Release of information Act - Did Anyone break the law in some released information?

Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by Friptzap, Sep 29, 2008.

  1. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Snipped the following from state of florida website. Form this PDF regarding release of information:
    http://laws.flrules.org/files/Ch_2008-041.pdf

    "Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
    Section 1. Paragraph (d) of subsection (4) of section 119.071, Florida
    Statutes, is amended to read:
    119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.—
    (4) AGENCY PERSONNEL INFORMATION.—
    (d)1.a. The home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers,
    and photographs of active or former law enforcement personnel, including
    correctional and correctional probation officers,......."

    Some of Casey's friends that they have released information from are former law enforcment and they released phone numbers and address no?

    here is the root page for the Florida Law

    the laws are what everyone follows the statutes are what are used to procecute someone for breaking the laws.

    Again here are the statutes:
    http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...1&Tab=statutes&CFID=65363383&CFTOKEN=14586160

    And this is just the root page for all of it:
    http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm?CFID=65363383&CFTOKEN=14586160
     
  2. Loading...


  3. JBean

    JBean Retired WS Administrator

    Messages:
    52,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Part of the problem is much of the personal info was redacted with a highlighter. ..well not really but it may as well have been one.
     
  4. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah really Aye? <- well this was highlighted from word anyway, lost its formating here :)
    :)
    But that aside, perhaps some other people have suits here, perhaps agaist OCSO? or would it be against Casey?
     
  5. MD MOMMY

    MD MOMMY New Member

    Messages:
    5,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's not as though OCSO didn't attempt to "black out" information. Ultimately SOME addresses, ss#'s etc could be seen on the documents though.
     
  6. IrishSweetOne

    IrishSweetOne New Member

    Messages:
    1,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Correction it was the Florida State Attorneys Office that released the info. Not the Sheriffs Office :)
     
  7. JBean

    JBean Retired WS Administrator

    Messages:
    52,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    State's Atty's office. but they probably have E&O insurance LOL.
     
  8. tx_Dot

    tx_Dot New Member

    Messages:
    2,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think Jesse gave his info (maybe not ss#), I don't know about Tony # 2.
    Anymoore x-cops ??
     
  9. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So we should ignore their neglect? So many people are trying to protect rights in so many different ways right now question is what degree of infraction does one stop?

    Releasing personal information of former policemen can be very detrimental to that individual well beyond the complications of identity theft.

    We are protecting ZFG's right to sue in her case against Casey, but what about the rights of these individuals?

    These people could come to harm if they ever were involved in any serious arrests with nefarious individuals wishing to do exact revenge.

    Granted they never realized how far this information would get on the good ole internet and it was a mistake and they never meant for the media to spread it across the country like water but they did release it none the less sloppy as it was.
     
  10. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    AHAH! but they gave the information to the FSAO!

    Plus that just seemed too long for the title.....
     
  11. MD MOMMY

    MD MOMMY New Member

    Messages:
    5,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, if they indeed have an issue with it then it is THEIR right to get an attorney just as ZG did. In this case, I tend to worry about 1 persons rights, above and beyond anyone elses. These people have a voice and right now I can think of 1 person that does not and that is my main focus. JMO.

    And how are WE exactly protecting ZG's right to sue?
     
  12. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gave it to whom? If you mean LE, that does not negate the fact that as former LE their personal information is protected to protect their lives for their duty performed for the state. It should have been properly redacted.
     
  13. HRCODEPINK

    HRCODEPINK Verified Insider

    Messages:
    2,166
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wooooooow...that's not good. I haven't read the full statutes yet, but I can't help but wonder if they might have not even thought about it because I would be willing to bet that the law was intended to protect the officers working the case, not the ones that are witnesses. But like I said, I have not read the law, I just assume that because it makes the most sense. How often, really are LE involved in something as crazy as this...has there ever been anything as crazy as this? You know what I mean. Especially with there being multiple persons in LE! You den't expect to find someone being involved in something like this who made the rounds at the police academy. I wonder if GA counts? He wasn't LE in Florida. I'll have to come back and read that tomorrow.

    Regardless of any of it, if that is the law, it is the law and it is a good one in my opinion. Someone should be held accountable.
     
  14. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you mean Caylee I cannot agree more, but I don't mind throwing some time in here and there to help out some of these others.

    It gives me a break trying to read through all the new docs.

    Well it was a general we, as in me and those similarly doing so. The we I refer are the ones here that are defending her position to sue. Allthough I do not believe she will win I do believe she has a right to sue. Even though on that same note we must defend Casey's rights as well in that there does not appear to be a statute in place for ZG to win a case, In some of "we's" opinions.
     
  15. MD MOMMY

    MD MOMMY New Member

    Messages:
    5,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course I am LOL.

    I see what you are saying and yes it sucks for them but like anyone else if they have issues they can most definitely seek counsel. I doubt we will be seeing one former member of LE suing anyone as I'm pretty sure he could be charged with something for his stunt, when he lied to LE not once but twice.

    And JG has been plastered all over the press so his case would likely be down the tubes IMO. BUT agreed it is their right to sue over this if the law allows it.
     
  16. Friptzap

    Friptzap New Member

    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh I do agree, I am just pointing out that this case has opened up some "flood" gates, that have gotten a tad out of control, so if people are looking to protect rights, I was noting some other possible rights violations.
     
  17. JBean

    JBean Retired WS Administrator

    Messages:
    52,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think we have another thread on that topic.
    Please don't start posting about that in here. Two completely different topics.
     
  18. gardenhart

    gardenhart New Member

    Messages:
    814
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Subsection 4 has to do with agency personel information and that's the section of 119.70 that was amended by this bill. It has nothing to do with the material released in this case.
     
  19. Themis

    Themis Registered User

    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Government attorneys generally do not have E&O insurance. Government entities are generally self insured or have a pool with other governmental entities. Ultimately, the taxpayer is the insurer.
     
  20. SeriouslySearching

    SeriouslySearching Active Member

    Messages:
    35,527
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Great! Just what we need...more lawyers involved in this case!

    I don't think there was any wrong doing in what was released.
     
  21. jennjenn

    jennjenn New Member

    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for the clarification, that makes sense. I am still curious what allowed the State to release those phone records to the public with all those phone numbers in them......can anyone explain that....I have seen links to statues but Im knee deep in my own course work and not really looking to take up law :p
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice