Panama City Beach police say town is done with spring break: 'Go somewhere else'
A northwest Florida city is declaring that its time as a hotspot for spring breakers has come to an end, saying it "can no longer be a Spring Break town."
Authorities in Panama City Beach, about 100 miles from Tallahassee, said they are calling it quits when it comes to spring break.
"Every year we try to manage it, and every year it brings more challenges," Panama City Beach Police Department Chief Eusebio Talamantez (J.R.) said in an April 13 statement on Facebook. "I'm not willing to risk the safety of our city to hold onto something that no longer works."
Talamantez said the city's "law enforcement officers should not be expected to shoulder the burden of an event that no longer aligns with the values or vision of this community."
"It's unfair to continue placing that weight on the backs of the men and women who serve and protect this city every day," he added.
Bay County Sheriff Tommy Ford, in a statement on Facebook, said over 200 officers from the sheriff's office, Panama City Beach Police Department, local agencies, and our state law enforcement partners were deployed during the busy spring break. The authorities faced "risks head-on to protect our residents, visitors, and businesses," according to the sheriff.
To punish those "who came here to bring trouble" with "guns, bad intentions, and no respect for this city," Talamantez said his officers and team caught several who thought they "could blend in and get away with it," adding many of them ended up in handcuffs and crying in the interview room.
"Some of you fired shots over petty arguments and social media drama," Talamantez said. "When the cuffs went on, the tough act disappeared. Our officers didn't see hardened criminals. They saw scared kids crying in the interview room. TikTok doesn't show that part, but our body cameras do."
Echoing Talamantez's comments, Ford said despite efforts by authorities to maintain harmony during the season, "spring break still draws some visitors with bad intentions—folks bringing guns, starting fights, or disrupting our community."
While Ford did not explicitly cancel spring break, he said his office is looking forward to working with the city administration, residents, business owners and community leaders to sharpen strategies to deter bad behavior and ensure everyone feels secure.
The police chief said he plans to hold "serious discussions with stakeholders and city leadership," about the future of spring break season, an event, he says, "no longer aligns with the values or vision of this community."
"Panama City Beach is a safe, family-focused community," Talamantez said. "We've worked too hard to build that, and I won't let a group of criminals destroy it."
Panama City Beach Mayor Stuart Tettemer told Panama City News Herald, part of the USA TODAY NETWORK, that his administration is "fully committed to making Panama City Beach as safe as it can be for the people who live here and those who visit."
"I support our law enforcement and am working with those who care about keeping the beach safe and strong," Tettemer told The News Herald.
Talamantez's statement comes on the heels of a chaotic spring break season on the beach, the News Herald reported. While the season is still winding down, the area has seen shootings and disorderly crowds. Officers reportedly seized firearms and illegal drugs at the gatherings.
On the flip side, in Talamantez's statement, he thanked those "who did things the right way," and appreciated "future doctors, nurses, engineers, teachers, and leaders who came here for a break, made memories, enjoyed the beach, and showed respect."
"To the good visitors, you'll always be welcome. To the idiots, go somewhere else," Talamantez said.
Last year, Miami Beach, another spring break hotspot, had said they were "breaking up" with spring break following a chaotic season.
"We're breaking up with spring break," the Miami Beach website had said. "Expect curfews, security searches and bag checks at beach access points, early beach entrance closures, DUI checkpoints, bumper-to-bumper traffic, road closures and arrests for drug possession and violence."
This year, the city released a reality television-style scripted video to warn visitors of the strict rules in place.
Contributing: Dylan Gentile, Panama City News Herald / Kinsey Crowley, USA TODAY
Saman Shafiq is a trending news reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at sshafiq@gannett.com and follow her on X and Instagram @saman_shafiq7.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Panama City Beach police chief says time as spring break town is over
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Written threat' at Lockport High School determined to be non-credible
BUFFALO, N.Y. (WIVB) — The Lockport City School District says a 'written threat' that caused students and staff to evacuate on Friday afternoon was determined to be non-credible. No safety concerns were found, the district said. Lockport High School was evacuated shortly before dismissal Friday following a written threat found in one of the classrooms, according to Lockport City School District Superintendent Mathis Calvin III. The threat was written on a piece of paper and found on the floor just after 2 p.m. Staff brought the note to administrators. Both staff and students were evacuated to the Kenan Center down the street out of an abundance of caution. 'The Lockport City School District takes and treats issues such as this very seriously,' Calvin said. 'Every incident is fully investigated and we will follow and use our code of conduct when addressing situations such as this manner.' A full sweep of the school took place, as well as an investigation. Students were sent home and after school activities were canceled for the rest of the day. Calvin says all Lockport schools will reopen on Monday with an increased police presence on-site. The written threat comes just two days after a high school student made a similar non credible threat on TikTok, but Calvin says the two incidents do not seem related. Kayleigh Hunter-Gasperini joined the News 4 team in 2024 as a Digital Video Producer. She is a graduate of Chatham University. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Stephen Stanko, who killed 2 and raped his girlfriend's 15-year-old daughter, is executed
Stephen Stanko, who killed 2 and raped his girlfriend's 15-year-old daughter, is executed While prosecutors painted Stanko as a cold, calculated psychopath at trial, his attorneys at the time argued that he was insane when he committed the rape and murders. Show Caption Hide Caption US expands execution methods Most death row inmates faced one execution method in modern history. Now, there are many alternative ways to die. South Carolina has executed a conman-turned-murderer convicted of killing two people and raping his girlfriend's 15-year-old daughter. Stephen Stanko, 57, was executed by lethal injection on Friday, June 13, for the murder of 74-year-old Henry Lee Turner, a retired Air Force master sergeant and father of three. Stanko was sentenced to death separately for the murder of his 43-year-old girlfriend, whom USA TODAY is not naming to protect her daughter's privacy as a rape survivor. Stanko became the 23rd inmate put to death in the U.S. this year and the third in South Carolina. He was pronounced dead at 6:34 p.m. While prosecutors painted Stanko as a cold, calculated psychopath at trial, his attorneys at the time argued that he was insane when he committed the murders. His current lawyers argued that his life should have been spared because the execution methods in South Carolina amount to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the U.S. Constitution, an argument refuted by state officials and rejected by courts. Here's what you need to know about Stanko's execution. Stanko's execution just one of four this week Stanko's final breaths came during a busy week for the death penalty in the U.S., with four executions between Tuesday and Friday. Two were executed on the same day on June 10: Anthony Wainwright in Florida by lethal injection and Gregory Hunt in Alabama by nitrogen gas. Oklahoma executed John Hanson by lethal injection on Thursday, June 12. What did Stephen Stanko do? In the middle of the night on April 8, 2005, Stanko attacked his girlfriend's 15-year-old daughter as she slept in her bed at home in Murrells Inlet, an unincorporated seaside community just south of Myrtle Beach. The girl later sobbed and clutched a white teddy bear as she testified about the hours-long attack, according to coverage by the Sun-News. At some point, worried about her mother, the girl broke free and found her lying on the floor in another room. The girl testified that Stanko then hit her over the head and she blacked out. When she woke, he raped her again and then pinned her body to the bed with his knee while he strangled her mother in front of her. "I said, 'Please God, take me and not her,'" the girl testified as people in the courtroom cried, the Sun-News reported. "I fought hard but she stopped making noises, and that was it." After he killed his 43-year-old girlfriend, Stanko then drove 25 miles north the Conway home of one of her friends, Henry Lee Turner, whose body was found fatally shot about 24 hours later. Stanko fled the scene, setting off a nationwide manhunt that made national headlines. Four days after the murders, federal authorities tracked Stanko down about 200 miles west to Augusta, where he was hobnobbing with Masters golf fans, introducing himself as Stephen Christopher, and lying about his wealth. Stanko had also already wooed a woman, moved in with her and had even gone to church with her on the Sunday before he was captured, authorities said at the time. "She said he was the nicest, most courteous young man," the woman's grandmother told Knight Ridder at the time. "You would never know he was a fraud." Charles Grose, Stanko's attorney, said that experts have diagnosed the inmate with brain damage, 'likely from numerous brain injuries including from a troubled birth, a blow to the back of the head as a teen while shielding a classmate from an assault, and repeated traumas from serious sports-related head injuries.' He said that problems resulting from the brain damage were manageable in a controlled environment like prison and that he "productively used his years on death row to repent of his crimes and seek God's forgiveness, help other inmates and write about his experiences.' Grose added: 'While nothing excuses Stephen's terrible crimes, his execution will not make South Carolina safer.' Stanko described as conman, psychopath Archived news reports citing courtroom testimony and interviews describe a con artist who had a knack for reeling in women. Stanko's various lies included, according to archived news accounts: that he was a millionaire, he owned multiple hamburger restaurants, he had an engineering degree from a prestigious university, and he made bigtime deals in oil and real estate. "He has a need for grandiosity," one forensic psychologist observed on the witness stand, according to a 2006 report in the Myrtle Beach Sun-News. Another one simply said: "Mr. Stanko is a psychopath." Although Stanko was adept at charming some, others didn't buy his act. "He was smooth and he was slick," John Gaumer, a colleague of Stanko's slain girlfriend, told the Sun-News. "It's a puzzle to everyone I know what it was that he had − that he was able to exercise so much control over her was a mystery.' Her ex-husband told the paper that he met Stanko at her home. "I didn't like him. He knew that I knew what he was,' he said. 'When we looked at each other, I just could sense that there wasn't something right here. But at the same time, you are being told that he is OK, and you want to believe that." He said that Stanko had admitted to having a criminal past, likely as part of a plan to gain her trust. "The snowing ... obviously it drew her in. It was all part of the barrage, the seduction," he said. Stephen Stanko had criminal past, helped write a book from prison It's unclear just how much of his criminal past Stanko shared with his girlfriend. He had served more than eight years in prison for kidnapping and trying to kill another girlfriend in 1996. He had been living with the woman in Goose Creek when they got into an argument about his involvement in theft and fraud, and she told him he had to move out, according to police reports obtained by Knight Ridder in 2005. The next morning, they fought again, and Stanko soaked a washcloth with bleach, put it over her mouth, and tied up her wrists and ankles before he left. The woman, who told police that Stanko had tried to suffocate her, was able to break free and get help, Knight Ridder reported. Stanko pleaded guilty to charges of assault and battery with intent to kill and kidnapping, and was ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation, according to online court records reviewed by USA TODAY. During Stanko's time in prison for that case, he became an author and co-wrote a book called "Living in Prison: A History of the Correctional System with an Insider's View." On Amazon, the book is described as "a rigorous exploration of our correctional system" from Stanko's perspective "on the harsh realities of prison life." Who were Stephen Stanko's victims? USA TODAY was unable to reach family members of either of Stanko's murder victims. Archived news reports about who they were are limited, but both Stanko's girlfriend and Henry Lee Turner were described as trusting and caring people. Her ex-husband told the Sun-News that the mother of three had a great sense of humor. "She was a vivacious, intelligent, compassionate woman who was a very good mother," he told the newspaper. Turner's daughter, Debbie Turner Gallogly, told the Sun-News that her dad met Stanko when he and his girlfriend went to Turner's house to help him with computer problems. "He's a very trusting person, a very welcoming person," she said. "He loved inviting people into his home for meals."
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
President Trump is on a pardon spree
President Trump is on a pardon spree | The Excerpt On a special episode (first released on June 12, 2025) of The Excerpt podcast: Trump's spate of controversial pardons hint at a two-tiered system of justice where only allies get clemency. Former U.S. Pardon Attorney Liz Oyer shares her insights on her former role and why recent clemency grants are so unprecedented. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Dana Taylor: Hello, I'm Dana Taylor, and this is a special episode of The Excerpt. It's been a busy few months in the world of federal pardons. It started on day one of the Trump administration with more than 1,500 people pardoned for their role in the January 6th Capitol Riot, and the pardons just keep coming. The past few weeks, we've seen a spate of controversial clemency grants, including a couple of reality TV stars who were found guilty of defrauding community banks out of tens of millions of dollars, a gang leader serving multiple life sentences, and a Virginia sheriff convicted of bribery in what prosecutors called a cash for badges scheme. The pardons are legal, but what are the ethical concerns here as President Donald Trump's list of pardons continues to grow? Here to dig into some of the details of the president's current pardon spree is former U.S. pardon attorney Liz Oyer. Thanks for joining me, Liz. Liz Oyer: Thanks for having me. Dana Taylor: Let's start off with full transparency here. You're suing the DOJ for your dismissal earlier this year. What's the background here, and can you please explain what the job of a U.S. pardon attorney is? Liz Oyer: I was fired in March from my position as pardon attorney, which is non-political position within the Department of Justice that is entrusted with reviewing applications for clemency from individuals around the country who are seeking that relief from the president and making recommendations to the President about who presents a worthy case for clemency. The position of pardon attorney is one that historically has been filled by a career employee of the Department of Justice, not a political appointee, to ensure that that position is one that is neutral and objective and that the clemency process is not fully politicized. Nevertheless, I was fired very abruptly in March, and my firing violated a whole host of civil service protections that apply to career employees. So I am appealing my termination to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which is the agency that's entrusted with adjudicating those types of issues. President Trump is on a pardon spree Trump's spate of controversial pardons hint at a two-tiered system of justice where only allies get clemency. Dana Taylor: There were some surprising pardons recently. We can't address them all, but I do want to discuss a handful. Let's start with Larry Hoover, a Chicago gang leader serving multiple life sentences for charges including murder, extortion, and money laundering. Trump can pardon whoever he wants. Do you worry he's not getting the best research for each case to determine if clemency is warranted? Liz Oyer: Well, the case of Larry Hoover is actually a very complex one. He has state convictions for an offense involving murder, and then he went on while in state prison to run a continuing criminal enterprise from the state prison, and he incurred additional federal convictions. So the federal convictions are the ones that were pardoned, not the state convictions. His sentence was commuted, and now he still has to deal with those state charges. But it is extremely unusual to grant a commutation of sentence to someone who goes on to commit a massive criminal offense while they're in prison. One of the things that's especially notable about Hoover's case is that he was serving his sentence at the federal super max prison. It's called ADX, it's a notorious prison where people who present challenging conduct in prison and need ultra restrictive conditions of confinement are housed. So the fact that he was granted a commutation by President Trump is very unusual and suggests that not a lot of weight is being placed on conduct in prison in considering who is worthy of a commutation of sentence. Dana Taylor: Many of these pardons are for people who owed significant sums of money and restitution for their crimes, Todd and Julie Chrisley, the reality TV stars, for example. What recourse do the people or entities who are due that money have, if any, and do you worry that Trump is granting clemency to people who don't show remorse? Liz Oyer: What the president has done in terms of using the pardon power to wipe out financial obligations that are owed to victims of crimes is unprecedented. The Chrisleys are one example among many of individuals who were required under federal law to pay what's called restitution, that means essentially paying back victims of crimes, but the pardons have the effect of wiping out that obligation to repay the victims, and those include people who are out of pocket very substantial sums. So that's an extremely unusual use of the pardon power, and it's one that really does prejudice the interests of people who have been victimized by crimes. Dana Taylor: And Liz, I mentioned former Virginia Sheriff Scott Jenkins at the top. He was convicted of receiving at least $75,000 in exchange for appointing North Virginia business executives as auxiliary deputies. He was scheduled to start a 10-year prison sentence the following day when the pardon came in. President Trump wrote on Proof social that he and his family were, "Dragged through hell by a corrupt and weaponized Biden DOJ." Do you worry that Trump is responding to personal emotional appeals rather than legal research? Liz Oyer: Trump does appear to be granting pardons to people in whom he sees something of his own story, something that he can relate to. But the case of Sheriff Jenkins was actually one that was a very straightforward case. He was caught on video accepting envelopes full of cash in exchange for bestowing badges upon people, so it's not a case where there was any doubt about his guilt. It is a case where the president decided to reward someone who was a political loyalist, and it's very unusual to see pardons of corrupt public officials in the way that Trump has been granting them. Sheriff Jenkins is actually one of, I believe, about eight public officials, elected officials, who have committed crimes involving an abuse of their official office who have received pardons from President Trump just in his second term alone. Dana Taylor: Why do you think it's important to have an independent set of eyes researching cases? Liz Oyer: What's so essential about the function that the Office of the Pardon Attorney has played historically is the vetting of candidates that they provide. The Department of Justice has a set of criteria that are very detailed and very rigorous that apply in every case before a recommendation is made to grant clemency. And in the interests of public safety, that vetting is taken very seriously so individuals who are not vetted won't get through this process. The vetting is an important component of it. And the other really important role that the Office of the Pardon Attorney has historically played is accessibility, making sure that the clemency process is accessible to all, not just those who have political connections, which unfortunately appear to be the only types of people who are getting clemency under the current administration. Dana Taylor: Paul Walczak, a former nursing home executive, also received a pardon. His mother recently attended a $1 million plate Mar-a-Lago fundraiser for Trump's Super PAC. Do you worry the president will grant clemency in exchange for gifts or even bribes? Liz Oyer: It appears that we're getting very close to that line. Individuals who are making large donations to the President or his causes are seeing those donations rewarded in the form of pardons. Walczak is one example of that, but not the only example. There's an individual named Trevor Milton, who committed a massive fraud, defrauded his investors of over $600 million, and he made a campaign donation of $1.8 million to Trump and then got a pardon early in the administration. So it's becoming almost sort of a business transaction for people who are involved in white collar crime. They're making a calculation that, "I can pay X and that I can profit X times 100 on committing white collar crimes," which is not something that we should be encouraging in this manner, and it's not how the pardon process is supposed to work. Dana Taylor: The president was asked a couple of weeks ago if he would consider pardoning P Diddy, who's currently on trial for sex trafficking, racketeering, and transportation to engage in prostitution. In witness testimony, he's been described as violent and abusive. If this pardon were to happen, it would of course put an end to an emotional and taxing trial for his alleged victims. Is there any legal precedent for this? Liz Oyer: It's very unusual to grant pardons to people who are the subject of ongoing cases, but that has not deterred this president. This president has undercut his own justice department multiple times by pulling the rug out from under prosecutions that they're actively pursuing. It would be very unusual to grant a pardon to somebody in this circumstance who's currently on trial, but the president does have the authority to do that if that's what he chooses. I will note that one of the things that the Department of Justice ordinarily does is solicit input from victims of crimes about how they would feel about a pardon. That step is being skipped by this current administration. The people who are victims of these crimes that are being pardoned are not being consulted for their input, which again, is not how the process is supposed to work. Dana Taylor: These recent clemencies came on the heels of the biggest blanket clemency of all time, and that was for the January 6th rioters, including those who assaulted police officers. As a former pardon attorney, what's the takeaway here for the American public when it comes to pardons for Trump loyalists, and what message does it send to the law officer community? Liz Oyer: Well, that action, along with the other things this president has done have sent a very strong message that the pardon power is going to be used to reward political loyalists. He appointed a pardon attorney who essentially has said as much. After the pardon of that corrupt sheriff that you mentioned, Sheriff Jenkins, the new pardon attorney, Ed Martin, announced, "No MAGA left behind," which seemed to convey a view that MAGA supporters would be broadly considered for pardons if they have committed crimes. And certainly that's what the January 6th pardons reflect on an absolutely massive scale, that the president's supporters don't have to worry about committing crimes because they will be protected by pardons. Dana Taylor: Liz, does the Constitution say anything about the appearance of a two-tiered system of justice? Liz Oyer: The Constitution grants the President this unchecked power to grant pardons and commutations of sentence, and there really are no limits to it. But the framers who wrote this broad power into the Constitution intended that it would be used for mercy, that it would be used to correct excesses of the criminal justice system, not that it would be used to do special favors for people who have political connections or wealth, but that's exactly how it's being used now. The judge in the case of Paul Walczak that you mentioned actually said in sentencing Walczak to prison, "I'm sending the message that wealth is not a get out of jail free card in this country." And literally days later, Trump granted Walczak a pardon, which just illustrates that in fact, under Trump's system of justice, wealth can be and often is a get out of jail free card. Dana Taylor: As you've said, the power of the pardon has been used for centuries to grant clemency to those the President feels are deserving of it. In your opinion, has the legitimacy of the pardon power been called into question? Liz Oyer: Absolutely the legitimacy of the pardon power has been called into question. I think that there are a lot of people in this country now who are watching what's happening and asking why does this power even exist? It is a power that has a great deal of potential to be used for good. We saw it at its height under President Obama who used it in a very principled and disciplined way to reduce sentences of people who were over-incarcerated due to outdated mandatory minimums, and he did that in a way that was very fair and consistent across the board and did a lot of good. But the way it's been used more recently and what Trump is doing with it now is really raising legitimate questions about whether this power is a good thing. Dana Taylor: Thank you so much for sharing your insights and for being on The Excerpt, Liz. Liz Oyer: Thank you very much for having me. Dana Taylor: Thanks to our senior producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan for their production assistance. Our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@ Thanks for listening. I'm Dana Taylor. Taylor Wilson will be back tomorrow morning with another episode of The Excerpt.
