logo
FSU Panama City students host a candlelight gathering in solidarity with fellow Seminoles

FSU Panama City students host a candlelight gathering in solidarity with fellow Seminoles

Yahoo18-04-2025
PANAMA CITY, Fla. (WMBB) – 'We are one Florida State University. We are just different locations, but we're all Seminoles. And when one of us hurts, all of us hurt,' FSU Panama City Associate Dean Irvin Clark said.
FSU Panama City united in the face of tragedy on Thursday. Hours after the shooting at the FSU Tallahassee campus, students at the Panama City location organized a candlelight gathering to show their support for their fellow Seminoles.
Event organizers say they wanted to provide the FSU community with an open forum to connect with one another and share their concerns.
'I think a lot of people are worried. Concerned like 'that could have been me' type of mindset. I think a lot of things that we try to push as FSU people are just that we are a family, we're a community. We'll stick together no matter what,' event organizer Bryanna Morgan said.
Bill introduced to rename stretch of Highway 90 after fallen WCSO deputy
FSU PC is providing counselors during this time, and other staff and campus police officers offered their support to students.
Officials say they weren't surprised their students stepped up to organize the event.
'It shows that they're human and that they seek out answers from a higher authority. And that's where my lord and savior, and so it's magical stuff. Is stuff that you can't teach in the classroom is something that you're born with,' Clark said.
Administrators postponed a block party carnival event that was supposed to take place Thursday night.
FSU PC classes will continue as scheduled on Friday.
FSU PC was on a soft lockdown Thursday afternoon, but officials quickly determined the campus was safe.
12 FSU PC students were on the Tallahassee campus during the shooting, but they are all safe.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Miami can't postpone its elections to next year, judge rules

time4 days ago

Miami can't postpone its elections to next year, judge rules

Miami elections could proceed this year as originally planned, after a judge ruled that city officials could not push elections back to 2026 without voter approval. The ruling comes after the Miami city council voted 3-2, and Miami Mayor Francis Suarez signed off, to cancel November's elections and hold them in 2026 instead. They argued the alignment with statewide elections would lower costs and increase turnout. The decision was met with pushback for being done via ordinance rather than a vote from the public. Suarez and council members faced accusations, including from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, of deciding to extend their own time in office, some beyond legal term limits. Mayoral candidate Emilio Gonzalez filed a lawsuit on June 30, challenging the decision, calling it "unconstitutional" and a "blatant power grab." Miami-Dade County Circuit Judge Valerie R. Manno Schurr ruled in favor of Gonzalez on Monday, saying the city did not have the authority to shift elections without voter approval. "The Court declares that the City of Miami cannot change the dates of municipal elections or the terms of offices for the City's elected officials without amending the City of Miami Municipal Charter … which requires approval by the electorate," Schurr wrote in her opinion. DeSantis lauded Monday's decision. He previously called the attempt to postpone the elections "wrong" and said he hoped to see "a swift legal response." "City of Miami politicians voted to defy term limits, cancel this year's scheduled election, and extend their own terms in office — all without voter approval. Today, a judge has put the kibosh on the scheme," DeSantis wrote on X. "Great to see the law and common sense prevail." Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who had issued a legal opinion on June 11 supporting Gonzalez's argument, also weighed in on social media. "Thrilled that the Court agreed with our legal opinion on the City of Miami's unconstitutional attempt at moving back an election without voter approval," Uthmeier wrote. Another amicus brief supporting Gonzalez's came come from former Miami mayor and current Commissioner Joseph Carollo. Carollo was one of the two commissioners who voted against shifting the elections. The court's ruling offers declaratory relief but not injunctive relief, meaning Miami is legally in the wrong but has not been explicitly ordered not to postpone its elections. However, Florida State University Law Professor Michael Morley said "if push comes to shove, the court can just enter injunctive relief" at any time. The city is appealing Schurr's decision. "While we respectfully disagree with the trial court's decision, we are confident in the strength of our case and remain optimistic about the outcome on appeal," City Attorney George Wysong wrote in the appeal notice. Morley said he thought the appeal was "extremely unlikely" to succeed. Speaking prior to the ruling, University of Miami Law Professor Charlton Copeland said due to the nature of the dispute, the suit would be able to move through the courts "fairly quickly." "These are clean legal arguments about what law governs… these aren't procedurally complicated issues," Copeland said. Aubrey Jewett, a professor at the University of Central Florida, said the choice to hold elections on even or odd years involves a "trade off." Odd-year elections might have lower turnout, but "a greater emphasis on local issues that people are actually looking at and voting on." In even years, local concerns might be drowned out by state or federal issues despite a higher turnout, Jewett told ABC News. Even as elections could go forward this year as planned, Jewett said harm has been done to Miami's political culture already because the postponement decision was pushed without voter input. "The local politics has long had a reputation for being sort of an insider's game, and that a relatively few number of people have a lot of influence," Jewett said. "I think that for a lot of Miami residents, it will breed even more cynicism and distrust."

Florida State student accused in a mass shooting is set to go to trial in November
Florida State student accused in a mass shooting is set to go to trial in November

Hamilton Spectator

time16-07-2025

  • Hamilton Spectator

Florida State student accused in a mass shooting is set to go to trial in November

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — The trial for the Florida State University student accused of killing two people and wounding six others in a mass shooting on campus in April is set to go to trial this November. At a case management conference in a Tallahassee courthouse on Wednesday, Second Judicial Circuit Judge Lance Neff set jury selection in the case of 20-year-old Phoenix Ikner to begin Nov. 3. Ikner's attorney, public defender Peter Mills, said he needs more time to delve into the case, which involves extensive video surveillance footage and witness testimony. 'I object to that, judge,' Mills said of the trial schedule. 'I am still investigating the case. My client's entitled to effective assistance of counsel.' Neff indicated he's open to hearing out Mills' concerns, saying, 'we can talk about what what you need' in order to investigate the case. As far as the prosecution, Second District State Attorney Jack Campbell said, 'we'll be ready.' Ikner faces two counts of first-degree murder and seven counts of attempted first-degree murder. He is the stepson of a local sheriff's deputy , and investigators say he used his stepmother's former service weapon to carry out the shooting. ___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

The laws around swearing in public as council plans £100 fines for bad language
The laws around swearing in public as council plans £100 fines for bad language

Yahoo

time16-07-2025

  • Yahoo

The laws around swearing in public as council plans £100 fines for bad language

Residents of seaside towns in south east England could be fined £100 for swearing in public, under fresh council proposals. Thanet District Council has launched a fresh bid to see restrictions on 'foul or abusive language' brought in to the Kent seaside towns of Birchington, Margate, Ramsgate and Broadstairs. The council tried to apply for similar rules – known as a public space protection order (PSPO) – last July. That scheme was scrapped a month later after the Free Speech Union (FSU) threatened legal action. However, council papers for a meeting on Tuesday have revealed that the authority now hopes to revisit the rules to crack down on anti-social behaviour. In their reasoning for bringing the fines back, the report states that police officers found it a helpful tool, and that they have experienced "increased difficulties in managing some of the identified forms of anti-social behaviour". The report says: 'There is an ongoing issue of antisocial behaviour in the Margate, Broadstairs and Ramsgate areas. The causes of this are complex and the PSPO is recognised by all of those working with such behaviour, as being one of the effective tools for dealing with this.' According to the document, the rule states: 'All persons are prohibited from using foul or abusive language in such a manner that is loud and can be heard by others and cause either alarm or distress to any other person in any public place.' The penalty for breaking the PSPO, which will cover Margate, Ramsgate and Broadstairs entirely, is £100 to be paid within 28 days - but is reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. The order also bans anti-social groups, misuse of public space, urinating, defecating or spitting, legal psychoactive substances (such as nitrous oxide), humiliating others and consuming alcohol. The report acknowledges a lot of criticism of the order, including the vague nature of the term "foul language" and fears of disruption to peaceful protests. However, they say that exceptions will be made if people have a "reasonable excuse" for having broken the rules. Cabinet members are expected to discuss the revisited order in the council chamber on 24 July. If approved, the PSPO will be in place for three years. Yahoo News UK has contacted the Free Speech Union for a comment. Swearing in public isn't automatically illegal – it becomes an offence under the Public Order Act 1986, Section 5, if it's threatening or abusive and likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. However, context is key and aggressive swearing in a crowded place can break the law, unlike casual swearing among friends. Someone must feel or be likely to feel distressed for it to be an offence. Police officers are less likely to be considered distressed and so swearing in front of them will not necessarily see you fined. There is also an offence of using obscene language in the street to the annoyance of residents. However, an arrest for this is only likely if the behaviour occurs in the presence of a police officer. Other laws, like the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, apply if swearing is racially or religiously aggravated. Local bylaws may also restrict swearing in specific areas. Freedom of expression under the Human Rights Act 1998 protects some swearing. However, courts balance this right against preventing public disorder. Breaching Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 can lead to a fine up to £1,000. No prison sentence is typically imposed for this offence. If swearing is racially or religiously aggravated under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, penalties are harsher. Offenders could face up to seven years in prison or an unlimited fine. Local bylaws, like those proposed by Thanet, may result in fixed penalty notices, often around £100. Non-payment could lead to court action and higher fines. Police may issue a penalty notice for disorder (PND) for minor offences, costing £80. Paying this avoids court but admits guilt. In rare cases, persistent or extreme behaviour could escalate to charges under broader public order laws. This might involve community orders or, in exceptional cases, short custodial sentences. Click below to see the latest South and South East headlines

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store