Marsy’s Law doesn’t unfairly shield officers’ identities
The Sentinel’s recent editorial, “Imagine if Derek Chauvin’s identity had been kept secret; now say hello to Florida” (April 13), as well as the news article, “Experts question ruling that hides cops’ names after some shootings” (April 12), offer a narrow account of Marsy’s Law for Florida and a recent ruling by the First District Court of Appeal.
Marsy’s Law for Florida was approved by Florida voters in 2018 because Floridians recognized the need for crime victims to have clear, enforceable rights and protections in our state constitution. One of those rights is to enable victims to prevent the automatic, public disclosure of personally identifiable information that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victims’ family.
This is a critical right that has provided many victims a sense of comfort and allowed them to feel safe during one of the most vulnerable times in their lives. It enables crime victims to decide on their own terms if they want information about them and what they have just endured out in the public domain. Those are very good things for victims and exactly why the law was embedded in our state constitution.
While the First District Court of Appeal ruled that law enforcement officers who are victims of crime can invoke this privacy provision, it by no way means that Marsy’s Law for Florida can be used to shield law enforcement officers from accountability.
When an officer-involved incident occurs, there is an investigation that must be conducted to determine if the officer was a victim in that situation or if that officer has broken the law. If after an investigation it is determined that an officer broken the law, he or she is not entitled to any rights or protections under Marsy’s Law. His or her name can and should be released publicly just like anyone else accused of a crime.
The responsibility to conduct these investigations falls on the appropriate law enforcement or criminal justice agency. Conducting an investigation into something as sensitive and as high-profile as an officer-involved incident is a serious matter that determines if the officer is a victim. It is in the public’s best interest, and in the interest of transparency, to share with the public information that either exonerates the officer or leads to charges filed against him or her.
News coverage of this ruling has focused exclusively on the aspect related to law enforcement. What has not been reported on is other facets of this ruling that are very positive for crime victims and which deserve equal recognition.
In this unanimous ruling, the court concluded that none of the constitutional language in Marsy’s Law for Florida conflicts with any other language in the constitution. It further clarifies that victims’ rights and protections should be afforded upon victimization and not following the commencement of any criminal proceedings. Further, it reaffirms that a victim’s name is among the personally identifiable information that can be prevented from automatic, public disclosure.
As we approach National Crime Victims’ Rights Week next week, it is important to remember that Marsy’s Law has advanced crime victims’ rights in Florida in a tremendous way and Florida crime victims now have necessary rights and protections they did not have before.