional facilities.
- Inside nuclear facilities in Florida (Stanton Energy Center, Turkey Point, etc.)
- Inside mental health wards
- And so on…

Prudence is different from fear.

Why are you are afraid of people that have passed a background check and have training carrying guns.

Remember: Prudence is different from fear.

Gun permit holders pose no threat to the public using government buildings.

The Constitution is a good thing. The Second Amendment needs to be enforced and upheld. Citizens have a right to keep and bear arms and that right should not be infringed upon by the government. However, even in 1776, it was legal to regulate guns by prohibiting citizens from carrying them into certain “sterile” facilities. Today is no exception.

Prudence was exercised in 1776 and it should continue to be exercised in the 21st Century.

You are clearly a genius.

Uhmmmm ok, there is no argument here on that point.

[Prudence defined]

And your point is exactly what?

This is not Little House on the Prairie in 1835 where a judge comes into town and uses a one-room building as a courthouse. Since the tiny shack only has one room, please feel free to call it whatever you like: a courtroom, a court house, a court building or a court facility. However, in the 21st Century, things have changed a lot and we now have giant judicial operations that encompass several multiple-story buildings (some are 10 stories tall) requiring huge judicial facilities.

Prudence is different from fear.

Remember: Prudence is different from fear.

My point is there have been no gun crimes committed by permit holders in any government building where lawfully carried weapons are and have been allowed and as such there is no documented risk to anyone on the part of these permit holders. I'd think a genius, especially one with law enforcement experience, could see the point of this, but it seems to fly over your head.

LOL, all of that typing and no gun crimes committed by permit holders. Remember: Anyone else carrying a gun can't bring it in, since they are breaking the law.

I'll stick with courthouse and courtroom, since that is what the statute says, and that is where the security is needed and remains in place, contrary to the inflammatory and false allegation made in another of your posts. Court facility is too generic, as a "facility" includes a parking lot in one statute. Only a nimrod would see the need to screen for guns in a parking lot, which incidentally is covered in s. 790.06(12)(b)- permit holders cannot be banned from keeping weapons in their cars. It is because of nimrods that a definition of courthouse is needed. Only a backroom deal from a fear mongering Democrat prevented that from happening this year. I hope it passes next year to put an end to this foolishness.

Webster's definition of prudence

1: the ability to govern and discipline oneself by the use of reason

2: sagacity or shrewdness in the management of affairs

3: skill and good judgment in the use of resources

4: caution or circumspection as to danger or risk


Is it reasonable to ban lawfully carried weapons from buildings where no gun crimes have been committed despite anyone's ability to bring one into the building? With a permit, you can carry a gun in the following government buildings or offices and others:
Tax collector
Property appraiser
DMV
Building department
State attorney (remote office)
Public defender (remote office)
Communications
Health department
Human relations
Libraries
Planning and Development
Procurement
Real Property
Risk and Safety (LOL)
State Representative

Remember: No gun crimes have been committed in any of them by permit holders.

What makes a clerk's office outside of a courthouse so special? I will guarantee you there are more irate people at the tax collector or DMV than the clerk's office, because that is where they have to pay money or bring in a bunch of papers to try & get something done, usually requiring multiple trips. Why hasn't the legislature included them- any of them- in the statute? Career centers made the list, the tax collector did not.

Look at nearby Hernando County. There are two clerk of court offices there. One is in an actual courthouse, the other is a standalone government center in Spring Hill. In Spring Hill, they share space with other county offices such as the tax collector. Permit holders can bring their guns into that building. According to genius theory, those employees must be quaking in their shoes every day they go to work. In reality, they are as safe as anyone in any other county building. In reality, permit holders save lives. The even save the lives of Deputies, such as the one in Lee County last year.

It's neither shrewd management nor good judgement in the use of resources to use sworn deputies and screen for guns to protect a building where there is no or minimal risk based upon historical crime. Do you send in extra deputies to patrol an area where there have been very few or no burglaries, or do you use them where there have been a lot of burglaries? Prudence is all about resource management, there are neither unlimited funds nor unlimited deputies.

[Unregistered]

A lot of very weird things have been happening. Normally, when an SSO employee disagrees with Knight, then he will openly ridicule him in front of everyone else. That’s his typical MO. However, the last couple of incidents have been with other elected public officials, who are not so easily pushed around.

• For example, we had the tit-for-tat when Knight publicly ridiculed Caroline Zucker and said that he was going to file a formal complaint against her with the Florida ethics commission. That public threat totally backfired.

• Now we have the tit-for-tat with Knight publicly arguing against Judge Charles Williams. When the judge did not arrest Knight, instead of showing humility, Knight threatened to appeal the judge’s ruling against him to the appellate court. However, it looks like that public threat is also backfiring bigtime.

In this current very public legal fiasco with Knight, he has finally bitten off more than he can chew. It’s just so weird how he attacks and argues against people in public. He has no humility or shame. To this very day, he blames VPD for arresting him for disorderly conduct. Again, he has no humility.

After the appeals court rules against Knight (and they most certainly will), then Knight will either have to obey the court or get thrown in jail for contempt of court. However, what makes this kind of arrest different is that Knight cannot bond out of jail on that kind of charge (you can ask the SAO about it). Even Plank was able to bond out of jail, but Knight won't be able to! Knight can only get out of jail by obeying the court.