Ryan Will, a homicide prosecutor with the 7th Circuit State Attorney’s Office who is running for Judge, admitted to the St. Augustine Record, that he helped communities install parks for the express purpose of banning persons required to register as sex offenders (who are subject to residency restrictions) from the area.
One of Will’s activities outside the courtroom is helping communities build parks in locations that use state law to keep sexual predators from moving into the neighborhood. Will led the effort to build the first one in his own neighborhood
What kind of Judge can this man possibly be if he admits to such a bias against a group of people and to taking such draconian action to banish them? Is this a person we want to appoint as a neutral arbitrator of the people?
According to the same article, he was once before reprimanded by the Florida Bar after he had “demeaned and ridiculed a defendant… by repeatedly calling him a crackhead.”
This is the last person we want standing in judgment of others! If you live in the areas comprising the 7th Judicial Circuit (Flagler, Putnam, St. Johns, and Volusia Counties in NE Florida) we strongly encourage you to contact your local media to make sure they know about this man’s character.
Isn’t what he does for parks gaming the system for the exclusion of “these people”? These people nomenclature was given to registrants in the Gundy SCOTUS hearing if you listen or read it. Sounds like specific characterization of registrants in a negative way that does not help. Almost sounds like where to ride on buses or drinking water fountains by making parks exclusion zones.
Is someone in his district willing to file a FL Bar complaint?
Has to be something willful/malicious and/or unethical about this.
FAC Kanye West is scheduled to talk with President Trump tomorrow or the next day about prison reform . If you can get his Facebook page or e-mail , it might be beneficial to fill him in on some helpful suggestions.
I’m a little confused by the title of this article. It states that he is a Florida circuit court judge and yet the article says he is a homicide prosecutor who is running for judge. Before I share this article with others, can I please get some clarification?
Bea, Thank you for this. Sorry – CANDIDATE for Judge. That was a mistake. It was corrected.
This is just my opinion but every single felony defendant, whether sex offender or otherwise, should seek recusal of this judge on the basis of bias. Because this man has shown such bias against accused or convicted sex offender’s, every felony defendant can expect the same or simar bias. And sooner or later the Judicial Qualifications Commission will see that this man should not be a judge under their Cannons and rules requiring impartiality.
Excellent idea , rule says that if the DEFENDANT feels judicial bias the judge must step aside
The American Bar Association and the Florida Bar both provide for investigations into their respective members on allegations of ethical violations. It seems to me that more investigation into this man’s ethics is warranted, especially given the scurtiny former Judge now Justice Kavanaugh went through.
Who wants a judge who already shows ignorance and prejudice against a group of people. Please encourage your voting family and friends to study the candidates and vote their conscience. We need fair minded judges.
I’m sure some will consider this zero a hero. I remember reading a law in the past that they can’t make you move if you were there first. I think the same law prohibited them from putting a bus stop near a sex offender’s residence. Is that law repealed, or do they just ignore it?
If you are there before the pocket park is built, they cannot make you move. They usually build these where there are no registered persons in order to prevent any from moving in, thus making it harder for that person to find a place to live. Despicable!
Well, it depends on the state or on the city/county. Since the Florida law does not apply SORRs to pre-2005 offenses (it is not applied ex post facto), Florida cities and counties might technically have their hands tied. It definitely happens in other states, like that IL case, unfortunately for them. I don’t know if any FL localities have attempted to apply their own residency restrictions ex post facto, but it would not surprise me if they did. My guess is they would get away with it until taken to court.
You are joking, right? The State knows that the residency restrictions do no apply to persons convicted prior to 2005, but they have essentially given the cities and counties permission to do that very thing AND enhance criminal penalties.
There is no reason to speculate. We know the answer.
Most municipal SORRs are applied retroactively.
There is a litigation against Miami-Dade’s SORR that is going to trial this month. It is a 2500 foot SORR. The 11th circuit already ruled that the plaintiffs have a cause of action based on Ex Post Facto grounds.
If I recall, there was a councilman or commissioner who argued that if we are going to not permit registrants to move within a certain distance from a school/daycare/playground, then we should also not permit school/daycare/playground to be built where it would violate that rule. I believe the background was that it was actually the law, but that the city/county readily granted waivers to daycares, but of course never granted any kind of waiver to a registrant. This was somewhere with an increased SORR distance, I believe, possibly Miami-Dade. Not sure on the details, but that’s the gist of it.