Florida Sheriff Loses Appeal over Web Postings

Updated: July 17th, 2006 09:49 AM EDT

THOMAS W. KRAUSE
The Tampa Tribune (Florida)

TAMPA - An appeals court has provided perhaps the final denial of the attempt by the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office to find the names of deputies who posted anonymous, often critical, messages on a Web site.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal did not provide a reason for the denial, so it is unlikely the case can move to a higher court.

"That means they could find absolutely no error with either the conclusions reached by the lower court or any of the reasoning," said Luke Lirot, the attorney for leoaffairs.com, a privately run sounding board for law enforcement officers who want to discuss their departments.

Previous judges ruled that anonymous speech, including posts on a Web site, is protected by the Constitution.

Lirot said deputies have as much right as anyone to call into question the actions of the government. If the deputies are acting as whistleblowers by airing problems with government policy, their speech and identities are even more protected, he said.

"Simply because you participate in the field of law enforcement doesn't mean you have to leave your constitutional rights at the door," Lirot said.

But Thea Clark, a sheriff's office attorney, said the rules are different for deputies. Deputies must rely on one another and trust one another with their lives, she said.

Clark said Sheriff David Gee was not concerned with criticism of his policies. He was concerned about deputies who used a public forum to make cruel, sometimes sexist and racist, remarks about other deputies.

"People shouldn't have to work in that environment," she said.

Clark pointed out that in January, Hillsborough County Circuit Judge Marva Crenshaw ordered site owners to remove racist and sexist language, which is not protected speech.

The issue arose last year, when the sheriff's office argued that it had a compelling need to get the names of anonymous deputies who posted messages critical of the investigation of Steven and Marlene Aisenberg's missing baby. Those who posted the messages, the sheriff argued, might have critical information about the case.

Circuit Judge William Levens ruled that Web site owners did not have to provide information about who posted the messages because anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment.

The sheriff's office also tried to secure the names through a lawsuit filed against several "John Doe and Jane Doe" deputies.

The lawsuit claimed the deputies broke department policy when they included sexist and racist language in the messages.

In that case, Crenshaw ruled that free-speech rights protect those who posted the messages. The sheriff's unsuccessful appeal was of Crenshaw's ruling.

Reporter Thomas W. Krause can be reached at tkrause@tampatrib.com or (813) 259-7698.