A retired turtle farmer from Jupiter says he's afraid of what law enforcement could do next after he learned a state agency searched his personal data 34 times.
This comes as recent reporting by the Miami Herald and Orlando Sentinel uncovered that Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation officers used driver's license records of environmental activists who criticized the agency or spoke at public meetings.
The reporting found the FWC used the state's DAVID system — known as the Driver and Vehicle Information Database — to monitor the activists since 2023. The agency said this comes amid threats of violence toward staff.
The Tampa Bay Times also reported the story and found the agency pulled information for more than 20 people.
What is the DAVID system?
The Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles describes the DAVID system as a "multifaceted database."
Information includes a person's driver's license number, address, date of birth, Social Security number, motor vehicle information and more. And it's designated for police to use in criminal investigations.
The system has faced controversy in the Sunshine State in recent years. For instance, a 2020 investigation by WTSP revealed hundreds of state and local workers were abusing their access to gather information for personal reasons.
This led to Gov. Ron DeSantis signing a bill into law in 2021 to prevent misuse by requiring more training on using the databases appropriately and increasing penalties for government workers.
"I've never been afraid of law enforcement in my life, but I am now. I'm afraid. I'm afraid that I could be set up or anything could go on."Jim Watt
FWC's look at the database
When it comes to recent reporting about the FWC using this database to access critics' information, the agency said the purpose was safety.
The FWC said topics brought before the commission can sometimes be controversial where people are passionate about their position. It added this can lead to "safety and operational concerns that require vigilance" to ensure all participants are safe.
It said it believed any inquiries conducted were done for public safety purposes and were consistent with "legitimate law enforcement practices."
"Assessing credible threats to the people who attend our meetings and work in our facilities is a legitimate and lawful function of law enforcement, and we take every threat seriously," the agency wrote.
The FWC also added that it supports the right to speak.
"Every Floridian has the right to speak at our public meetings, to petition this agency, and to disagree with our decisions and our commissioners. We support that right without reservation. Taking part in the public process should never carry a personal cost," the FWC wrote.
One of the people the agency searched was retired turtle farmer Jim Watt. He was told FWC officers did "34 criminal investigations" on him. But the Tampa Bay Times reported the agency said Watt was never under a criminal investigation, nor is he currently.
On "Florida Matters Live & Local," Watt said he felt the FWC did not need to look into him and that he's never raised his voice at commissioners.
"I've seen people get emotional and yell at them. I have nothing to do with any of these people that are doing any of this," he added.
He explained that he's spoken at around 30 televised commission meetings and around the same number of FWC shareholder meetings and some multi-county commission meetings.
Watt believes the FWC accessed his data because he's a "whistleblower." He's talked at meetings about his concerns with the use of pesticides. And he believes this is the agency's way of "fighting back" at him.
He argues the FWC "did not need to do this" and said he is "squeaky clean."
A threat to the First Amendment?
But the FWC's use of this system is prompting concerns that it could chill people's free speech.
Although the FWC argues its usage was legitimate for safety purposes, Gary Scott Edinger with the First Amendment Lawyers Association said that speaking negatively about an agency — even passionately and yelling at commissioners — is not a threat under the law.
"Being vocal, using extreme language — what we call rhetorical hyperbole — that's not a threat. It's not ground for criminal investigation, which is essentially what these DAVID inquiries are," Edinger said on "Florida Matters Live & Local."
He also said that even if the agency tried to use the searches in a later prosecution in the case someone does commit a crime, he believes the information would get suppressed since it's likely a Fourth Amendment violation.
Edinger added that now this information is out to the public, it will likely make people unwilling to be as vocal in criticizing the agency. He said it's a First Amendment problem.
"They don't want government looking down over their necks, and the legal standard is whether a person of ordinary firmness would be deterred from speaking, and I think the average American would not speak if they were worried about government surveillance," Edinger said.
"None of the information suggests there have actually been threats made, which would be the threshold for beginning a criminal investigation. And so I would view the current actions of the agency to be unconstitutional."Gary Scott Edinger, First Amendment Lawyers Association
He added that it's not always an easy line to walk in protecting public office officials, but based on public information, none of the people surveilled have threatened the agency.
"They've been really vocal. They've been really critical. But we're allowed to do that in the United States, right? We're Americans. We get to do that," Edinger said. "None of the information suggests there have actually been threats made, which would be the threshold for beginning a criminal investigation. And so I would view the current actions of the agency to be unconstitutional."
Overall, the use of the DAVID system has shaken Watt, and he's now afraid of walking into a public meeting again.
"As a matter of fact, when I drive down the road and I see a game warden truck pull up near me...I've never been afraid of law enforcement in my life, but I am now," he said. "I'm afraid. I'm afraid that I could be set up or anything could go on."
Watt said he believes the agency wants to shut him up and is in "fear of retaliation."
And if they're willing to go into his records 34 times, "what would they do next?"
This story was compiled from an interview conducted by Matthew Peddie for "Florida Matters Live & Local." You can listen to the entire program here.
