FL: Florida human trafficking database with names and mugshots of perverts caught paying for sex VANISHES after lawmakers failed to agree to extend it

Source: dailymail.co.uk 1/10/24

Florida’s database with names and mugshots of people convicted of paying for sex suddenly disappeared on January 1, 2024.

The Soliciting for Prostitution Public Database was launched at the start of 2021, and racked up a list of hundreds of offenders, according to ABC. 

The Database mysteriously vanished on January 1, 2024, along with a message saying that ‘the section requiring the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to create and maintain the Solicitation for Prostitution Public Database stands repealed.’

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

17 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Critically, this is what an insider said about the database:
“The idea was to shame people,’ State Attorney Andrew Warren told ABC.”

Another exhibit in overturning Smith v. Doe? It’s also interesting how quick the Florida legislature was to let this database slide, and how few men they managed to get on it!

They let it slide because they were not getting federal dollars for it.

You mean they had to take care of something they wanted?! NO!

Copy and paste the quote above and use it as an exhibit in court cases going forward.

Could it be that “The Soliciting for Prostitution Public Database” was taken off because the people that are getting on it are the ones that pushed it in the first place?

Interesting that there is no registry for so many violent crimes (I think I would like to know if someone with a history of home invasions is living in my neighborhood), yet the government arrests, imprisons, and puts on a registry individuals because of what that individual has seen.
How many hundreds of thousands of men are in prison, or on the registry, because of what they have seen? Think about it. Also, you could look at a video of a murder of a 15 year old and you would not have committed any crime. However, if that same 15 year old was female and topless while being murdered…. well, you know the result.
Some say that the crime of CP is not the actual viewing of the underage images, but the crime is that the perpetrator “believed” he was looking at a naked minor. Well guess what… when I first watched the movie “Fast Times at Ridgemont High”, I actually thought that Stacy was indeed 16. (she was not, she was played by Jennifer Jason Leigh who was of age at the time of filming).
So, does that mean that I viewed CP because I believed I was seeing a naked minor? Should everyone that watched that movie be investigated for viewing CP because the person on the screen said that they were 16 years old?
So then that brings me to this point… what about those that WANT to look at CP but do not look at CP? Are they guilty of a crime in the government’s eyes?
I know that my rant is off topic. But I just wanted to see what other’s thought.
Thanks.

I’m pretty sure that someplace, in an Iron Mountain (NYSE IRM) warehouse… next to the Ark of the Covenant, is a tape with a backup copy of the database.

Last edited 9 months ago by Scott