🚫 OCSO disabled social media comments after two police shootings, citing threats and harassment.
📜 Legal experts say the timing could make it appear as viewpoint discrimination, violating free speech protections.
📂 Public records requests yielded no documentation explaining the decision, raising questions about transparency.
SHALIMAR — Following public backlash over two officer-involved shootings that drew national attention within six months, the Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office has turned off comments across all of its social media platforms.
Critics argue that the move is an attempt to evade scrutiny and public criticism. At the same time, the OCSO states that it was a move to protect department members from threatening and abusive language.
The decision came shortly after the release of details surrounding a November 2023 shooting involving Marquis Jackson, a then-22-year-old man who deputies nearly killed under questionable circumstances.
During the incident, Deputies Beth Roberts and Jesse Hernandez responded to a call at a townhome complex on McLaren Circle in Fort Walton Beach, where a woman reported that her boyfriend, Marquis Jackson, had taken her vehicle and sent her threatening texts.
The caller also said Jackson may have been armed with a silencer and multiple weapons.
When Jackson arrived on the scene, he was briefly searched before being detained without incident and placed in the back of Deputy Hernandez’s patrol car. Hernandez returned to the caller to complete paperwork, including a Victim’s Rights form.
Moments later, as Hernandez approached his vehicle, he believed he heard a gunshot and felt something strike him. Convinced he was under fire, Hernandez rolled away from the car and fired multiple rounds into the back seat, where Jackson was being held.
Additional deputies arrived and pulled Jackson from the car. No weapon was found. An investigation later determined that the sound Hernandez heard was from an acorn hitting the roof of his vehicle. Jackson was not injured.
The public was not made aware of the incident’s full details until February 2024. Hernandez, a former U.S. Army officer who had joined OCSO in January 2022, resigned on Dec. 4, 2023.
An internal investigation found that Hernandez’s use of force was “not objectively reasonable” and that he had violated the agency’s policy on the use of excessive force. Roberts was cleared of wrongdoing.
Nearly six months later, the Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office was entangled in another public relations nightmare after another deputy-involved shooting resulted in the death of Roger Fortson.
Around the time these details became public, the sheriff’s office began turning off comments on all its social media platforms. In a statement to Mid Bay News, the agency said the move was meant to “ensure accurate, timely and reliable public information is easily accessible online.”
“In order to continue releasing such information without distraction, false information, spam and social media bots, we are following other government agencies and corporations in Florida and nationwide in removing the ability to post comments on our social media platforms,” the statement read.
OCSO also confirmed it sought legal counsel before making the change.
“Our legal staff thoroughly researched the decision,” a spokesperson said. “A government agency can turn off commenting on social media accounts. The practice does not selectively block or delete specific comments based on viewpoints expressed.”
The Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office is one of at least 19 sheriff’s departments across Florida that have limited or disabled public comments on social media. Others include Alachua, Calhoun, Collier, Columbia, Lee, Hardee, Hamilton, Hernando, Highlands, Holmes, Gadsden, Jackson, Pasco, Nassau, Okeechobee, Sarasota, St. Johns and Union counties.
In U.S. constitutional law, government-operated social media pages are generally considered “limited public forums,” particularly when they are used for official communication purposes.
This designation means agencies can impose content-neutral rules, such as banning threats or profanity, but cannot engage in viewpoint discrimination. For instance, removing only critical comments while allowing praise would likely violate the First Amendment.
Legal experts, like local attorney Mike Chesser, say government agencies may turn off social media comments to prevent defamation, threats or discriminatory speech, but only if the decision is applied consistently and not as a means to suppress public criticism.
“My understanding of the law is that you can shut off comments if it’s a content-neutral restriction,” Chesser said. “But it looks to me at six days after something like this happens that it may not be content-neutral.”
He noted that while government agencies are not obligated to host public forums, how they regulate access matters.
“It is the discretionary control over that media that creates the constitutional concern,” Chesser said. “Not the existence or non-existence of [the platform].”
Chesser acknowledged the complexity of regulating public input on social media, especially when the public forum is government-run.
“If they invite people to come… I think that’s an invitation that a police department or sheriff’s department probably would find helpful to them,” he said.
When asked whether a blanket shutdown of comments during a period of public criticism might amount to viewpoint discrimination, Chesser said it was a “really good debate,” and added: “If 98% of what we’re getting on this thing is people [expressing] anger… are they really obligated to spend money to do that?”
In researching constitutional law, turning off comments across all posts, particularly on sensitive topics, may be legally permissible when accompanied by a clear and posted comment policy.
Still, agencies must take care not to infringe on legitimate public discourse. Courts have consistently ruled that when government actors use social media for official purposes, they are subject to the same constitutional protections as private individuals regarding free speech.
The U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that principle in its 2024 decision in Lindke v. Freed, which clarified that public officials acting in an official capacity on social media must uphold First Amendment rights.
When asked whether the department issued a public notice before limiting comments, the sheriff’s office said it responded to individual inquiries and that Sheriff Eric Aden addressed the change during public community events.
One such instance occurred at some point last year, when Aden, speaking at a local Republican event, addressed the prohibition on comments during his remarks.
“We were fielding hundreds of threats a day at the sheriff’s office,” Aden said. “They threatened me, they threatened my wife. They doxxed me, they posted my house.”
Aden also said that the backlash the agency received online was politically charged and, at times, abusive.
“We were fielding hundreds of Democrats a day,” Aden said.
He suggested the comments had less to do with public accountability and more to do with political hostility.
“This isn’t just happening in government,” he added. “We’re seeing this in private sectors too—people turning off their comments.”
“We have some trolls, people that are nasty against all of us,” he said. “And it hurts small feelings. But we’re still answering calls, saving lives, and coming to your houses when you need us.”
Aden added that the office continues to provide public information through its website and phone lines, and encouraged residents to contact the department directly with any concerns or questions.
“The Facebook comments, we do appreciate the praise,” Aden said. “But the negative comments—why people that did nothing wrong were unjustly being treated—that’s why We made that change.”
To gain further understanding of why the OSCO made the change, Mid Bay News made a records request on Jun. 6, 2025.
That day, Mid Bay News filed a formal public records request with the Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office, seeking any documentation related to the decision to disable or limit public comments on the agency’s social media platforms.
The request, made under Florida’s Public Records Act, Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes, asked for access to “all internal communications—including but not limited to emails, memos, text messages, and meeting notes—regarding the decision to disable or limit public comments” between Nov. 1, 2023, and Feb. 29, 2024, weeks before the the shooting and weeks after the report went public and comments were turned off.
After receiving no response for several weeks, Mid Bay News sent a follow-up email to the sheriff’s office on June 27. In response, the agency stated that it had no record of the original request and requested that it be resubmitted.
On Jul. 2, the sheriff’s office provided a 235-page document that entailed only two items: a news article from The Capitolist about the rising cost of condo ownership in Florida, and an Epoch Times article titled “The Psychology behind Social Media Hate: A Veteran Explains,” which had been shared by employees internally on Feb. 26, 2024.
As of Jul. 28, the sheriff’s office has not provided any internal emails, memos, meeting notes, or text messages responsive to the original request.
The agency has not cited any legal exemptions for withholding records, as required under Florida law.
Collin Bestor is a reporter for Mid Bay News and covers local government in Okaloosa County. You can reach him at collin@midbaynews.com.
Pro Communi Bono
St. Francis De Sales, Ora Pro Nobis!
