I think the way you catch them is when you see a policy implemented that you know would require a public vote, and none is found. Such as increasing benefits in lieu of pay.
Interesting turn in public records request in Escambia Co.
- Thread starter wrobert
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
I think the way you catch them is when you see a policy implemented that you know would require a public vote, and none is found. Such as increasing benefits in lieu of pay.
The reason they requested the computer is because they have proof that emails were sent to the private account on it about government business.
This isn't an invasion of privacy we need to worry about, it's yet another elected official not following the rules and trying to circumvent the law.
This isn't an invasion of privacy we need to worry about, it's yet another elected official not following the rules and trying to circumvent the law.
Keep in mind that anyone can create an email address and access it from any computer, which would bypass all that crap if they wanted to avoid getting caught being in the dark. I cannot honestly believe that if a personal computer is taken in such case as noted above, that people wouldn't abuse their authority and search for many other things while in the progress. I truly think you are fooling yourself if you believe that only incriminating emails will be read.
I'm not saying someone couldn't read their personal emails while searching for the others, I am saying that I don't have a problem w/ them going through the proper legal channels to verify that a court order has been properly carried out.
If you choose to involve a personal email account, laptop, phone, PDA, bank account, in government business it makes it fair game IMO.
If you choose to involve a personal email account, laptop, phone, PDA, bank account, in government business it makes it fair game IMO.
What about letters sent to a private residence? Should the Court also issue a search warrant to search the residence for letters which could have been mailed? If you think not, what makes the difference between searching for incriminating evidence in the two, similar, yet different formats? It is just as likely that one could receive mail as email, and ironically, it may be easier to avoid getting caught, having an actual letter, than an electronic email.
If they have proof that someone is sending mail that contains sensitive information to a certain address to circumvent the law, why shouldn't they be allowed to look for it?
I would think a warrant to search that location would be worded to include those documents..........and that additional charges would be added because they used the US mail system to commit a crime.
I would think a warrant to search that location would be worded to include those documents..........and that additional charges would be added because they used the US mail system to commit a crime.
My point is that if they have proof of incriminating emails, why did they need to seize the computer? They only seized the computer to look for the supposed emails. If they have proof that incriminating letters are being mailed, they wouldn't have to search through a person's house to find the actual letters.
Without proof, it is only speculation, and therefore all public officials could have their computers confiscated and searched in hopes of finding something. Next thing you know, they will be monitoring the phones of elected officials. Oh, wait, I bet they already do that.
Without proof, it is only speculation, and therefore all public officials could have their computers confiscated and searched in hopes of finding something. Next thing you know, they will be monitoring the phones of elected officials. Oh, wait, I bet they already do that.
As I understood it, the computer was seized after a complaint was filed that he didn't comply with the request for all the emails - they gave him 2 months to release his emails to them, and then seized the computer when he still didn't produce them and made excuses.
If that is the case, it doesn't sound as though they had proof. Giving the guy the benefit of the doubt, let's look at the following scenario: the "suspect" received a request to forward all of the County business emails. He (for this scenario) turned over all of said emails. However, some opponent, or haters, suggest that he didn't turn all of them over as requested. So, they take it to the Court, which confiscates his personal computer, searching for something that doesn't exist. (kind of difficult to produce something that doesn't exist.)
Now what makes sense about that, and what would keep people from doing that to every person in elected office in Florida? Answer: absolutely nothing. Nothing more than the news story on the subject, plants the seed of wrong-doing in the citizens of his area, even if no wrong doing ever happened.
I in no way am stating that the person is guilty or innocent of the accusations, I'm just saying that this is the perfect opportunity to play poliTRICKS, to get someone thrown out of office, or to get someone else elected.