Research Archives - Florida Action Committee (FAC)

“It’s the Law”: The Human Side of Registry Enforcement

FAC_Media — Sun, 04 Oct 2026 18:37:45 +0000

Florida Action Committee

Opinion & Commentary

“It’s the Law”: The Human Side of Registry Enforcement

The questions that follow people on both sides of the badge

By FAC Media
October 3, 2026 · Updated October 4, 2026

As a military veteran, I have friends in law enforcement. I ask them these same questions on a personal level, and even they are torn. One of those friends is a police director.

Those conversations stay with me. A uniform does not make difficult questions disappear. A person can believe in public safety, take their job seriously, and still wrestle with whether a law is fair or whether enforcing it will make the situation better.

That is the human side I want people to consider when we talk about registry enforcement. There is a person behind the badge, and there is a person standing in front of it. Both may be dealing with rules neither one had any say in writing. The consequences, though, fall heavily on the person being arrested and the family left behind.

If an officer apologizes while making an arrest, I can appreciate the compassion. I also want to understand what “it’s the law” means in that particular encounter. Is there a warrant? Does the law require that response? Is agency policy involved? Could the situation have been handled another way?

Those questions matter because carrying out a law and deciding whether that law is justified are different responsibilities. An arrest can be legally authorized and still leave the public with serious questions about the rule that led to it.

What we ask officers to carry

Florida’s own training recognizes that police work involves more than enforcement. The FDLE’s 2023 basic recruit textbook places constitutional rights and ethical responsibility alongside the duty to enforce the law. Its code of ethics calls for respect for “liberty, equality, and justice” and enforcement “courteously and appropriately.” It also teaches officers to speak up and intervene when another officer acts unethically.

The same training says personal feelings cannot govern an officer’s decisions. I understand that. A legal duty can remain even when the person carrying it out is uncomfortable with the outcome. That is a difficult position, especially when an officer can see that the immediate action will leave the underlying problem untouched.

There is also a difference between having authority to arrest and being required to arrest in every situation. Florida’s general warrantless-arrest statute uses “may arrest.” The available choices depend on the law, agency policy, warrants, and circumstances. That does not make a warning an option for every registry violation.

I want to understand where an officer has a choice and where the responsibility belongs to the people who wrote the law or set the policy. Otherwise, we can end up arguing with the person standing at the door while the decision that brought them there escapes scrutiny.

That tension appeared in a 2013 account of a Davie neighborhood meeting. Detective Adam Granit described having to follow rules even when he might disagree with them. His words are included under Broward County below. The report does not identify a particular restriction he wanted repealed.

Lawmakers have questioned the results, too. In remarks reported by the Florida Bar in 2008, then-Senator Dave Aronberg criticized conflicting local housing limits and proposed a uniform statewide approach. He still supported restrictions. What he challenged was whether the existing patchwork was making the public safer.

Written policies deserve scrutiny, too. The Orlando Police Department’s registry policy, effective April 21, 2025, opens with a broad claim about reoffending. Yet its non-arrest-contact section also limits arrest for merely refusing information. An agency’s assumptions and its procedures both shape what happens at the door. The exact policy excerpts appear under Orange County.

Officers have seen the human cost

These concerns appeared in public long before my personal conversations. In a July 20, 2009 NPR interview, then-Miami Police Chief John Timoney described officers responding to a man attempting suicide at the Julia Tuttle Causeway encampment. The report examined how residency restrictions had left registrants living beneath the bridge.

“It’s just an awful situation.”

John Timoney, then Miami police chief — NPR, July 20, 2009

That was a police chief describing distress his officers had encountered. Police can be the people called to respond when someone reaches a breaking point under the conditions the system has created.

The supervision side was raising concerns, too. In a 2009 research paper, Amy L. Datz, a Florida Department of Corrections assistant bureau chief, described Florida’s policies toward people convicted of sex offenses as “too broad and overreaching” and “ineffective and under-funded.” Her FDLE-hosted research surveyed 259 correctional probation specialists across Florida. Seventy-eight percent identified residency restrictions as the leading obstacle for supervised registrants.

That is a historical finding from Datz’s research, rather than an official statewide policy position. But it deserves attention. The people responsible for helping others comply were identifying housing restrictions as a major barrier to compliance. Lawmakers should have to answer that concern.

Perez put the conflict into words

By December 2017, Miami-Dade was again discussing enforcement at an encampment of homeless registrants. At the December 13 Public Safety & Health Committee hearing, Police Director Juan Perez described the position his department was in:

“We are in a catch 22, because regardless of what laws are in place in legislation, we know we have to enforce eventually the laws and county ordinances.”

Juan Perez, Miami-Dade Police Director — December 13, 2017

Later in the same hearing, he explained what concerned him about enforcement:

“Because my, my concern is that we do come in there and enforce, and we just displace it to another neighborhood or somewhere else. Because I don’t believe that the county ordinance is going to put individuals that are there – take them away – and there’s going to be some magical solution to it. They – the individuals there – will come out again, especially for county ordinance, and will be looking for a place to live, reside, and to be able to use as an address.”

Juan Perez — a later excerpt from the same hearing

These are the two recorded excerpts transcribed for our documentary, with punctuation adjusted for readability. They occur separately in the original hearing recording, at approximately 55:46–55:57 and 57:17–57:42.

This is why I wanted his words included. Perez was acknowledging a duty to enforce the rules while questioning what that enforcement would accomplish. Move people out of one neighborhood, and they still need somewhere to sleep. Arrest them, and that need may still be waiting when they come out. They still need an address they can lawfully use.

The county’s January 2018 research notes summarize that concern. They also summarize Deputy Mayor Maurice Kemp saying the county did not intend to arrest its way out of the situation. The problem was being recognized inside county government, including by the department expected to enforce the ordinance.

If the police director can see that the law will move the problem rather than solve it, why should the public be satisfied with another round of arrests?

A judge questioned the punishment

The same questions reach the courtroom. In State of Tennessee v. Rex Allen Moore, a routine appointment to swap a GPS monitor led to discovery of an unreported email account. Moore was already on probation for a separate theft conviction. The discovery led to registry-related charges and proceedings to revoke that probation.

At the August 19, 2022 hearing, Judge G. Scott Green of the Knox County Criminal Court found a violation but questioned whether it warranted making Moore serve the full four-year sentence:

“Do I think that he should go serve four years in the penitentiary for this, I don’t know that I feel that way”

G. Scott Green
Judge, Knox County Criminal Court, Tennessee
August 19, 2022 hearing; quoted in the July 11, 2023 appellate opinion.

The outcome was time served and renewed probation. The appellate court affirmed, finding knowing nondisclosure. The judge’s hesitation concerns the punishment; it does not erase the court’s finding. The four-year sentence was the underlying theft sentence.

What response makes someone more likely to comply and makes the community safer? A reporting violation deserves examination. So does the punishment imposed for it.

There are practical alternatives within Florida’s own agencies. In written replies to FAC in 2022, Manatee County’s Tom Kitchen Jr. and Walton County’s Jeffrey Goldberg described emergency sheltering that kept registrants with their families. Other county replies required separation or sheltering at a jail. These historical records show different administrative choices; they do not establish shelter rules in force today.

Hear the difference, county by county

We tried to find quotations for every Florida county, with speakers’ names, positions, dates, context, and source links. This has been hard. Some statements are easy to find; others are buried in older reports, hearings, written policies, or archive comments that lead to another source.

You deserve to see the words for yourself: how leaders connected to your county defend these rules, and what concerns others raise about their effects on registrants and families. Where we found both perspectives, we put them together below. All existing county quotations are retained. Where a perspective is still missing, we say so; that gap does not mean everyone in the county agrees.

A report or republication date is not necessarily the date words were spoken. Housing restrictions, registration checks, presence rules, and emergency policies can involve different laws and years. These excerpts are not presented as a direct debate. A safeguard or accommodation does not necessarily mean opposition to registration.

54 counties have source-linked quotations. Forty-four include enforcement or restriction material alongside concerns, substantive safeguards, or humane alternatives. Ten still need a substantive contrasting voice.

Choose a county below to read its quotations.

Alachua County

FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens

FAC_Media — Sat, 03 Oct 2026 00:48:17 +0000

Florida Action Committee • Friday Wrap-Up

FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass
and Its Continued Burdens

Friday, October 2, 2026 • Opinion & Analysis Based on Public Records

View all dropdown sections

After the Report: Inside the Military’s Push for Accountability

FAC_Media — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 20:09:38 +0000

FAC MEMBER REPORT • MILITARY JUSTICE

After the Report: Inside the Military’s Push for Accountability

A soldier’s firsthand account of the reporting process, with research into the training, funding, and political pressure of 2013–2014

By FAC member • A Personal Account and Documented Research

This is not a short read. Many parts of the registry system take time to explain. This account combines firsthand military experience with research into its lasting consequences.

Recently, I looked up a soldier I had encountered over a decade ago. He was still on a sex-offender registry.

I knew him through a report I handled as an Army SHARP representative. I understood my responsibility to help, but not how far the consequences could reach.

Looking back, I see a process I knew only from the beginning: reporting, investigation, confinement, charges, trial or agreement, and a conviction potentially requiring registration. Politics and funding explain the surrounding system, not his outcome.

The encounter reportedly occurred in April 2013. I was not there. His wife contacted me roughly four months later, in August, as I remember it.

They were married and both serving: he was an Army Staff Sergeant (SSG), E-6, with 18 years of service, and she was a Corporal (E-4). In my experience, his rank fit his military occupational specialty (MOS) at that point in his career. Their marriage was ending as the allegation entered military justice.

There were no civilian charges. They lived on post, and military authorities handled the criminal case. The civilian proceeding was a divorce.

An extra duty with lasting consequences

My regular job was leading a maintenance platoon. After returning from war, I was assigned SHARP as an extra duty—“voluntold,” as soldiers say. Command said they selected me for my compassion, open mind, and willingness to listen. I wanted to help, but had not chosen this duty or understood its lasting consequences. Another motor-pool team leader was an instructor on post.

My responsibility was support and referral, not deciding who was telling the truth.

SHARP and Family Advocacy were separate programs. The Army’s March 2013 explanation identified Family Advocacy’s domestic abuse role. I still need to confirm which office she visited and how investigators became involved.

I understood the beginning of the process much better than the ending.

What we heard before Friday release

I had served since 2008. Early Friday safety briefs centered on domestic violence and drunk driving. Around 2012–2013, I noticed much more emphasis on sexual harassment, assault prevention, and consent alongside those warnings.

The warnings and posters were repeated. This was drilled into us alongside our regular jobs and responsibility for soldiers.

The message I took away was that a drunk person could not consent, even within marriage. The legal question was more specific than whether someone had been drinking: incapacity and the circumstances mattered. Marriage was not a defense.

I remember consent apps available around that time, with Good2Go among the big names. I recall downloading an app, entering both people’s information and signatures, and an emailed form. I cannot confirm which app provided those features.

Good2Go’s public launch was announced on September 29, 2014, and We-Consent was available by 2015. These dates provide context; I am not dating my download.

During 2014 safety briefs, I remember captains and top brass pushing Good2Go and similar apps for married couples, not just one-night stands. Some remarks hinted the records could be used against you. That is my memory, not a quotation from a manual.

I remember being told to lock myself in the bathroom and call for help during a domestic confrontation. It felt as though the reporting spouse—the accuser—had the power to set everything in motion. Reporting did not establish what happened.

Around 2010, I remember soldiers acting out sexual-assault training scenarios. After 2012, I remember professional actors. One set included about ten scenarios, including a marital argument. The Army documents WILL Interactive’s 2010 Team Bound production and October 2013 update, using actors and soldiers. That supports the production history, not which videos my unit watched. The update followed the report I handled.

What I remember about the report

As I remember it, both spouses acknowledged sexual activity but disagreed about consent. Acknowledging an encounter is not admitting assault.

As I remember her wording, she first described a “regular encounter” she “didn’t really kinda want.” Later, after attending a support group for military wives on post, she described it as marital rape involving sodomy. That is my recollection, not a transcript.

I was not in that discussion and do not know why her description changed. Investigators needed to clarify conduct and consent.

Her husband said she planned to leave, move back with her mother, and seek sole custody of their daughter. He believed she was retaliating. I could not know her thinking.

She was not crying or visibly unhappy, which stood out compared with others I had helped. Training reminded me that reactions differ; appearance could not establish truth.

To my knowledge, there was no hospital visit or rape kit. She wanted an investigation. I provided resources and guidance, passed the matter onward, and my involvement ended.

Neither the absence of a medical exam nor their agreement that sex occurred settled the dispute about consent.

What “sodomy” meant in 2013

“Sodomy” did not itself mean rape. The 2012 military manual’s Article 125 explanation described oral or anal conduct, distinguishing force or lack of consent.

In April 2013, Article 125 still broadly prohibited sodomy, though constitutional protections already limited punishment of private, consensual adult conduct.

In United States v. Marcum, the court applied Lawrence v. Texas, considering coercion and military-specific factors.

Congress removed consensual sodomy from Article 125 in Section 1707 of the law signed December 26, 2013. An offense involving force or lack of consent remained.

What I heard around the unit

I knew he was in military confinement—the “brig,” as we called it. Later, privates and senior enlisted soldiers brought up his name. I heard he had spent six or seven months confined before accepting a deal involving time served and what they called a dishonorable discharge. I did not attend the proceedings or see the agreement, so I cannot independently confirm that duration or the terms of the deal.

People said he was fighting the case. I cannot confirm whether that meant pretrial challenges or later appeals.

Pretrial confinement required more than an allegation. The 2012 Manual for Courts-Martial required probable cause, foreseeable nonappearance or serious criminal misconduct, inadequate lesser restraints, and prompt reviews. The general 120-day arraignment rule allowed exclusions; it did not absolutely cap confinement.

In the unrelated drug-and-assault case United States v. Danylo (2014), the court considered 349 days of pretrial confinement and rejected the Sixth Amendment speedy-trial claim. Lengthy confinement was possible; that does not justify his.

Under military rules on agreements and sentencing, a deal could limit confinement while allowing a punitive discharge. Time-served credit could permit release. A dishonorable discharge required a general court-martial sentence, not an administrative agreement. Pending review could delay the discharge beyond release.

A guilty plea required a voluntary admission and factual basis, as United States v. Jordan explains. Contested charges required proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Without court records, I cannot call his conviction punishment on an allegation alone.

The money, training, and pressure behind it

Leaders of all five armed services then—Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard—appeared at the June 4, 2013 Senate hearing on military sexual assault. My firsthand perspective is Army; the wider picture comes from records.

In April 2012, the Army reported that its budget to combat sexual assault had grown fivefold since 2007. Expanded training and preparations for full-time brigade response coordinators and victim advocates preceded the 2013 political crisis.

On March 4, 2013, Senators Barbara Boxer and Jeanne Shaheen wrote to Secretary Hagel after Lieutenant General Craig Franklin overturned Lieutenant Colonel James Wilkerson’s conviction. They demanded explanations, asked about reversing the dismissal, and urged limits on commanders’ reversal powers.

We heard that scrutiny reached the top brass: if them, any of us. The New York Times covered allegations against Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair in 2012; The Washington Post covered Franklin’s handling of another officer’s case in March 2013. I remember that pressure reaching briefings, but cannot establish what drove this soldier’s case.

On May 7, 2013, President Obama said people committing these offenses should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged.” Those words are in the official White House transcript.

Hagel announced weekly reviews and retraining on May 17, after meeting Obama. The Army’s active-duty deadline for refresher training and personnel reviews was July 1. Both preceded the August report.

In August 2013, Hagel’s instruction on the integrity of military justice required independent judgment based on facts and law, rejecting career pressures, demands to satisfy senior officials, and predetermined outcomes or sentences.

Obama’s December 20, 2013 statement directed Hagel and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey to intensify their response, with a December 1, 2014 review and possible further reforms.

A Defense Department funding statement records fiscal 2014 SAPRO operation and maintenance funding of $26.798 million, plus $25.3 million for special-victim counsel, investigation, and prosecution capabilities. These department-level figures neither identify the Army’s video budget nor explain his outcome.

Sinclair’s March 2014 outcome also matters: sexual-assault charges were dropped; other guilty pleas brought a fine and reprimand, without confinement.

In United States v. Boyce, the military appeals court examined the treatment of Lieutenant General Craig Franklin following controversial decisions in other sexual-assault cases.

On May 22, 2017, the court reversed the findings and sentence without prejudice for apparent unlawful command influence and authorized a rehearing. It did not find the allegation false or that pressure had changed the verdict; it questioned whether the proceedings would appear fair to an informed observer.

This staff sergeant’s separate Army case still requires its own records.

What I still do not know

His senior leadership confirmed to me that his wife later recanted. I have not seen the statement itself or records showing how investigators or courts addressed it.

His charges, plea agreement, findings, sentence, confinement records, and appellate history would separate events from later accounts. Memory and a registry label cannot identify every allegation or the conviction offense.

The dates matter for sentencing, too. The later rule requiring dismissal or dishonorable discharge for covered offenses committed on or after June 24, 2014, would not automatically apply to an April 2013 act. A dishonorable discharge was nevertheless possible. A Defense Department panel report explains the effective-date distinction.

I also cannot assume there was no appeal because no civilian lawyer was hired. Under Articles 61 and 66 as they stood then, an approved dishonorable discharge ordinarily triggered military appellate review unless that review was validly waived or withdrawn.

How many others in 2014?

I keep wondering how many other soldiers went through something like this. The gathered reports show the following outcomes in the Army’s fiscal year 2014 report:

131 subjects receiving punitive discharges in the sexual-assault-charge court-martial cohort.
68 resignations or discharges in lieu of court-martial.
74 completed administrative discharges or other separations for sexual-assault offenses.
33 subjects processed for administrative discharge or separation following nonjudicial punishment on a sexual-assault charge.
7 administrative separations still incomplete at year-end.

These fiscal-year categories do not count people discharged solely on unproven allegations. The 131 punitive discharges were not necessarily dishonorable, executed that year, or based on the same conviction offense. I would not combine these figures into a total of people treated like him.

A 2016 Defense Department panel found that spousal and intimate-partner cases fell under Family Advocacy and were excluded from SAPRO’s annual case-outcome reporting. Those historical tables cannot reconstruct his case or reliably count comparable ones.

Being able to afford another look

Military law provided defense counsel and qualifying appellate representation without requiring someone to hire a private attorney. Still, paying a civilian specialist for another look can be beyond a struggling family’s reach.

I do not know his finances or what help he sought. Stopping a legal fight does not mean accepting its outcome. People can run out of money, energy, or hope before they run out of questions.

The consequences did not stop at discharge

After leaving the military and finding myself on the registry, I looked back at my part in this system. Doing my assigned duties after war, I had helped with the first steps of a process that could lead someone else to the registry.

I think of it now as a pyramid: decisions and demands at the top, responsibilities passed down, and people like me carrying them out. I had not consented to taking on that larger role; I had been assigned a duty. My compassion was real. So was my willingness to listen. I did not understand what could follow long after my involvement ended.

I never imagined that, by doing my assigned duty, I could be a small part of a process leading to the very registry system I would later fight against.

Finding him still registered made that connection real to me. A qualifying military conviction can bring someone under SORNA, the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, without a second civilian conviction. Those federal duties operate alongside state registration laws. There is no separate federal registration program for people leaving military custody.

The consequences follow across state lines. Wherever he lives, works, studies, or visits, applicable registration laws govern. Even a visit can trigger registration requirements, depending on the state and circumstances.

Each state determines whether his conviction requires registration and how he is classified. Classification, reporting frequency, and duration can differ. His records would establish his exact conviction and classification; an allegation or discharge alone would not.

My part ended when I passed the report onward. His life kept going under the weight of what followed.

I wish my training had connected the first report to those lasting consequences. That gap can exist in civilian life, too: someone may help start a process without understanding how its outcome could change lives. Understanding that should encourage care and accuracy, never silence someone seeking help.

People reporting harm deserve support. People accused deserve a fair investigation. Both deserve a system that takes its responsibilities seriously long after the first report. When command pressure is questioned, I believe independent civilian scrutiny deserves discussion. Every forum still has to test the evidence and apply the law correctly.

A marriage ending badly does not prove fabrication. An allegation does not prove guilt. And a conviction does not make questions about the process improper.

That is why I want the rest of the story.

The post After the Report: Inside the Military’s Push for Accountability appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

☀️ FAC Sunday Lookout: Hope, Community & Staying Connected

FAC_Media — Sun, 27 Sep 2026 11:00:47 +0000

FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE · SEPTEMBER 27, 2026

FAC Sunday Lookout

Weekly Updates & Organizational News

Connection. Encouragement. A new week of possibility.

In this week’s FAC Sunday Lookout, let’s make room for the people and possibilities that keep us moving forward.

A conversation, a useful resource, or a chance to be heard can make the week feel less overwhelming. Here are a few ways to stay
connected and take the next step together.

Make time to connect

County Coordinator Monthly Check-in
Sunday, September 27
7:00–7:30 p.m. Eastern

County Coordinator Check In
Monday, September 28
7:00–8:00 p.m. Eastern

Membership Call
Thursday, October 1
8:00–9:00 p.m. Eastern

County coordinators: the calendar offers a Sunday or Monday check-in. Thank you for helping keep local members connected.

View calendar & joining details

All times Eastern. Check the calendar for any changes.

ENCOURAGING READING · GEORGIA · SEPTEMBER 10

A chance to have a petition heard correctly

In Perry v. State, Georgia’s Court of Appeals set aside an order denying a registry-removal petition. The court found that the trial court had applied the wrong version of the law and returned the case for further consideration.

The encouraging part: Kenneth Perry, representing himself on appeal, secured another opportunity for his petition to be considered under the applicable rules. The ruling did not order his removal or decide whether he meets every requirement.

It is a reminder that careful review and persistence can matter. This is a Georgia decision; it does not change Florida’s registration requirements.

Read the court’s opinion

Recent reading selected for this edition; the decision was issued September 10, not this week.

FAC MEDIA · SEPTEMBER 25

Help one more person see beyond a label

FAC’s new post, Florida Registry Laws: Behind the Headlines, Beyond the Labels, introduces a video examining the human consequences of registry
policies through public footage, officials’ statements, and research.

One thoughtful share can open a conversation. Send it to someone willing to listen, and tell them why understanding the full story matters to you.

Read the post & watch

Useful knowledge is worth sharing

NARSOL’s resource directory brings together information on housing, employment, education, support groups, and reentry. Its welcome article makes a practical point: sharing what we know can help others avoid starting from scratch.

This is an established resource, not a newly announced program. Explore what may fit your circumstances and confirm each provider’s eligibility and availability directly.

Explore NARSOL resources

PRIVACY & ACCOUNTABILITY · SEPTEMBER 25

Privacy belongs to every citizen

WRAL reports that Franklin County fired a detective and stopped using its Flock camera system after an audit uncovered misuse to monitor a private citizen. The matter was referred to the district attorney; the report did not establish whether criminal charges would follow.

“Citizens deserve transparency, and a government they can depend on to keep them safe, not a government that can beweaponized against them.”

— Sheriff Kevin White, quoted by WRAL

Why it matters to our community: If an employee can misuse access to monitor one person, what safeguards protect people already subject to extensive government reporting? That is an accountability question—not evidence that this incident involved a registrant or that the system captures every movement.

The constructive lesson: an audit identified misuse and the agency took action. Meaningful access controls, review of searches, and consequences for abuse deserve public attention. Privacy and accountability should protect everyone, including people required to register.

Read WRAL’s report

DAVID FOLLOW-UP · PRACTICAL SUPPORT

Protecting yourself and supporting each other

Following FAC’s September 17 DAVID data-breach alert, a public-records request sought information about scams targeting people required to register. In its September 25 response, the Florida Attorney General’s Office stated:

“This office does not have any responsive documents.”

The Florida Attorney General’s September 25, 2026 response. Recipient information is redacted in the supplied photo.

The response applies to records held by that office; it does not establish that no scams occurred.

The response does not establish whether particular scam calls were connected to DAVID or how many registrants’ records were affected.

There are steps you can take:

Suspected driver-license or ID fraud:
contact FLHSMV’s Fraud Unit at
850-617-2405 or fraud@flhsmv.gov.
Identity theft: find reporting and recoveryguidance at
IdentityTheft.gov.
Scam calls or payment demands: report them at
ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Verify a caller’s claims using an independently obtained
official agency number.

To share an experience with FAC, email
media@floridaactioncommittee.org.
Send a brief account and a safe way to reach you; leave out Social Security numbers, full ID numbers, passwords, and banking details. Contacting FAC does not replace an official report.

Helpful reference:

FLHSMV identity-theft and driver-license fraud guidance
.

Sneak peek: Tuesday’s video

Coming Tuesday, September 29: a closer look at scams
targeting people required to register.

We’ll look at scam experiences reported by FAC members, how callers use fear and official-sounding demands, and the
questions those experiences raise about protecting people required to register.

A warning tells us not to fall for a scam. But is a warning a complete solution?

That’s the question we’ll explore—along with the difference between advice to potential victims and accountability for
those targeting them.

Visit FAC’s YouTube channel

Watch for Tuesday’s release. This link opens the channel; the new video is forthcoming.

Thank you for showing up

To everyone who answers a call, checks on another member, researches a question, or shares reliable information: thank you. Those everyday efforts help make a community.

Interested in helping with media or research? Tell us what you enjoy doing and what time you can offer. You can also contact Membership to learn about FAC and available support.

Contact the Media Team

Contact Membership

Help FAC continue this work

78% of the fundraising goal reached!

Help close the remaining 22%.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to FAC’s legal fundraising effort. Your support helps sustain the work ahead.

Donate to FAC’s Legal Fund

For information about making a tax-deductible donation to Florida Action Foundation, Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization, contact
admin@floridaactionfoundation.org

Your support helps keep people connected, information moving, and reform efforts going. FAC’s donation page offers options
for general operations and membership, legal work, and outreach essentials.

If you’re able, choose the fund that matters most to you. Every contribution is appreciated. Sharing reliable information, volunteering, and checking on another member also make a difference.

View all FAC donation options

Sign and share the human rights petition

9,634 verified signatures

Change.org total checked September 26, 2026. The count continues to change.

FAC’s petition asks the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to investigate public sex-offender registration in the United States and take appropriate action on the human
rights concerns it raises.

Just 366 more signatures would bring the petition to 10,000.

If you have already signed, share it with someone who has not. A personal message about why dignity, family, and the opportunity to rebuild matter can help start a meaningful conversation.

Sign & share the petition

A THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.”

— Helen Keller

As shared by Helen Keller Services

Here’s to a week of connection, useful steps, and renewed hope.

With unity comes change.

Florida Action Committee · Sunday Lookout · September 27, 2026

Visit FAC
·
Calendar

The post ☀️ FAC Sunday Lookout: Hope, Community & Staying Connected appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

🧒⚖️ If the Registry Protects Children, Why Are Children on It? 📊 Florida’s Numbers Tell a Different Story

FAC_Media — Sat, 19 Sep 2026 13:00:03 +0000

FLORIDA • CHILD SAFETY • YOUTH • PUBLIC POLICY

If the Registry Protects Children,
Why Are Children on It?

Florida’s own government reports, public-health guidance and research raise questions that deserve serious discussion about youth, rehabilitation, public disclosure and where sexual harm to children actually occurs.

Can publicly identifying a child for years or decades be shown to make children safer?

Sexual abuse is serious. Victims deserve support, accountability matters, and preventing another victim should be the central objective of public policy.

But those principles do not prevent us from examining whether every registry policy actually accomplishes that objective.

Florida’s own records show that the registration system reaches people through the juvenile justice system, while modern child-safety research shows that sexual harm frequently comes from someone a child already knows and trusts.

Those facts belong in the same public-safety conversation.

515

JUVENILE SEX OFFENDERS

OPPAGA • October 2024

90%

KNOWN & TRUSTED

CDC child sexual-abuse guidance

91%

KNEW THE ALLEGED ABUSER

Florida child-on-child study

6.5%

AVERAGE REPEAT SEX-CRIME ARREST RATE

Florida study • 1990–2010

Florida Government Data

515 Juvenile Sex Offenders

Florida’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability — OPPAGA — reported 515 juvenile sex offenders in Florida’s registry data as of October 2024.

That number should not be interpreted as meaning that 515 juveniles are currently committing offenses or that each one presently poses the same level of risk.

Instead, it demonstrates the reach of Florida’s registration system into juvenile cases.

Florida law includes specified juvenile delinquency adjudications for qualifying offenses committed when the juvenile was 14 years old or older.

That means registry consequences can begin during adolescence.

A child can complete treatment, complete supervision, finish school, mature, become employed, build relationships and eventually become a middle-aged adult.

The question is how long conduct from adolescence should continue defining that person’s public identity.

Read OPPAGA Report 24-11 →

HOW LONG CAN IT FOLLOW SOMEONE?

The Removal Clock Can Run for Decades

OPPAGA describes Florida’s general statutory petition pathway as requiring qualifying individuals to have been lawfully released from sanctions, confinement or supervision for at least 25 years, along with other statutory requirements.

Because qualifying juvenile registration under the framework discussed by OPPAGA began in 2007, the report states that the earliest a juvenile sexual offender could become eligible for that removal process is 2032.

A decision made during adolescence can therefore have consequences extending deep into adulthood.

Read Florida Statute § 943.0435 →

Where Does Child Sexual Abuse Actually Occur?

“Stranger Danger” Is Only Part of the Picture

Modern public-health evidence shows that focusing primarily on unknown strangers can leave families with an incomplete understanding of risk.

90%

CDC

About 90% of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by someone known and trusted by the child or the child’s family.

91%

FLORIDA DCF

In Florida’s child-on-child sexual-abuse assessment, 91% of alleged victims knew the alleged abuser.

Important: These figures come from different studies and different populations. They should not be merged into one statistic.

Children frequently know the person involved.

Read the CDC Guidance →

Read Florida DCF’s Study →

Florida Repeat-Arrest Research

Most Sex-Crime Arrests in the Study Were Not Repeat Sex-Crime Arrests

6.5%

A peer-reviewed study by Jill Levenson and Kristen Zgoba examined aggregate Florida Department of Law Enforcement arrest data from 1990 through 2010.

The researchers defined a repeat offense as an arrest committed by someone who had a previous conviction in the same crime category.

The average annual repeat-offense arrest rate for sex crimes was 6.5%.

By that study’s definition, approximately 93.5% of sex-crime arrests in the average year were not repeat arrests attributed to someone with a previous conviction in that same sex-crime category.

Read the Peer-Reviewed Florida Study →

Thank You to Every Volunteer on the Florida Action Committee Legislative Team

A special thank-you goes to every volunteer contributing time, research, personal experience, calls, emails, meetings, drafting and outreach to Florida Action Committee’s Legislative Team.

The team is helping prepare and support the proposed Young Adult Registry Petition Act, which FAC intends to advance for consideration during the 2027 Florida Legislative Session.

The proposal is designed to create a new petition pathway for qualifying people whose offenses occurred when they were young adults, giving lawmakers an opportunity to examine whether Florida’s current 25-year removal framework adequately accounts for youth, maturation, rehabilitation and long-term public-safety outcomes.

Every email matters. Every phone call matters. Every volunteer matters.

Thank you to everyone helping put these questions before Florida lawmakers and making sure youth, rehabilitation, public safety and the long-term consequences of registration receive serious legislative consideration in 2027.

Read FAC’s Legislative Committee Post →

TURN INFORMATION INTO ACTION

Share • Join • Donate • Sign

If this information matters to you, help put it in front of families, lawmakers, judges, journalists and community leaders.

JOIN FAC

DONATE

SIGN THE UN PETITION

A share costs nothing. Membership builds numbers. Donations support the work. Petition signatures show that people are paying attention.

WATCH • SHARE • SUBSCRIBE

Watch the Videos Behind the Research

Prefer video? Watch the latest reporting, research explainers, Florida registry coverage and advocacy videos on YouTube — then share them with someone who needs to see the issue in a different way.

Watch on FAC YouTube

Like • Subscribe • Share

Read the Sources for Yourself

Florida OPPAGA:

Sex Offender Registration and Monitoring Triennial Review

Florida Statute:

Florida Statute § 943.0435

CDC:

About Child Sexual Abuse

Florida Department of Children and Families:

Child-on-Child Sexual Abuse Needs Assessment

Florida Repeat-Arrest Research:

Levenson & Zgoba — Community Protection Policies and Repeat Sexual Offenses in Florida

Florida Action Committee:

Legislative Committee / Young Adult Registry Petition Act

Florida-specific public records and research • Readers are encouraged to review the linked primary sources and form their own conclusions.

The post 🧒⚖️ If the Registry Protects Children, Why Are Children on It? 📊 Florida’s Numbers Tell a Different Story appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Child Sexual Abuse Is Preventable — So Why Aren’t We Preventing It?

FAC-3 — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 11:18:09 +0000

For decades, much of the public conversation surrounding child sexual abuse has focused on what happens after abuse occurs: arrest, prosecution, incarceration, registration and increasingly severe punishment.

But a new article from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health makes an important point: child sexual abuse is preventable, not inevitable.

The Johns Hopkins MOORE Center for the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse argues that the United States needs to approach child sexual abuse as a public health problem and prioritize prevention rather than relying primarily on punishment after a child has already been harmed. A system that waits until abuse occurs before intervening is, by definition, not a prevention system. Punishing someone after a crime has occurred may serve legitimate punitive purposes, but it does nothing to prevent harm or undo the harm suffered by the child.

According to Johns Hopkins, decades of research have identified opportunities to prevent child sexual abuse, yet prevention remains significantly underfunded. “Every year, the U.S. spends $5.4 billion on incarcerating people convicted of CSA compared to about $3 million for CSA prevention research.” That’s pathetic! The institution is calling for a national strategy that recognizes child sexual abuse as a public health issue and invests in evidence-based prevention.

It’s a question the Florida Action Committee has been asking for more than a decade. Why does so much of our public policy focus on perpetual punishment of people after they have offended, rather than on preventing abuse before it happens?

Florida has built an enormous system around registration, residency restrictions, public notification and increasingly severe criminal penalties. But those measures only operate after a person has already been convicted and have been proven in study after study to be ineffective at preventing recidivism.

If our goal is truly to protect children, the government should be directing resources toward the interventions that research shows can actually prevent abuse.

That means supporting children and families, educating communities, identifying risk earlier, expanding evidence-based prevention programs and creating opportunities for people at risk of offending to seek help before a child is harmed.

The Johns Hopkins message is not that sexual abuse isn’t serious. It is precisely the opposite. It is too serious to settle for policies that only respond after the damage has been done. According to the article, child sexual abuse is preventable. It’s time for politicians to invest in prevention with the same urgency and resources that we devote to punishment.

Read the Johns Hopkins article

The post Child Sexual Abuse Is Preventable — So Why Aren’t We Preventing It? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Study: Meta Analysis Shows LOW Recidivism Among Child Pornography Offenders

FAC-3 — Tue, 07 Apr 2026 12:18:23 +0000

A new meta-analysis is reinforcing what researchers have been saying for years: Florida’s one-size-fits-all approach of keeping everyone on the registry for life and subjecting them to the same sweeping restrictions runs directly counter to the evidence.

Drawing on 30 non-overlapping samples, the study found that individuals whose offenses are limited to Child Sexual Exploitation Material (CSEM) have very low rates of sexual recidivism, particularly when it comes to committing contact offenses. In other words, the assumption that all people on the registry pose the same level of risk simply isn’t supported by the data. Instead, the research shows wide variability in risk, underscoring the need for a more tailored, evidence-based approach.

That’s where the Risk-Need-Responsivity model comes in. Long recognized in the field of corrections, this framework emphasizes that interventions should match an individual’s risk level. High-risk individuals may warrant intensive supervision and restrictions, but applying those same measures to low-risk individuals is not only unnecessary, it can actually be counterproductive and increase the likelihood of reoffending.

The implications are hard to ignore. Law enforcement resources are finite, yet current practices often direct significant time and effort toward lower-risk individuals. Meanwhile, validated risk assessment tools such as STABLE-2007 and CPORT exist precisely to distinguish who is more likely to reoffend and who is not, but they remain unused in shaping registration policy.

What this meta-analysis ultimately makes clear is that a blanket approach, like Florida’s, doesn’t just fail to improve safety, it actively undermines it. A smarter strategy would prioritize resources, supervision, and restrictions to the focused cases where they are actually needed.

A meta-analysis of recidivism rates among individuals who commit child sexual exploitation material (003)

The post Study: Meta Analysis Shows LOW Recidivism Among Child Pornography Offenders appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Participate in a Study on Your Experience on Florida’s Registry

FAC-3 — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 11:48:48 +0000

A doctoral research study through the School of Psychology at Fielding Graduate University is seeking participants to explore the lived experiences of individuals on Florida’s Sexual Offender Registry.

The purpose of this study is to better understand how being on the registry impacts daily life. Participation involves taking part in a confidential interview that will last approximately 60 minutes. Participation is completely voluntary, and participants can withdraw at any time. Participants will be compensated $50 for their participation. No identifying information will be included in the final report. The information you provide will be kept strictly confidential and will not impact your legal status, parole or probation requirements, or access to services.

Individuals who have been on the Florida Sexual Offender Registry for at least six months and are at least 19 years old are eligible to participate. This study has been reviewed and approved by the Fielding Graduate University Institutional Review Board (IRB).

If you or someone you know is interested in participating or would like more information, please contact Caroline Cortright at carolinecook@fielding.edu

Thank you for considering this opportunity to share your experiences and contribute to research that aims to increase understanding and awareness of the challenges faced by individuals on the registry.

Thank you to ACSOL for posting this announcement.

The post Participate in a Study on Your Experience on Florida’s Registry appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Useful Study: Factors Impacting upon Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (2017)

FAC-3 — Wed, 23 Jul 2025 11:58:24 +0000

Below is a link to an older (2017) study, but one which contains a good deal of helpful research. It’s Factors Impacting upon Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders: The Role of Conservatism and Knowledge by Michelle K. Rosselli and Elizabeth L. Jeglic from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York.

It’s a worthwhile read.

Factors Impacting upon Attitudes towards Sex Offenders

The post Useful Study: Factors Impacting upon Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (2017) appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Study Finds Alarming Rise in Homeless Sex Offenders

FAC-3 — Fri, 06 Jun 2025 12:02:14 +0000

The case comes just as a new national study is shedding light on what researchers say is a little-discussed but increasingly urgent problem: the growing number of homeless individuals on the sex offender registry.

The Cicero Institute, a nonpartisan policy group, released findings in April showing that in at least 32 states, more than 10 percent of the unsheltered homeless population consists of registered sex offenders. In eight states, sex offenders make up more than half of that population.

In California, sex offender residence restrictions, coupled with policies that bar many from shelters, have pushed a subset of formerly incarcerated individuals into street homelessness. Shelters often exclude registrants from programs, especially those near schools, parks or senior facilities.

According to past surveys, 71 percent of homeless shelters in multiple states bar entry to registered sex offenders outright, regardless of their offense or risk level.

The Cicero Institute recommends developing specialized housing models for homeless sex offenders, expanding secure transitional options under close supervision, and enhancing tracking systems to prevent violations.

The report also calls on federal agencies like HUD to begin tracking sex offender status as part of their annual homeless assessment reports — a step that advocates say is essential for public safety planning.

SOURCE

The post Study Finds Alarming Rise in Homeless Sex Offenders appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).