Florida Action Committee Condemns Sheriff’s Office for Evicting Registrants as “Perverts”
By Florida Action Committee… NARSOL Florida State Affiliate the Florida Action Committee (FAC) is outraged by the recent actions of the Putnam County Sheriff’s Office, which has forcibly displaced individuals attempting to rebuild their lives after serving their sentences. By clearing out a trailer park he described as a “cesspool of sex offenders” and calling its residents “perverts,” the sheriff’s office has not only dehumanized these individuals but also undermined their efforts to reintegrate into society as law-abiding, productive citizens.
“These people are not clustered in the trailer park because they want to be there,” said the president of FAC. Residence restrictions leave them nowhere else to go. Municipalities pass these misguided ordinances and then complain about the unintended consequences they created themselves.”
Stable housing is a cornerstone of successful rehabilitation. For many of these individuals, the trailer park provided a rare opportunity to establish a home, maintain employment, and access support systems. He might not care about these individuals, but the Sheriff should care about the safety of the community. By displacing them, the sheriff’s office has created a crisis of homelessness and instability, increasing the likelihood of recidivism and endangering public safety. “How can we expect individuals to rehabilitate when they are denied the basic dignity of a place to live and are subjected to public shaming?” asked FAC’s President.
The use of derogatory language like “perverts” is not only unprofessional but also counterproductive. Such rhetoric perpetuates stigma and fear, making it even harder for individuals to find acceptance and support in their communities. Rehabilitation requires a level of compassion, not condemnation. It requires opportunities, not obstacles. The sheriff’s actions demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to create safer communities.
The FAC calls on the Putnam County Sheriff’s Office to reconsider its approach. Instead of displacing and demonizing individuals, we urge law enforcement to work collaboratively with community organizations, social services, and policymakers to develop solutions that prioritize both public safety and rehabilitation. Stable housing, access to social services, and employment opportunities are not privileges—they are necessities for reducing recidivism and fostering safer communities.
The Florida Action Committee stands ready to work with all stakeholders to ensure that individuals seeking to rebuild their lives are given the support they need to succeed. Public safety and rehabilitation are not mutually exclusive—they are two sides of the same coin.
This is absolutely disgusting behavior from someone who is supposed to be upholding the law and making sure their community is safe. Wouldn’t publicly shaming these individuals be akin to cruel and unusual punishment? Something that protects all citizens under the 8th amendment? If they were living somewhere legally allowed by law, then what grounds does this sheriff have to do this? The property owner can evict individually sure, but if they really had a problem with these individuals then they wouldn’t have rented to them in the first place. However, if those displaced owned the trailer but not the lot (as is typically the case in many trailer parks) then that creates an entirely separate issue involving the rights of those people. I feel for them, truly I do; no one forced to register should have to worry this much once they’ve figured out how to make the best of their situation and are attempting reintegration.
The good sheriff should look at the stats of those who are in positions of trust, such as LE and those around him professionally as well as personally, before speaking since they are more likely to commit an offense then a person with sex conviction is to repeat their offense. They should wonder who in their office is committing a sex offense that has not been caught either as a member of LE or in their homes or both. Casting a stone in a glass house while yelling the loudest is surely going to break a pane of glass while hiding what they may already know about the LE community in this vein.
Hurling disparaging epithets does nothing to protect children. It’s a tactic that’s intentionally done by LEOs. Then the local news bites every time and sane-washes the whole thing as legit. It’s a perpetual vilification feedback loop.
Unbelievable that people in Florida and anywhere else have to deal with wasted time and money that protects no one. We all have all done our time and should be permitted to live a normal life. What’s the point of supervised release then? As I said in one of my posts… How long is it going to be before they start saying other people are just as dangerous and should be on some type of list or monitoring software? People should be calling their representatives about these issues. It’s only a matter of time before it heads in that direction.
An informed public is a safer public! Says the flat Earth crowd.
So Florida state law enforcement created the gathering problem in the first place, then creates more work for themselves by forced dispersal. Sounds like grounds for some kind of civil suit. Condemnation goes only so far. Nevertheless the consistent propaganda about sex offenders props up an illogical police state.
I see Illinois is contemplating a bill to make a 250 ft school zone residence restriction and ISP, Illinois State Police are opposing the proposed law. I believe they fear conflict would ensue which brings officers into harms way.
And Wisconsin Supreme Court election Ads are underpinned with the topic of child sex offenders. Each claiming the other is too extreme for WI. We know what the former Attorney General who unlawfully attached bracelets to sex offenders without judicial order will do to the constitution. He’ll shred it, similar to the Sheriff’s Office in FL. A digitally enhanced police state.
I see the U.S. heading into a police state day by day. The moment you make laws hindering one group or labeling as so called “dangerous,” then people out there have no idea who or what group they will label next. I know it seems I rant every post, everything is just about money and nothing else. The public needs to know that. Misinformation is all they know how to do. A person is more likely to get shot by a stray bullet than a S.O. running around doing so called “dangerous” stuff (and yes I know it happens, but it’s rare.)
Patrick,
Inevitable, given the unfettered use of a database prescribed by the data bros and the rest of the electronic tech sector. SOR was about virtue signaling for ALL database driven enterprises. To lend faith in it for the people to believe in it’s virtues.
Having a database is one concept; enslaving the human to the machine’s repetitive maintenance is another.
Written perfectly! “Municipalities pass these misguided ordinances and then complain about the unintended consequences they created themselves.” Exactly!
Self sustained bureaucracy collecting data for the sake of the collecting alone. Precisely why socialism inevitably collapses the costly overhead. Those people are pawns in Machiavellian terms. Meanwhile, the Sheriff’s Dept. gets to publicly ” dab.”
Sinful.
The ruling the Supreme Court just made with respect to the unlawful deportation of the Venezuelan man about Due Process necessity has implications for my 1992 case. Deportation & SOR are each civil regulatory regimes which require Substantive Due Process before implementing (Kentucky v Padilla, 2002) This recent ruling has opened the door for Pre-act (SOR) defendants who had not waived their rights via plea & standard waivers to confront the Administrators who unlawfully imposed the registration requirement without the opportunity to contest by direct appeal subsequent to conviction. One cannot contest by direct appeal consequences which were not on the table at the time.
This is also the substantive claim oddly mentioned and referred to but not weighed in Connecticut DPS Procedural due process case.