Posted on 04/06/2005 10:07:43 AM PDT by lainie
Letter To Editor Criticized Use Of Tasers, Sheriff's Weight
ORLANDO, Fla. -- Orange County's sheriff may have broken the law when he used driver's license records to track down a woman who wrote a newspaper to criticize his staff's use of Taser stun guns and described him as too fat for basic police work, critics say.Orange County Sheriff Kevin Beary had his aides use the records to get the address of Alice Gawronski so he could send her a scathing letter, which some say violated federal privacy law. It is illegal to access a driver's license database to obtain personal information, except for clear law-enforcement purposes, under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994.
"I recently read your slanderous remarks about the Orange County Sheriff's Office in the Orlando Sentinel," Beary wrote Gawronski on March 23. "It is unfortunate that people ridicule others without arming themselves with the facts before they slander a law enforcement agency or individual."
Gawronski said, "I thought I was exercising my First Amendment right of free speech -- expressing an opinion in an open forum about a paid public official." She considered Beary's letter a form of intimidation.
Violators of the driver's privacy act can be sued in U.S. District Court for damages of at least $2,500, punitive damages, attorney's fees and all other relief the court determines to be appropriate.
"If I were her, I'd sue and get him in front of a jury. He'd probably get laughed out of the courtroom," said Chris Hoofnagle, the senior counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "This is the most common problem with surveillance -- who's watching the watchers."
(Excerpt) Read more at wftv.com ...
Weight? Excuse me! I thought that was an issue here. Harrass? I think that would require several letters.
You said the press doesn't like his weight now? What are you talking about.
A sheriff abusing his power one time is enough for me.
Glad he is a good sherrif. I kind of think his personal reply to a public letter disqualifies him from that, though. The proper reply would have been an answering letter to the same newspaper. Whatever the legality or the intent, a personal letter like that from a sherrif to a private citizen is definitely intimidating - not appropriate in a free society, IMO.
To clarify: The press does not like his use of taser guns or his conservative leanings. The liberals do not like that he goes after criminals and uses tasers. The weight comment came up in the letter to the newspaper from someone who does not like tasers or him or his weight. As for his abuse of power, I am very certain that he won't get away with anything he should not.
True. But still, he had no right to get the woman's address.
All those that died in Dachau and Auschwitz appreciate your sarcasom....that was sarcasm, wasn't it?
Except when he's breaking the law, right?
It's for The Children.
I totally agree with you. See post 57.
Ol' Dan, please see post #57, I should have made my stand clearer in the first place. Apologies.
Yes, I agree that liberal office holders are no better, probably much worse, IMO. Thanks. I do kind of understand how the sheriff's face must have turned red when he perused that particular morning paper. I can imagine some of the kidding around the office was unmerciful.
The left-wing rabble - including one of their their mouthpieces, the Orlando Sentinel, have been trying to take Sheriff Beary down for years, but he's re-elected here every time he runs.
Just like the Left goes after Tom DeLay, President Bush, and every other effective leader in America, so they relentlessly go after Sheriff Beary.
Lay off our Sheriff. We love him.
As the state expands, so does the definition of "acceptable conduct by the state." So, that includes "as long as he's a target of the Orlando Sentinel," whatever goes, is fine with you. Sounds like you have exactly what you want and deserve.
This man has been totally misread! He has a hands on
approach with all of his constituants and goes out of his way to help people!
During the hurricanes he was out in the dangerous winds checking on the
elderly making sure they were ok. It is not surprising that he would
want to straighten out a matter of great concern to someone in his
county. That's just the way he is and that is one of the biggest reasons he
got re-elected.
Let's see, now --- We have a sheriff who has a decades long, steller record in law enforcement. He is respected and appreciated by all in the community (with the exception of the criminal element and their supporters), to the extent that he is re-elected by a wide margin each time he runs. People feel very safe in this county knowing he is on the job.
A citizen in his district writes a letter to the editor voicing concern over those big meanie law enforcement officers using taser guns to subdue suspected law-breakers. She signs her first and last name and the city in which she lives to her letter.
The sheriff, wanting to afford her the opportunity to ride in the cruisers with law enforcement herself so as to see firsthand how responsibly the tasers are being used by the officers, obtained her address and sent her a letter.
He obtained her address from the DMV. That wouldn't have been necessary because her name, address, telephone number, etc., etc., are all over the internet: Google Results 1 - 10 of about 266 for Alice Gawronski Fl. (0.12 seconds) [snip]
And because I know the sheriff to be an upstanding person and believe that this incident has been blown way out of proportion, you state: "Whatever goes is fine with you."
Dingy! Dingy! Is your name "Alice"?
Doesn't make any difference whether or not it was "necessary:" he admitted using DMV records to find her, when sending a letter to the editor in reply would have been more than sufficient. I don't care if he's the greatest sheriff since Lobo, he broke the law and it's bizarre that you want to make ME the bad guy.
People make mistakes. Some big - some small. A charitable person will give the benefit of the doubt to someone whose life shows a long-term pattern of commendable, law-abiding behavior.
I hear they have an opening for "The Church Lady" position on Saturday Night Live. You may want to apply.
Moral busybodies:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under live robber barons than under omnipotent moral busibodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good, will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
"Isn't that special"?
Uh, whatever. I'm not an SNL character. I'm hardly a moral busybody for pointing out abuse of power. He's a sheriff, sworn to uphold the law. He is supposed to know better. It is vital that The People keeps and maintains its power over government, and there was a time when we didn't have to talk conservatives into that line of thinking. You know -- who's watching the watchers? At least your more sane compatriots down there acknowledge what he did was wrong and that he shouldn't just get away with it. Call me all the names you want. I still haven't done anything, and it still won't change facts.
Even though your conscience probably doesn't bother you at all, I suggest that - for STARTERS - you run down to the nearest police station and turn yourself in so as to "pay the price" for all the times you weren't caught "doing wrong" as you "broke the law" speeding.
One could almost equate the obsession you exhibit over our sheriff with the inordinate obsession the DemocRATS and their mouthpieces in the MSM exhibit over such "criminals" as Tom DeLay, President Bush, Mel Martinez, Jeb Bush, et.al., ad nauseum.
The rigid KOOKS in the hard right are the flip side of the coin of the KOOK extremists that make up the hard left.
People make mistakes. Some big - some small. A charitable person will give the benefit of the doubt to someone whose life shows a long-term pattern of commendable, law-abiding behavior.
Readers will notice the catagory of people with which you relate.
BTW! Let us know what they determine the amount of your accumulated speeding fines to be after you confess to them, will you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.