Lee County deputies say a suspect broadcast the aftermath of a 2025 fatal shooting before his arrest more than a year later.

PINE MANOR, Fla. — A Facebook Live broadcast made from a roadway after a fatal shooting has become one of the most unusual pieces of evidence described by authorities in a Lee County murder case. Deputies say Gedeonson Hyacinthe, 42, streamed from the scene after another man was shot and killed in Pine Manor on April 14, 2025, then spoke to viewers about the confrontation while the scene was still active.

The broadcast matters because investigators say it came immediately after the encounter they later treated as a homicide. According to the Lee County Sheriff’s Office, Hyacinthe and the victim first argued at an intersection, the dispute became physical, and the two men “tussled.” Deputies arriving on Palm Drive found Hyacinthe standing over the victim in the roadway. Hyacinthe told them the victim had been shot during the struggle. Authorities later alleged that Hyacinthe fired the fatal shot, a claim now reflected in a second-degree murder charge. The victim’s name has not been released in the reports reviewed for this story.

The livestream did not replace the rest of the investigation. Authorities said Hyacinthe was detained at the scene and taken for questioning while the sheriff’s Major Crimes Unit assumed the case. Detectives continued working after that first interview, and the July 2026 arrest announcement said the State Attorney’s Office eventually approved a warrant charging him with second-degree murder. That sequence puts the phone broadcast alongside, rather than above, the physical evidence, interviews and other investigative work that would be needed to support a prosecution. The sheriff’s office has not publicly detailed all of the evidence that detectives say led them from the scene in April 2025 to the murder warrant more than a year later.

What authorities have described about the video is limited but significant. They say Hyacinthe took out his phone after the shooting, started a Facebook Live stream from the roadway and recounted events to his online audience. He also turned the camera toward the active scene, according to the sheriff’s account. Law enforcement has not released a full transcript of the broadcast in the material reviewed, and the available reports do not establish how long the stream lasted, how many people watched it live or whether Meta preserved a complete copy. Those gaps are important because the public description of the video is an allegation by investigators, not a substitute for the recording itself or for evidence tested in court.

The case also illustrates the difference between a suspect’s account and an investigator’s later conclusion. At the scene, Hyacinthe said the men had been in a physical fight and that the victim was shot during it. The sheriff’s office later stated that its investigation determined Hyacinthe shot and killed the man. The reviewed sources do not provide a detailed explanation of how detectives resolved any conflict between Hyacinthe’s version and their findings. They also do not say whether he has offered a formal defense in the murder case. Because the case is pending, the charge is an accusation, and prosecutors would have to prove it in court.

Florida law defines second-degree murder as an unlawful killing caused by an act that is imminently dangerous to another person and demonstrates a depraved mind regardless of human life, without requiring a premeditated design to kill a particular person. It is a first-degree felony that can be punishable by a term of years up to life. The statutory definition helps explain why the charge is distinct from first-degree premeditated murder, but the public reports reviewed do not spell out the prosecution’s complete legal theory or identify which specific facts prosecutors intend to rely on to satisfy each element. Those questions ordinarily become clearer through charging documents, discovery and later court proceedings.

Hyacinthe also faces two counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, according to the July reports. Florida law defines aggravated assault as an assault committed with a deadly weapon without intent to kill or with an intent to commit a felony. The public accounts do not identify the alleged victims or conduct underlying those two counts, so it would be premature to connect them to any specific moment in the confrontation. Authorities also said Hyacinthe faced drug-possession charges after he was taken into custody in July. The material reviewed does not provide enough detail to identify the substances at issue or explain whether those allegations are connected in any way to the 2025 shooting investigation.

The timing of the arrest is another unresolved part of the story. Early reports said Hyacinthe had been questioned after the shooting and was no longer in custody before the 2026 warrant was served. One report characterized the gap as an escape from custody, while local coverage based on the sheriff’s announcement said detectives kept working to establish charges and did not explain why he had not remained jailed after the initial questioning. Because the available official description does not provide a detailed account of how he left custody or whether he was legally released, the safer conclusion is narrower: he was detained and questioned in April 2025, and he was not in jail on the murder charge until authorities arrested him after the warrant was approved in July 2026.

Court scheduling records add a later procedural marker. A 20th Judicial Circuit docket lists Hyacinthe under case number 26CF397 for pretrial-detention proceedings in July 2026, including hearings set before Circuit Judge Bruce Kyle. That record is consistent with reports that he was being held without bond after his arrest. A July news report also listed an Aug. 17 court date, but the sources reviewed for this update do not establish what happened at that appearance or identify a later disposition. No conviction or acquittal is shown in the material consulted, and there is no basis in the reviewed record to describe the murder allegation as proven.

The digital aspect of the case is likely to remain a focus because authorities themselves highlighted the Facebook Live stream when announcing the arrest. But the legal case will turn on admissible evidence and the elements of the charged offenses, not on the novelty of an online broadcast. The sheriff’s public account does not say whether the stream captured the shooting itself; the reports describe it as a broadcast of the aftermath. That distinction is central. It means the video, as publicly characterized, may document statements, location and conduct after the gunfire without necessarily showing the act prosecutors say caused the victim’s death.

As of Aug. 22, the latest verified material reviewed places Hyacinthe in an active Lee County criminal case following the July arrest and pretrial-detention hearings. The outcome of the previously reported Aug. 17 court date could not be confirmed from the accessible records reviewed. The victim remains unidentified in the cited reports, and authorities have not publicly released the full livestream or a complete evidentiary account of the shooting. The reviewed material also does not establish a trial date, a plea or any final ruling on the homicide charge. Those omissions limit what can responsibly be said about the case beyond the arrest, the charges and the proceedings already documented.

The fact that the stream was created at the scene also gives investigators a potentially time-linked source that can be compared with other evidence, but the reviewed reports do not say whether detectives obtained platform records, device metadata, witness copies or any separate video. They do not say whether viewers contacted police, whether comments were preserved or whether the broadcast remained online. Those unanswered questions should remain unanswered in publication rather than be replaced with assumptions about what investigators recovered.

Author note: Last updated August 22, 2026.