Originally Posted by ND Sol

With "withholding adjudication" (or deferred adjudication), if the defendant completes the requirements therefor, the defendant comes back to court and the judge dismisses the charges. Since this happened in 2000, I would believe that the judge has dismissed the charges. As such, all the perp has is an arrest, but no conviction.

While I am no fan of the TSA, I don't think that an arrest without conviction should be an automatically disqualifying factor. For example, we have the current President of the United States admitting in writing that he committed a felony with respect to our current drug laws. That is not an automatic disqualifying factor either.

And the title of the New Times Miami is incorrect based on the article - he wasn't fired, he resigned.

N830MH states the perp "doesn't have a qualification". What's the basis for that accusation? N830MH states the perp, "He didn't telling the truth". What's the basis for that accusation? N830MH thinks the perp "lied about his application and he didn't passed his background check". What's the basis for that accusation? Those are just three accusations he has made that I don't see any basis in fact.