comment: >
  
  I am a doctoral student in Educational Leadership at UCF and we studied his whacked out speech about school behavior. He is certainly delusional
context: Being accused of a crime is just about as bad as being convicted from a publicity point of view. Arrest records, charges, mugshots, etc are made public and then spread by news media, blogs, and even extortion sites. An arrest alone (even with no charge or conviction) shows up on a background check. And then, when they decide you're innocent, nothing new is published and none of the old things are redacted, so you remain guilty in the eyes of the public. You will always look like a guilty criminal in Google search results. It's insane how it works. >
  
  This is why fair judicial systems have a blanket ban on publishing names and pictures of the accused until sentenced guilty.
  Not the vindictive systems though. >
  
  The counter-argument to that is that our justice system is transparent. The media and public know who is being arrested and charged, so the government is held accountable and can't be doing misdeeds in secret.
  I don't know what the answer is or which evil is worse but I can see how keeping things secret has problems too. >
  
  I think the answer is either a published retraction and/or deletion of the original article if the person is found not guilty or the record is expunged. >
  
  Damage is done by then. >
  
  Agreed. Obviously the real solution is not publishing a thing until the case is closed and there is a conviction. But even after a conviction if someone is able to do their sentence and qualify for expungement, there is no reason that should still be searchable. >
  
  Keep the media out of the courtroom would honestly do a lot for it in my opinion, I'm fine with court and arrest records being open to the public but the media plays it up to get people watching/reading. >
  
  The problem is transparency. If a court is closed to the media (and public by default), then we can't guarantee a fair trial as we can't be sure what happened in the court room. Records are good, but who's to say the records are accurate. >
  
  Sheriffs are out here trying to get tik tok famous.
  Breaking laws for likes. >
  
  I’m from the area. This guy spends a ton of his budget on marketing. >
  
  Imagine if they spent that money on better initiatives like more appropriate training and community involvement. >
  
  
  Imagine if they spent that money on better initiatives like more appropriate training and community involvement.
  
  I imagine he wouldn't be reelected? >
  
  Probably not. And that's why police shouldn't be elected. >
  
  You think they should be... Handed positions by whom?
  You think a Sheriff hand picked by Desantis is gonna be better?   Maybe if it came down to the federal level?
  All the way down from the new Supreme Court  v2.0  Where precedent doesn't matter. >
  
  
  Handed positions by whom?
  
  Town mayor, after getting a passing grade at an academy. Preferably an academy nowhere near a Blue Oyster bar. >
  
  You do know the jurisdiction of sheriff isn't a town though, right? >
  
  Yes, a town can be fully within the jurisdiction of a sheriff but it is a county position. Many counties have many towns. >
  
  Good. It's disgusting that law enforcement officials make spectacle out of the performance of their jobs. 
  I understand that Sheriffs are, at least to some degree, a political position... but can we please stop with the grandstanding and attention mongering? >
  
  Most people who are in trouble with the law are not criminals. They shouldn't have the low points in their life used as a carnival act for another persons ego boost. >
  
  Even if they are in trouble, everyone deserves at least a modicum of dignity, when you turn your justice system into a joke like this, that’s all it will ever be >
  
  It's already a joke. Sex offenders have a public registry, meanwhile, murderers do not. Why one and not the other? Why is pissing outside a sexual offence? Because law, aside from the lobbying, is just people throwing out suggestions and hoping one will stick. >
  
  I’ve always made this same argument, I’d be much more concerned to know my neighbor was convicted for physical violence of some sort rather than the low level behavior that gets most people on the sex offended registry >
  
  It's generally not "low level behavior" that gets you on the sex offender registry. >
  
  My friend went to a christian summer camp in Georgia (the state) and got caught having sex with a 16/17 yo. He was 18 at the time. I forget what the details were but her parents were very overprotective (hence Christian summer camp) and tried to get him charged with rape or some other sexual crime involving a minor. Thankfully it didn't stick but he's on their sex offender registry now. You can definitely be put on there for stupid reasons >
  
  
  Thankfully it didn't stick but he's on their sex offender registry now.
  
  I call bullshit to this story. I don't believe any state has a registry for non convicted individuals. It would be a constitutional violation. He was convicted of a 'sex crime'.
  In fact he can request to be taken off after a certain amount of time, and a judge agrees he doesn't pose a risk in GA
  And multiple crimes have been removed from the registry and if he was convicted of one of them he can request to be taken off. 
  Looking at the rules, there is no way he wasn't convicted a felony sex crime and he is on the registry. Your friend is likely lying to you, and you can find out by going to the registry site and typing in their name. >
  
  This was over 5 years ago so I probably got the details wrong. Most certainly wasn't charged with a felony because I have zero doubts his parents would have just left him there and disowned him because they were also batshit crazy. I do remember it only had to be on there for a certain amount of time like 3 years or something so he's probably not on it anymore. I knew the girl he was with (they were dating in secret, not just a random girl) and although I dislike the guy, he most certainly wouldn't have done anything to her that would constitute being labelled as a sex offender, and both he, the girl, and surprisingly his parents were fighting the accusations. So regardless of the details that I'm misremembering, he was on the registry for stupid reasons. Possibly one of the "removed crimes" you mentioned since it was so long ago >
  
  The changes were done in 2010. From what I can find he would have to have been convicted of a felony in order to be on the list. 
  There is often a lot more to these stories than the victim or the offender are willing to say. And it sounds like there is a lot more to this particular one. >
  
  The SO used to do that shit in my area. They would make “fugitives of the week” post. They would take peoples FB profile photos and put them on the list. It was 99% of the time for shit like unpaid traffic tickets. It’s fucking disgusting. Cops wonder why people hate them so much. >
  
  I'm not sure if they wonder, or don't care. >
  
  This is amazing.  Thanks for sharing this. >
  
  I bet my left nut that a Florida judge rules the police have no duty to know for certain you are  wanted if you are not in their custody >
  
  If you read the article, the man was LITERALLY in their custody one of the times he “won” on the wheel. 
  Another time, he had just need released from their custody, after a judge returned him to probation. 
  It should also be noted that his probation was a result of a judge ordering a withholding of adjudication,  and he wasn’t convicted. So, technically, as long as he was adhering to the terms of the probation (he was arrested for violation, but was released when it was dropped, and returned to the same terms—which was the time he had been recently released, yet still appeared on the wheel), he literally and legally had not been convicted of a crime. 
  So, if someone who technically wasn’t even a convicted criminal is considered worthy of this county’s “top ten most wanted felons,” then the sheriff’s budget needs to be severely slashed. There’s clearly an excessive surplus of funds, based on the production surrounding the “wheel of misfortune,” especially when one of their most concerning “fugitives” is someone who has been found by a judge to not require conviction. >
  
  
  he literally and legally had not been convicted of a crime.
  
  "But he could have been a fugitive somewhere. And that's enough facts for us. Americans want to feel safe. It seems like you don't like freedom. You look kind of guilty yourself... Get back here. Halt. Quit resisting arrest with your screams as I taze you or I'll give you some more freedom..." >
  
  Taze? This is Florida sir, we support the ammo and firearm industry and have an economic duty to use them to shoot you dead. >
  
  Electric guns? Get that hippie shit outta here >
  
  In the state of Florida once you get your mugshot taken Sunshine Laws make it so that the mugshot immediately becomes public information. Even if you are found innocent, if someone googles your name the mugshot will remain. There are “businesses” that will scrape the internet for these pics and post them online and on billboards and make you pay to have them taken down. 
  Florida jails are funded by headcount, encouraging officers to be less discriminatory in what offenses they deem to be arrestable because who cares? They get paid regardless. 
  Then you get this other convenient little problem: how can you get a job if every time your name is Googled the employer can see your mugshot and what you were charged with, even if the charges were dropped or your name was cleared. It’s almost like you’d be forced to turn to less legal avenues of work which would most likely put you back into the jailhouse (funding them once again) or to a much lower paying job, such as a tipped position which only has to pay you $2.75 an hour in Florida. Don’t like it? Perfect, it’s a “Work at Will” state, which means your employer can fire whoever they want, whenever they, for whyever they want, without prior notice and rob you of benefits. 
  Couple all that with Floridas terrible education stats and policy that only grants highschoolers 4 years to get their diploma (if you fail a single year and can’t make up the credits by a certain date, you are barred from walking the stage and getting a diploma) you have a state that literally thrives off of tourism and perpetuating cycles of poverty and crime. 
  Source: Spent 26 years there and my brother spent 10+ years fighting to have a mugshot of him, taken after an arrest for a crime he didn’t commit and was absolved of, out of public domain so he could get a job. 
  Fuck Florida. >
  
  I was in a township that was successfully sued for extortion because their department had "Mugshot Monday" where they would round up the weekly arrests and put them on a wall of shame online.
  You could only remove the mugshot by paying the police department an insane sum of money. Even if you fought your case successfully they would leave your mugshot up if you didn't pay the fine.
  Thankfully that stopped after a black college professor was wrongfully accused and lost a job after he was doxxed by a student who dug up his mugshot with a Google search, despite the charges being dropped by the police after his lawyer wanted to review the badge cam footage.
  This is what people mean when they want to defund the police. I don't want GOOD police officer to be undersupplied, but there is a ton of side money from shady shit for police departments ranging from kickbacks from crime scene cleanup companies to straight up extortion like these examples >
  
  Everything this sheriff is doing is illegal. He won't give a fuck about that. He faces no consequences surrounded by Republican judges and representatives. >
  
  And voters. Don’t forget the voters. >
  
  I live in this county.  The sheriff is a fucking tyrant.