Florida Could Ban Release of Recordings After Mass Shootings
Inspired by last year's school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that left 17 people dead, the bill says victims' relatives could be traumatized by the images, and that recordings and photos of mass killings could inspire others to kill.
March 28, 2019 at 01:14 PM
4 minute read
Florida's government agencies would be prohibited from releasing photos, video or audio that record the killing of a person in an act of mass violence, under a bill approved by the state Senate.
Inspired by last year's school shooting in Parkland that left 17 people dead, the bill says victims' relatives could be traumatized by the images, and that recordings and photos of mass killings could inspire others to kill.
“The Legislature is concerned that, if these photographs and video and audio recordings are released, terrorists will use them to attract followers, bring attention to their causes, and inspire others to kill. The Legislature also finds that dissemination of these photographs and video and audio recordings may also educe violent acts by persons who have a mental illness or who are morally corrupt,” the bill reads.
The bill says the Legislature also recognized that these types of images can be widely disseminated on the internet in an era when most people have access to computers and smartphones. That would subject victims' families to continuous injury.
In addition to the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the bill states that lawmakers are “gravely concerned” about the 2016 mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, in which a gunman killed 49 people, and the 2017 shooting at a Fort Lauderdale airport that left five dead.
The bill defines an act of mass violence as an attack that leaves at least three people dead, not including the perpetrator. It bans the release of depictions of the actual killing or victims' bodies after an attack. Copies of those images and recordings could be released to victims' immediate families, and victim's relatives wouldn't be prohibited from releasing copies to the media or others. It doesn't ban the release of other images during an attack, such as a killer approaching a school or business or police responding to the scene, as long as bodies or killings aren't depicted.
Republican bill sponsor Sen. Tom Lee told reporters after the vote that he understands media plays a role in holding authorities accountable after an attack, and said news organizations can petition a judge for the release of recordings and photos.
He commended the South Florida Sun Sentinel for its coverage of the Parkland shootings and acknowledged the newspaper was helped by having access to video and recordings after the attack.
“If you read the Sun Sentinel, we would have been unlikely to get to the bottom of what happened in Parkland without access to that footage. If there's a compelling public interest, I'm hopeful the media will still be able to get to it,” Lee said.
But he also acknowledged that suing for access to recordings is expensive.
“There will still be that ability to go to court, and I frankly regret that they have to go to the extraordinary measures they do because going to court costs money — a lot of money,” Lee said. “But we looked at 11 ways to Sunday on how to write this to make it easier on the media to get access and this was the best we could do.”
A House version of the bill was approved by two committees and can now be considered by the full chamber.
Brendan Farrington reports for the Associated Press.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250