Florida Moves To Restrict Media Access To Stand Your Ground Case Records

[Old Fart]

After a Tampa Bay Times' review of 200 cases that involved the controversial "Stand Your Ground" law found an "uneven application" and "shocking outcomes," one Florida lawmaker is seeking to impede the media's ability to scrutinize the law.

Earlier this month, state Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fort Walton Beach) filed an amendment that would "severely limit access to court records in the self-defense cases," the Times' Michael van Sickler reports.

The amendment would allow those found innocent in a Stand Your Ground case to "apply for a certificate of eligibility to expunge the associated criminal history record."

Gaetz said his amendment was unrelated to the Times' Stand Your Ground investigation, the Associated Press reports. "The point is to ensure that someone who appropriately uses a Stand Your Ground defense doesn't have their life ruined by the use of that defense," he said.

Gaetz's amendment has sparked concern among journalists, Media Matters reports, who say the loss of access to public records could have damaging effects.

For entire article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/24/stand-your-ground-records_n_5007847.html

 

[Fredkrueger100]

I hope it passes. I love how the journalists are saying it will hurt their job. I say good. All they care about is spewing out crap. They are just mad because they won't be able to put out stuff that makes the stand your ground Law look bad. People in the media sicken me. That is one job in my opinion that takes a scumbag to do it. I have to many morals to do it.

 

[Glocktogo]

If the journalists are complaining regarding this subject, what they're really saying is it impacts their ability to make money on the suffering of others. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

 

[rawhide]

Gaetz said his amendment was unrelated to the Times' Stand Your Ground investigation, the Associated Press reports. "The point is to ensure that someone who appropriately uses a Stand Your Ground defense doesn't have their life ruined by the use of that defense," he said.

Sounds like the media in this case has an agenda. BUT, Limiting information access to the media because they might misuse it treads onto very dangerous ground. Kind of like limiting law-a-biding citizens access to firearms and magazines because they could misuse it. Be very careful what you wish for.

 

[Dave70968]

The media is (supposed to be) the watchdog of the government. While I understand and applaud the intent--protecting those who've already been forced to defend themselves on the street and in court--keeping governmental happenings secret is a bad, bad road down which to start.

Remember, it's subpoenaing records that has proven all sorts of government corruption, including discriminatory issue of concealed carry permits in may-issue states. This sword cuts both ways; we should wield it cautiously. "Uneven application" of the law--even a law we like--is a fundamental injustice, and we should be glad to see it rooted out and brought into the light. I don't know what, specifically, the Tampa Bay Times review found (or claims to have found), but if the evidence supports the claim, we should seek to fix the problem, not hide the data.

 

[Glocktogo]

That's the problem, media is unaccountable to anyone these days.

 

[Old Fart]

That's the problem, media is unaccountable to anyone these days.

The freedom of the press is a holy grail which should never be questioned or restricted. Don't believe me? Just ask them.

 

[Rod Snell]

Sounds like the media in this case has an agenda. BUT, Limiting information access to the media because they might misuse it treads onto very dangerous ground. Kind of like limiting law-a-biding citizens access to firearms and magazines because they could misuse it. Be very careful what you wish for.

OK, then let's make public the names, addresses, and personal records of all the journalists so all the special interest groups can investigate them and "seek interviews" on their home and cell phones.

I don't think there is one thing special about a journalist that gives them the right to harass everyone else.

 

[Dave70968]

OK, then let's make public the names, addresses, and personal records of all the journalists so all the special interest groups can investigate them and "seek interviews" on their home and cell phones.

I don't think there is one thing special about a journalist that gives them the right to harass everyone else.

Journalists don't have any more access to "personal records" than anybody else.

Remember, the interest being protected by the First Amendment is the people's right to keep an eye on the actions of government. Being charged with a crime, including the disposition of such charges, is a matter of public interest specifically because it is a governmental act. Yes, there is some balancing to be done to avoid unnecessarily ruining a man's good name (see, e.g. Richad Jewell), but the public definitely needs to know whom the government is charging (or not charging), with what, and how those prosecutions are handled. Hiding those records moves us back in the direction of secret courts, and that's somewhere we really don't want to go. Public trials and such are not just to protect the defendant; they're also to give we, the people, confidence that the court system is working properly. Hide the records and we can't audit our government, with all that implies.

 

[RickN]

Media Matters is a far left wing Soros funded group. That should tell you all you need to know.