5-3-2008 Colorado:
To people who knew him, 32-year-old Charlie Speridakos of Lynn, Mass., was the guy who made pizzas at the local pizza shop.
Speridakos, like the 11 others caught in Mesa County’s Internet sex sting, seemed like just another regular guy with a job and possibly a family. What those who knew him didn’t know was these men in their free time trolled the Internet in search of cheap thrills from young girls.
“It’s just across the board,” Chief Deputy District Attorney Tammy Eret said. “I think that’s what is so scary. You never know who the predator is. Lots of times it’s your neighbor, the guy next door — someone who you would never expect.”
Mesa County investigators got more than they bargained for when they cast a net in March 2007 and caught 64 suspects in the United States and several other countries accused of attempting to lure children over the Internet into having sex.
The dozen suspects authorities have since filed charges against range in age from 21 to 58. Those caught include a soldier, a government worker, fathers, a teacher, a nurse and an aspiring law-enforcement officer.
They logged in with chat names such as “bebad4dad” and “hardcandy4fun.” One man traveled hundreds of miles across the Rockies and carried condoms and alcohol in anticipation of meeting a teenage girl at Grand Junction’s Lincoln Park, Other suspects flashed genitalia and performed sex acts on Web cameras and asked perceived young girls to do the same.
“Parents need to be aware that wherever kids go, predators go,” Eret said of Internet social networking sites.
Ten investigators spent five 10-hour days in early March 2007 in Internet chat rooms pretending to be 14-year-old girls.
Investigators were instructed to go where the conversations escalated to sexually explicit talk.
Eret said investigators chatted on sites such as Yahoo and MySpace. They created profiles as 11- and 12-year-old girls and as young boys, but got the most response when they pretended to be 14-year-old girls.
Eret said that more suspects from the sting will be prosecuted in Mesa County. One of the investigations from the sting led to a more serious case of sex assault on a child, and it revealed another formerly undetected suspect.
Some of the cases are time consuming to prosecute because investigators have to physically retrieve the suspects’ computers.
Law enforcement in other jurisdictions where suspects have been caught decided to handle those cases, she said.
Eret said she’s pleased with the results of sentences from the Mesa County sting, which are more severe than sentences for similar crimes in other counties.
Many of the suspects now have to register as sex offenders for the remainder of their lives. Prison time is not applicable for defendants in sex sting operations because suspects aren’t physically sexually assaulting children.
“They’re labeled and registered (as sex offenders),” Eret said. “A lot of these defendants are getting evaluations and treatment that they need. I think that’s important.” ..News Source.. by Amy Hamilton
May 31, 2008
CO- Many of 64 suspects looking for cheap thrills seemed like the guy next door
AK- Lawyer's surgery delays sentencing of sex offender
5-15-2008 Alaska:
A sex offender waiting for a prison sentence gained a few extra months of freedom after a judge delayed sentencing so his attorney could recover from spinal surgery.
Juneau Superior court Judge Philip Pallenberg last month granted a three-month continuation to allow attorney Thomas Nave to recover from major neck surgery.
Richard Bailey, 60, in March pleaded guilty to two counts of online enticement of a minor following a plea agreement to reduce the original seven counts.
Last August, an Arkansas sting operation caught Bailey while looking for online predators. Over a period of time, Bailey arranged a tryst with someone he presumed to be 13 years old.
Bailey's recent conviction was not his first. In 1984, he was convicted of sexually abusing an 8-year-old girl at a Ketchikan baseball diamond. He also has convictions for exposing himself going back to 1974.
Bailey does not appear on the sex offender registry for his past convictions and is not required to register until after his release following whatever sentence he receives.
Juneau District Attorney Doug Gardner wrote that Bailey admitted he has a victim list that "may exceed 75."
A pre-sentencing report written during Bailey's 1984 trial said he was "driven to molest children." Then, Bailey was sentenced to two years. Both were suspended, according to court documents.
"He could not control his impulse to fondle her," wrote the investigator.
A clerk who answered the phone at Juneau Superior Court said Pallenberg is forbidden to speak with anyone about the case without everyone involved present.
"No ex parte communication," she said.
Gardner did not oppose Bailey's sentencing delay. The case was a complicated one and Nave needed to be well to deal with the sentencing phase, he said.
"Things happen," Gardner said.
This spring, while released on bail, Bailey was charged with giving alcohol to a minor. Bailey, a former employee of several Juneau box stores, pleaded guilty quickly to avoid additional charges, according to court records.
In Nave's request for postponement, he apologized for the inconvenience to the court and participants. Nave told Pallenberg that he recommended at least one other client seek out an alternate counselor.
Pallenberg rescheduled sentencing for July 22 when Bailey faces between zero and two years in prison. Nevertheless, Gardner is pushing for Pallenberg to send Bailey to prison for five years to be followed by an extensive probation period enabling the slightest violation to return the pedophile to a cell.
"The reality is, that despite the danger that Bailey presents, he will one day return to live in the community," Gardner said. ..News Source.. by Greg Skinner | JUNEAU EMPIRE
NM- Online sex offender pleads guilty
5-31-2008 New Mexico:
A 21-year-old Albuquerque man arrested after asking for pornographic pictures of children online has pleaded guilty to sex crimes.
Travis Brown appeared in court Friday to answer the charges. Police say brown asked a police officer posing as a 12-year-old girl for nude photos on the Internet.
Brown's capture was a part of a larger online police sting in September.
Brown faces up to four and a half years in prison and will have to register as a sex offender. ..News Source.. by KCB.com
ME- Oakland police conduct sex sting
5-31-2008 Maine:
OAKLAND — Working with the national organization Perverted Justice, police on Friday night arrested a Swanville man in a sex sting.
Scott H. Ely, 37, of Swanville was arrested on a charge of attempted sexual abuse of a minor.
Arresting officer Rick Stubbert said Saturday that Perverted Justice arranges internet chats between people with a criminal history and people who pose as potential victims. Once a time and place for a sexual encounter is arranged, Stubbert said, police step in.
In this case, a 21-year-old woman posing as a 15-year-old waited for Ely on the front porch of an Oak Street home, Stubbert said. When Ely arrived and approached her, police arrested him.
Stubbert said that the arrest will not be aired on television. Some Perverted Justice sting operations have aired on network television.
Police took Ely, who has a criminal past, to Kennebec County Jail in Augusta, Stubbert said. Ely posted $1,000 unsecured bail and will be arraigned on the Class D misdemeanor on July 23 in Waterville District Court, Stubbert said.
Sexual abuse of a minor can become a felony when a sex act actually takes place, Stubbert said. ..News Source.. by Morning Sentinel Staff Report
MI- Owosso man's Internet case spawns charge from attorney general's office, legal debate over online meetings
5-31-2008 Michigan:
OWOSSO, Michigan -- It's a familiar script.
Man chats up 13-year-old girl online, makes a date for sex and ends up in handcuffs when he shows up for his interlude to find a cop waiting to arrest him.
An Owosso man, however, has found himself in the middle of a plot twist.
While Timothy Arthur never showed up for a tryst that police say he made with an underage girl on the Internet, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox took the rare step of sending police to arrest the 21-year-old at home.
Cox claims his office is the first to bring charges against suspected child predators who arrange sex with minors online but never follow through on the meeting.
One Oakland County defense attorney believes Cox has gone too far.
"Where do you draw the line between policing thought and conversation?" said Gail Benson, who specializes in defending sex-related crimes.
Arthur was recently arrested as part of state-sponsored Internet sting involving the group "Perverted Justice," a controversial online organization that has risen to fame through the Dateline NBC show "To Catch A Predator."
Using the screen name "tim_arthur2001," investigators allege Arthur began chatting online Jan. 21 with a Perverted Justice decoy posing as a 13-year-old girl.
The chats -- five in all -- continued until March 7 when Arthur allegedly agreed to meet the girl at a home in Wayne County.
While nearly 30 men braved bad weather in March and went to a decoy house in Wayne County to meet his "date," prosecutors said Arthur was among 11 others who stayed away.
So Cox had traced the men through their Internet service providers and had them arrested at home.
Arthur now faces two 10-year felony charges of communicating via the Internet to commit a crime -- accosting & soliciting a minor for immoral purpose, as well as a 4-year felony of using the Internet to disseminate sexually explicit material to a minor.
His attorney, Charles E. Quick of Owosso, said he is still reviewing the case and hopes it will be resolved "favorably for everyone."
Arthur is currently free on $5,000 bond.
A spokesman for Cox said there is a certain amount of irony and justice to the cases involving Arthur and the other men.
"Internet predators disguise who they are to gain trust by lying through their teeth," said Rusty Hills.
"In this case, they find out it's a special agent reading the material. The worm has turned."
Although the recent sting was the attorney general's first involving Perverted Justice, Hills said the state always intended to pursue men who didn't show up for meetings with the decoy.
"I don't know why other agencies don't go after non-travelers," said Hills.
While the decision to pursue such cases may be rare in Michigan, a Perverted Justice official said other states pursue individuals who don't show.
"Being arrested while not showing is not unique. However, what is unique (in the recent Michigan operation) is how many they arrested that did not show," said Xavier Vom Erck, director of operations for the California-based Perverted Justice.
The Michigan sting ended up with the fourth-highest arrest tally the group has been involved with, trailing only three stings in California.
Von Erck noted the group was able to snare men despite so much national exposure of similar operations in other states.
"You see some people are more paranoid ... but we've had individuals who have already been arrested for this crime once and are awaiting trial ... hit us up again," said Von Erck, in an e-mailed response to The Flint Journal.
Lauded in some circles for its work, Von Erck's group also has been the target of harsh criticism from others who have labeled members cyber vigilantes.
Two years ago, the group was involved in a sting operation involving a Texas prosecutor who killed himself when police tried to arrest him at his home for soliciting sex with a decoy posing as a 13-year-old boy.
Flint defense attorney Michael P. Manley said it used to be harder for prosecutors to prove cases in which suspects didn't actually show up for their "dates," but the laws have been increasingly modified to the point where someone is guilty of planning sex with a minor.
"It's almost as if you think about it, you're guilty," said Manley.
Manley believes changes need to be made to differentiate hardcore pedophiles from Web surfers who have what he calls "morbid curiousity."
But it does not appear that many groups are lining up to lead that charge.
An ACLU spokesperson said the group had no comment on the case, while a group that has dealt with Internet freedom issues also declined to address it.
"Nobody wants to get behind a pedophile," said Benson.
Ultimately, Benson believes police are creating crime by using decoys to pose as victims.
"It's not just sex. ... I don't know where it ends," she said.
Police operations using online decoys to snare child predators are still relatively rare in Genesee County because few departments have the resources to do them, but county Prosecutor David S. Leyton lauds Cox's aggressive approach.
Leyton said there may be concerns taking such cases to trial when no physical meeting with police takes place, but believes it's worth taking that chance in order to send a strong message.
"We need to discourage people from thinking they can patrol the Internet for young people," said Leyton.
Although the attorney general's office hasn't decided if it will partner with Perverted Justice again, it promises more stings are on the way.
"We will still go after predators," said Hills. ..News Source.. by Bryn Mickle
IL- Bradley’s Missing Sex Offender Database bill awaits signature
What a waste of taxpayer's funds, no wonder it sat in the legislature since early 2007, the law is useless excepting to put a feather in it's sponsors' caps. Lets face it, doesn't the regular registry tell one -if they read it- when a person IS NOT in compliance? So, now that legislators have patted each other's back, do this and I'll do that, the useless law will pass and waste more people's time.
5-31-2008 Illinois:
SPRINGFIELD — Legislation sponsored by Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, is awaiting the signature of Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
The measure would create a Missing Sex Offender Database would be available to law enforcement and the public to identify sex offenders and make that information to the public
“Local law enforcement officials work tirelessly to monitor every sex offender in our communities, but sometimes they slip through the cracks and fail to register with the proper authorities,” Bradley said. “This database will help locate missing sex offenders who are not complying with the law and help protect the public from these dangerous predators.”
The bill has been stalled in the Senate for over a year. HB 1998 unanimously passed the House in April, 2007, but did not pass the Senate until last week. The bill is now on the governor’s desk for consideration.
“This database coordinates efforts of law enforcement agencies across the state to track down missing sex offenders and makes this information easy to access,: Bradley said. “It is imperative we continue to identify ways to protect our kids and give them a safe, nurturing environment to grow up in.” ..News Source.. by Diane Wilkins
MI- A Law Lacking Logic Michigan's Senate Bill S-1328
"(9) A COMPUTER TECHNICIAN WHO HAS KNOWLEDGE OF OR OBSERVES A COMPUTER TECHNICIAN WHO FAILS TO REPORT KNOWLEDGE OR OBSERVATION OF CHILD SEXUALLY ABUSIVE MATERIAL AS REQUIRED IN THIS SUBSECTION IS GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR 93 DAYS OR A FINE OF $500.00, OR BOTH. "
This is our new series in reviewing selected laws, proposed or enacted, which fail the test of logic as defined below, hence becomes a Law Lacking Logic. The birth of our "Laws Lacking Logic" series came from reader input during our recent series on a federal law, S-431 "The Kids Act of 2008" which defies logic to the nth degree in virtually every aspect; see that series of articles.
"Law Lacking Logic" definition: Any law, proposed or enacted, or provision of one, where the wording is, illogical, vague or ambiguious, imposible to follow or enforce, or whose stated purpose is but a pretext for another real purpose.
5-31-2008 National:
The bill in question today is, Michigan's Senate bill 1328:
Lets begin with the definition of Computer Technician, the bill says: "(d) "Computer technician" means a person who installs, maintains, troubleshoots, upgrades, or repairs computer hardware, software, personal computer networks, or peripheral equipment."
Immediately one sees that the law, as written, is in the AND sense, and unless the business defines such jobs as "computer technicians" that business will not have to comply. Example: Best Buy has what they call the Geek Squad, software related, hence software technicians.
Simply said, the law doesn't allow for any other job titles performing some or all of those functions.
Next, study this bill, employers somehow must teach their employees to recognize "Contemporary community standards" "Erotic fondling" "Erotic nudity" "Listed sexual act" "Masturbation" "Passive sexual involvement" "Prurient interest" "Child sexually abusive activity" "Child sexually abusive material" "Sadomasochistic abuse" "Flagellation or torture" "Sexual excitement" "Sexual intercourse" with respect to a child (someone under 18) and using only the words of the statute and without ANY EXAMPLES, such as pictures, because under the Adam Walsh Act (Sec. 501(2)(E)), the instant ANYONE recognizes any of these, law enforment must seize the computer and prevent anyone from ever seeing that image again, including the defense attorney of the client so charged with the crime.
How many computer technicians will remain in their jobs when their job descriptions are changed to include such things as mentioned above? Especially since, many Mom & Pop computer stores use teenagers for computer repairs because they are more familiar with computers than most adults. Does anyone see a minimum age limit for computer techincians in the proposed law?
Has anyone ever taken a computer in for repairs, it goes something like this, they put the computer up on the counter and check it out to see what it doesn't do or what is wrong with it; in plain view of other customers should there be any. Does anyoen see anything in the proposed law requiring an area, secured from the public, for such checking? Oh yes, the employer may have to have such lest he be accused of showing child porn to the public if it should appear on the screen during a check out of the computer.
Apparently the points I made above are based on a law already enacted, now I'm getting to the newly proposed portion:
CHILD SEXUALLY ABUSIVE MATERIAL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HIS OR HER PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY OR EMPLOYMENT SHALL REPORT THAT KNOWLEDGE OR OBSERVATION TO THE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
Lets look at the punishment for the computer technician who FAILS to report child sexually abusive materials. Oh folks say, why would the technician FAIL to report it? Well, lets look at HOW they would not know about it, but be accused of knowledge of it, after the fact.
Someone brings in a computer with a 500 giga byte hard drive admittedly containing thousands of pictures. The technician locates the problem, fixes it, and returns the computer to the customer.
Sometime thereafter that customer is arrested for downloading child porn from the Internet, the police confiscate the computer and see a repair tag somewhere on the computer or in his possession.
OK, the first thing law enforcement is going to do is see if the computer repair technician knew there was child porn on the computer at the time of the repair, likely the tecnician would say NO. However, the police forensics technician finds several pictures on the hard drive which are dated (files on computers are automatically dated by the computer operating system when created) BEFORE the computer repair date.
Obviously the computer technician isn't telling the truth, so sayeth law enforcement and the prosecuting attorney because it is an election year and they need convictions to get relected. How does the computer technician prove innocence?
S-1328 is inherently FLAWED, it is a "Law Lacking Logic," it ignores the way the fundamental computer business does business, and FAILS to include a requirement in the bill for the computer technician to view EVERY SINGLE PICTURE found on any computer brought in for repair.
OH, you say, thats a burden on the computer repair business, and would drive the cost of repairs up likely higher than the cost of the entire computer, well, you know what they say, anything to save one child.
I'll skip over commercial film or photographic print processors because their jobs are more cut and dried, excepting they frequently do it in view of the public, but we''l let that slide for today.
I could pick on the law and the newly proposed portions until the cows come home but I think above is sufficient to show a "Law Lacking Logic" and that lawmakers, not just those in Michigan either, have no business making such laws without the aid of industry people to advise them which they obviously skipped over when this FLAWED BILL was written. Typicial of lawmakers.
Oh yes, I've repaired many computers for folks in the past, but if I knew such a law existed, and if I lived in Michigan, I would never again repair any computer for anyone, its easy to see why!
May 30, 2008
NY- Registered Level Two Sex Offender Installs Cameras on Home Exterior
If this man is supposed to remove these security devices as suggested in the article, should everyone else also be required to remove all types of home security devices? Alarms, cameras, fences, locks on doors, locks on wondows, etc. etc.
The man is a homeowner and has a right to protect same, especially since the government (state and federal) has failed in its job to protect him and his family. Constitutional rights do not end with a conviction of a crime.
One other thought, since we know that better than 95% of new sex crimes against chaildren are committed by someone known to the child, I wonder, are these parents equally worried about who else might be taking pics of their children, if they are?
Finally, I hope the media is willing to post the pics of anyone this fellow might catch, on his cameras, who are acting suspiciously in the vicinity of his home. Obviously, anyone acting suspiciously is going to attack thei fellows home, at least, using the logic of his neighbors.
5-30-2008 New York:
Residents on Bronson Street came home to find a flyer announcing that someone in their neighborhood had installed home security cameras on their home.
Cameras for security are not unheard of, but what happens when you don’t know what the owner is videotaping?
And what if the owner of the cameras is a sex offender?
That’s what residents of Bronson Street in the city of Watertown want to know when Joe Coffie, an admitted level two sex offender, and his fiance placed cameras on the exterior of their home.
Coffie says that he installed the cameras for safety and security only and not to spy on his neighbors.
He also claimed that there was drug activity on the street and he was within his legal rights to place the cameras on his home.
The Watertown Police say that he is within his rights and that their hands are tied.
However, there are families with children that live on Bronson Street and concerned residents want to know what Coffie is videotaping and if their children are at risk.
Michael Cooke, a concerned parent and resident, says something has to be done.
“If something doesn’t get done…something is going to happen to one of these kids. I’m might be my kids, it could be the ones across the street,” she said.
Joe Soluri said that he called the police before this incident to report Coffie’s activities, but was told nothing could be done.
“I told the police that he was videotaping kids in the yard and they said that was ok.”
Coffie says that he is not using the cameras to videotape children and he is registered as an offender for a mistake he made in 2003.
“A, I’m not taking down the cameras. B, if they are doing illegal stuff, the cops will know and C, I don’t give a damn what people think,” Coffie concluded.
Neighbors said they will continue to raise concerns about their children’s safety while Coffie said he will not remove the cameras as long as it is legal. ..News Source.. by Rachel Kent
IN- GPS pilot project for sex offenders ends
Corrections official had hoped for more time before money ran out for program.
5-30-2008 Indiana:
SOUTH BEND — A pilot program that provides global positioning system monitoring of local sex offenders on parole has ended a month earlier than expected.
Susan Hancock, director of the St. Joseph County Community Corrections, says she had been told by Department of Correction officials that the program, which was a joint effort with the local state parole office, would end June 30 because there was no more money for it.
The end of the GPS program does not affect services provided to local sex offenders through Project Roots, a separate program administered by Community Corrections that includes money for counseling, housing and assessments.
Hancock had a plan to wind down the GPS monitoring. She outlined that plan last week at a Community Corrections Advisory Board meeting.
She planned to accept no one new into the program after this week and to collect the monitoring devices from participants by June 30.
However, on Tuesday, Hancock received an e-mail from the local parole office telling her the monitoring units needed to be collected by Thursday.
So all the local participants were contacted and turned in their GPS units Tuesday.
“What concerns me is that is 30 extra days they could have been monitored and there could have been a smoother transition,” Hancock said.
“I really was caught off-guard. No one had contacted me, and I was very frustrated,’ she added.
Douglas Garrison, a DOC spokesman, blamed the communication issues on the bureaucracy of the DOC and the need to return the GPS units to the vendor.
As it turned out, after all the units were collected in St. Joseph County, the deadline was extended from Thursday to mid-June. That did no good for the local program, Hancock said.
Those running the 15-month pilot program liked it, despite its rocky end.
Started in February 2007, a total of 57 paroled sex offenders took part in the program in St. Joseph County. The community corrections program received $7 per day to supervise an average of 20 a month. The program took in more than $50,000 through March.
Funding came from a one-time federal grant that ran out, said Garrison, noting the program was extended for a few months.
With the DOC’s already over-stretched budget, there were no state funds available to continue it, Garrison said.
“It was a nice additional tool to have,” said Douglas Huyvaert, local parole office supervisor.
Along with St. Joseph County, a similar GPS pilot program was run in Howard County, he said.
One of the major benefits of the GPS system, Huyvaert said, was that it gave the parole agent information right away whenever a parolee entered an exclusion zone.
The exclusion zones are those areas within 1,000 feet of a school, day care or park.
The parole agent could make an immediate contact with the offender and also verify if the person was just passing through the area in a vehicle, Huyvaert said.
The GPS monitoring was added on to the extra supervision that sex offenders on parole already received, Huyvaert said. Those remain in place now that the GPS program is ended.
Supervision for sex offenders includes, for the first month, weekly visits to the parole office or in the home by a specially trained parole agent.
After that, if all is going well, the in-person contacts will be at least biweekly, Huyvaert said.
Offenders determined by a court to be predators may have more supervision.
Huyvaert did not immediately have data on how many GPS notifications would have resulted in technical violations of the offenders’ parole when compared with the cases without it.
Whether the notification would result in a violation would depend on each individual’s situation, he added.
One purpose of the pilot program, according to Garrison, was to test and determine the worthiness of GPS supervision because of a law to go into effect in 2009 that would mandate GPS monitoring of certain sex offenders.
“It’s going to be required in a year,” he said, “so it’s a good idea to learn some about the capacity and costs.”
Data from the pilot project will be shared with state officials and legislators, Garrison said, to help them move forward with any changes that might be needed.
Hancock said she still is interested in seeing if there is more grant money available to restart a similar program, but so far, nothing has come to fruition.
“I wish we could have had more time” she added, still lamenting the early end of the GPS program. ..News Source.. by Marti Goodlad Heline
MI- Internet sting nabs 2 Wayne-Westland suspects
5-30-2008 Michigan:
Two area men are among 11 people arrested last week as part of a multi-jurisdictional Internet child predator sting.
Jason Duane Hughes, 25, of Westland and Corey Patrick Dingman, 31, of Wayne, now face criminal charges after allegedly being caught in the second phase of a sting operated by the Van Buren Township Police Department, the Wayne County Sheriff’s Department, and the Michigan Attorney General’s Office that targeted adults who solicited sex from or sent sexually graphic materials to children via computer.
Both Dingman and Hughes now face one charge of communicating via the Internet to commit a crime—accosting and soliciting a minor for immoral purposes, which is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison if convicted. Both men are also accused of one count of communicating via the Internet to commit a crime, specifically the dissemination of sexually explicit material to a minor. If convicted on the second charge, the punishment is up to four years in prison.
The first phase of the joint operation, which prompted the arrests of 27 men, was a three-day sting in March in which alleged predators traveled to a home in Van Buren Township with the expectation that the meeting would allegedly provide a sexual experience involving a minor.
“The first 27 suspects were the ones who showed up at the house, then several others sent things over the web, but never showed up,” said Jerry Champagne, director of the public safety department for Van Buren Township. “One guy didn’t even show up in March because two days prior to our sting he was arrested in Macomb County for the same thing. Another guy actually contacted a girl and convinced her to go to Europe with him, but he was arrested because the girl’s mom saw it on the computer.”
The more recent crackdown, known as phase two, targeted individuals who had chatted online with volunteers posing as minors, but who didn’t travel to the decoy location during the earlier phase.
“This Internet predator sting was unique,” said Attorney General Mike Cox. “Most focus only on those predators that traveled, but not with this project. If you solicit a child for sex or send sexually graphic material to a youngster, you don’t escape prosecution just because you never got off your couch. Identifying this type of Internet predator can be difficult, but the extra effort is worth it to protect children from those who seek to harm them by using the Internet.”
According to Rusty Hills, spokesperson for the attorney general’s office, it is not unusual for law enforcement personnel to be online in the hopes of capturing a predator. Instead, he said that it was the sheer magnitude of the sting that made it unusual.
“Often times you have young people on the computer who are too trusting,” said Hills. “They may not listen to their mom or dad…but they’ll believe anything they read on the Internet.”
The sting, he said, essentially turned the tables on would-be pedophiles who take advantage of that trust by hiding their identity online to solicit children when the ‘kids’ turn out to be adult volunteers.
Volunteers were provided through the non-profit organization Perverted Justice, which is operated specifically to find and help convict pedophiles and to discourage would-be pedophiles from acting. The group is well known for their efforts nationwide, including the ‘To Catch a Predator’ specials that are regularly broadcast on Dateline NBC.
“This two-phase operation has been an unqualified success and taken countless children out of harm’s way,” said Wayne County Sheriff Warren Evans. “The arrests made during phase two are equally as important as those made at the sting house because each suspect’s ultimate goal has been the same: sexual gratification through the exploitation of children.”
Between the two phases, the operation has resulted in 38 arrests of men from Michigan as well as one from New Jersey. The suspects ranged from 19 to 57 years old. ..News Source.. by Andrea King
See also: Max for Internet Predator Crew: 298 Years
MI- Massage or sexual assault at nail salon?
5-30-2008 Michigan:
KENTWOOD, Mich. (WOOD) -- Was it a massage or sexual assault?
That is the question some are asking about a Kentwood nail salon.
Best Nails Spa in a strip mall on 60 Street in Kentwood advertises for manicures and pedicures. It is a place Cheryl has gone for years...until now.
She doesn't want her identity disclosed, but she talks about another service she received from a manicurist - a massage.
"He started going into areas he shouldn't have," she told 24 Hour News 8, "and I became very uncomfortable. He massaged my breast area for several minutes on each one."
She says he got close to her genital area.
She filed a police report against Anthony Tran, a licensed manicurist who runs the spa with his wife. He pleaded no contest to disorderly obscene conduct in the case last month.
The case is closed but the report raises questions about licensing.
Now city officials say they are looking into it all because Tran shouldn't have been doing massages at all.
24 Hour News 8 asked Tran if he ever touched the breast area of a woman.
"No," he answered.
It is a different story than what he told detectives.
"I asked him if he had touched this female/victim's breast or genital area. Anthony stated yes...he then replied that while massaging he often checks for breast cancer. He does this as a service to the customer," according to the police report.
Tran also told police that he will massage breasts as part of a massage.
"No, that's different. I don't want to go into detail," he told 24 Hour News 8.
Tran said it's his word versus hers.
It is a frustration since the victim never complained to him and even tipped him for all the services afterward.
Both factors, the prosecutor's office says, that played into the final charge.
"If somebody told me this story I would have said, 'Why didn't you fight him off? Why didn't you get up and leave the room?' But when you're in that situation you literally freeze and become numb," said Cheryl.
She was numb at first, but she doesn't want to be silent. She is the only one on record to come forward against Tran but she wants other women to have courage to do the same if they have a similar story. ..News Source.. byEmily Zangaro
Sixty years of human rights failure – governments must apologize and act now
To read their full report Sixty years of human rights failure – governments must apologize and act now
5-30-2008 Global:
Amnesty International today challenged world leaders to apologize for six decades of human rights failure and re-commit themselves to deliver concrete improvements.
“The human rights flashpoints in Darfur, Zimbabwe, Gaza, Iraq and Myanmar demand immediate action,” said Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International, launching AI Report 2008: State of the World’s Human Rights.
“Injustice, inequality and impunity are the hallmarks of our world today. Governments must act now to close the yawning gap between promise and performance.”
Amnesty International’s Report 2008, shows that sixty years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations, people are still tortured or ill-treated in at least 81 countries, face unfair trials in at least 54 countries and are not allowed to speak freely in at least 77 countries.
“2007 was characterised by the impotence of Western governments and the ambivalence or reluctance of emerging powers to tackle some of the world’s worst human rights crises, ranging from entrenched conflicts to growing inequalities which are leaving millions of people behind,” said Ms Khan.
Amnesty International cautioned that the biggest threat to the future of human rights is the absence of a shared vision and collective leadership.
“2008 presents an unprecedented opportunity for new leaders coming to power and countries emerging on the world stage to set a new direction and reject the myopic policies and practices that in recent years have made the world a more dangerous and divided place,” said Ms Khan.
Amnesty International challenged governments to set a new paradigm for collective leadership based on the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
“The most powerful must lead by example,” said Ms Khan.
China must live up to the human rights promises it made around the Olympic Games and allow free speech and freedom of the press and end “re-education through labour”.
The USA must close Guantánamo detention camp and secret detention centres, prosecute the detainees under fair trial standards or release them, and unequivocally reject the use of torture and ill-treatment.
Russia must show greater tolerance for political dissent, and none for impunity on human rights abuses in Chechnya.
The EU must investigate the complicity of its member states in “renditions” of terrorist suspects and set the same bar on human rights for its own members as it does for other countries.
Ms Khan warned: “World leaders are in a state of denial but their failure to act has a high cost. As Iraq and Afghanistan show, human rights problems are not isolated tragedies, but are like viruses that can infect and spread rapidly, endangering all of us.”
“Governments today must show the same degree of vision, courage and commitment that led the United Nations to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sixty years ago.”
“There is a growing demand from people for justice, freedom and equality.”
Some of the most striking images of 2007 were of monks in Myanmar, lawyers in Pakistan, and women activists in Iran.
“Restless and angry, people will not be silenced, and leaders ignore them at their own peril,” said Ms Khan. ..News Source.. by Amnesty International
May 29, 2008
TN- New Law Puts Mark On Sex Offenders' IDs
Are state messages placed on previously convicted sex offenders driver's license or license plates a violation of the ex post facto clause?
See my commentary following the article. eAdvocate
5-29-2008 Tennessee:
Registered Sex Offenders Must Carry Special Driver's License By Sept. 1 See Video which gives a good explanation of how it is currectly thought to be implemented.
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- The state of Tennessee is set to issue a new kind of driver's license that will have a special marking signifying that the carrier is a sex offender.
Some lawmakers said the idea is so simple that they don't know why they came up with the idea earlier. Police said the new license will go a long way toward protecting children.
State Rep. Debra Maggart said she is troubled by the fact that a sex offender can anonymously roam the streets, especially after police pulled over a sex offender last December.
"He had four or five young boys in the car with him that he had lured out of a sleepover," Maggart said.
That is why Maggart said she backed the bill that recently became law.
On Sept. 1, every registered sex offender in the state must carry the special driver's license.
The Department of Safety said it has yet to design the new license, but Maggart said it will look like any other Tennessee driver's license and only law enforcement officials will be able to see the notification.
Lawmakers said they believe the special ID will alert police when an offender violates the law like going to a public park or getting too close to a school.
"When an officer pulls you over or stops you and looks at your ID -- when he calls that in to dispatch, all he is told is if you have an outstanding warrant or not. They don't share your rap sheet," Maggart said.
Under the new law, if a police officer pulls over a sexual offender, the new license will notify them to look for things they usually would not during a routine traffic stop.
"This helps them do their job and helps protect our children in our state," Maggart said.
Any sex offenders who don't qualify for a Tennessee driver's license will be required to get a state ID that will have the sex offender marking on it. ..News Source.. by Chris Tatum
COMMENTARY:
Does this violate the ex post facto clause, most would say, no, but read on.
When RSOs go in to register they provide information to the registry. Then the registry displays certain of that information on a public registry; all state action.
However, driver's licenses and license plates are vastly different. How you ask? Well, who is carrying the state's message, the RSO, that is not like the state displaying information on the Internet.
So there are some who think that distinction is crazy? In the U.S. Supreme court, the case of Smith v. Doe (Sex offender registration), during Oral Argument the following discussion took place between Mr. Olson (then Solicitor General for the U.S.) and Justice Kennedy:
Justice Kennedy QUESTION: Could -- could the State require a special mark on your license plate?
MR. OLSON: No, I -- well, I don't know, Justice Kennedy, but I would say that would be considerably different than what's here because that would --
QUESTION: I don't think it's very different.
MR. OLSON: Pardon me?
QUESTION: I don't think it's very different.
MR. OLSON: I -- I respectfully submit that it's a great deal different. That mark on your license plate, or mark on your forehead would go wherever you would go. It would require you to carry the government's message rather than the government supplying the message.
QUESTION: Well, this statute requires you to make the government's message four times a year.
MR. OLSON: It only -- it doesn't require you to make the government's message four times a year. The government's message, I respectfully submit, is made when a citizen submits an inquiry to the State through the Internet listing. All -- it is required four times a year is to advise the government of a current location or current information so that the information on the registry is accurate and -- and up-to-date.
So, who is carrying the message? It is the RSO when it is on his driver's license or license plate. That distinction, following the sentencing where it was not part of the sentence, could very well be construed as further punishment. i.e., a ex post facto violation.
Apparently, there is something in law about, who carries the message, and lawyers know about this. Now to find those lawyers to fight the issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme court. That may be easier said than done.
One more thing must be addressed, in the video they mention a case where a RSO had a few boys in his car and was stopped by a police officer. The women in the video claimed, if the driver's license had "Sex Offender" on it, then the police would know who he is dealing with.
My question: Why does it have to be on the license, he stopped the car, why did he stop the car and what was he going to do? Obviously because there were a few boys in the car with a man, I think that is likened to, "Driving while being a man with kids." We all know what is usually in that comment.
The cop checked the guy's license by calling it in, wouldn't it be much easier to have the station returning the call, have check for sex offender as part of their check for warrants?
Here is the real reason behind this, it is a sound bite which gets votes, the fact that it will cost the state tons of taxpayer dollars lawmakers care not. Secondly, it is another way to restrict RSOs and get convictions for not following the letter of the law, which would likely have some time element involved as well.
Now, how does what is on a license or license plate, protect kids? It doesn't, kids are not involved with licenses or license plates, and the crap about if a RSO went near a school someone would know, is plain baloney. There has not been one crime reported to have been comitted by a RSO who lived within a proscribed distance from a school, committed at said school, not one.
The focus is not kids, that is a pretext, the focus is further restrictions to circumvent constitutional protections, and sound bites to get votes for lawmakers.
eAdvocate
Does the Supreme Court's Current Doctrine of Stare Decisis Require Adherence to the Supreme Court's Current Doctrine of Stare Decisis
2008
Abstract:
This Article asks whether a fair application of the Supreme Court's current doctrine of stare decisis to the Supreme Court's current doctrine of stare decisis would counsel in favor of adhering to current doctrine or departing from it. Professor Paulsen argues that the paradoxical answer is that current doctrine of precedent suggests that current doctrine of precedent disserves all of the doctrine's supposed policy justifications. Accordingly, the Court's current doctrine of stare decisis may and should be overruled - according to the Court's current doctrine of stare decisis. ..Source.. by MICHAEL STOKES PAULSEN, University of St. Thomas School of Law
Costs of Incarceration and Supervised Release (Federal)
2007
In fiscal year 2007, it cost $24,922 to keep someone incarcerated in a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility for 12 months, and $22,871 to keep an inmate incarcerated in a community correction center.
For the same 12-month period ending September 30, 2007, it cost $3,621.64 for a federal offender to be supervised by probation officers.
Those figures translate in daily costs of $68.28 for a Bureau of Prisons facility, $62.66 for a community correction center, and $9.92 for supervised release.
For criminal defendants who had not yet been tried, the daily cost of pretrial detention services was $64.40 and the cost of supervision by pretrial services officers was $5.85.
Cost calculations were made by the Bureau of Prisons, the Department of Justice's Office of Federal Detention Trustee, and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. ..Source.. US Courts
The Reintegration of Sex Offenders: Barriers and Opportunities for Employment
February 2007:
Abstract:
The process of reintegration of offenders after release from prison, or during a community sentence, is a key aim of criminal justice policy. This article provides details from recent research that investigated the barriers and opportunities to employment for sex offenders. The authors describe the barriers that are faced by sex offenders and the anxieties that employers experience when employing sex offenders. The authors conclude that the approach taken by the State is less than reintegrative and serves to increase the barriers and reduce the opportunities for employment for sex offenders. ..Full Paper.. by KEVIN BROWN, University of Manchester - School of Law; JONATHAN W. SPENCER, University of Manchester - School of Social Sciences; JO DEAKIN, University of Manchester - School of Social Sciences
TX- Murphy fires police chief involved in 'Dateline NBC' sex predator sting
5-29-2008 Texas:
Billy Myrick, the Murphy police chief who helped facilitate the city's participation in a sex predator sting with Dateline NBC in 2006, was fired Wednesday.
But Murphy City Manager James Fisher said the "To Catch a Predator" segment and its legal fallout did not weigh in his decision to terminate Mr. Myrick.
Mr. Fisher said that since he started as city manager in March, he has been evaluating departments and decided a change was needed in the Police Department.
"It was the best thing for the department, for the community and for Mr. Myrick," Mr. Fisher said.
Mr. Myrick could not be reached for comment.
During the Dateline sting, conducted with Internet watchdog group Perverted Justice, former Kaufman County District Attorney Louis "Bill" Conradt Jr. fatally shot himself. His family is suing NBC, saying that Dateline caused his suicide.
In addition, the Collin County district attorney's office declined to pursue more than 20 cases related to the sting, citing problems with the evidence gathered.
Former City Manager Craig Sherwood, who resigned last summer and staunchly defended Mr. Myrick from pressure related to the sting, said the firing was a bad decision.
"There's nobody in my opinion who works harder and does more for the safety of the people of Murphy," said Mr. Sherwood, who ran unsuccessfully for mayor this month. "It's disappointing."
Mr. Sherwood said Mr. Myrick, who has nearly 30 years of law enforcement experience, transformed the Murphy department into a professional organization in the three years he was chief. Mr. Sherwood hired him in 2005.
Some City Council members, including Mayor Bret Baldwin, criticized Mr. Myrick in part because he didn't inform them that the sting was going to take place. Mr. Baldwin did not return messages seeking comment.
Louis A. Barrow Jr. will serve as interim police chief, Mr. Fisher said. According to a Murphy news release, Chief Barrow has served as chief or interim chief in five Texas cities. He was an interim police chief under Mr. Fisher in Bee Cave, near Austin, where Mr. Fisher was city administrator before taking the Murphy job.
Mr. Fisher said Chief Barrow will be among those involved in the search for a permanent chief but will not be a candidate for the job. ..News Source.. by IAN McCANN / The Dallas Morning News imccann@dallasnews.com
May 28, 2008
TX- Sex offender banned from school, met (HIS) child for lunch
5-28-2008 Texas:
CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — A registered sex offender remained in jail Tuesday night and has been banned from Corpus Christi public school property after meeting his child for lunch in an elementary school cafeteria last week.
Prosecutors on Tuesday said they have filed a motion to revoke the 34-year-old man's probation. He was sentenced to 10 years probation in 2004 for the aggravated sexual assault of a child. One of the terms of his probation was that he had to stay away from schools, prosecutor Sandra Eastwood said.
Officials said the man met his child for lunch at Allen Elementary School. Another parent in the cafeteria noticed him and immediately reported his presence to administrators. School officials called police, but the man left by the time authorities arrived.
The man subsequently was arrested on a charge of criminal trespass and remained in the Nueces County Jail on Tuesday, a jail officer said. He was ineligible for bond.
"There is no evidence any students were in danger when he was in the cafeteria, but certainly we do not want registered sex offenders on our campuses," Corpus Christi Independent School District Superintendent Scott Elliff said in a story in the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. "The staff did exactly what they have to do in this situation, which is notify the police." ..News Source.. by Chron.com
GA- The rape of intelligence
5-28-2008 Georgia:
THE SERIAL MOLESTER known as the Georgia General Assembly did it again, with Gov. Sonny Perdue acting as an enabler by not vetoing the measure. Their sex-offender residency restrictions slapped down by the state Supreme Court, the legislators removed the narrow cause of the court verdict and launched the thing once again.
Despite good intentions ruined by overly broad language that some assembly leaders concede is intended to make it impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere in Georgia, this is more than a civil-rights offense. It’s stupid and everyone, except the political grandstanders in an election year, knows it.
It’s bad enough when the “usual suspects” in filing rights lawsuits take the state to court — and win — but when they’re joined in the effort by organizations whose purpose is to end sexual assaults against women and children one would hope the light of day might creep into the dark recesses of some political minds.
THE REVAMPED measure once again bans sex offenders — which include teens who were caught getting oral sex from the young lady now their wife, among other follies — from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of where children might gather: schools, churches, parks, gyms, swimming pools or any of the state’s 150,000 school bus stops.
The only thing changed was what the justices struck down in the only limited portion of the first measure to reach them (more are pending, including the church restriction). Now a sex offender who owns his or her home will be allowed to remain there even if a facility where children gather later opens nearby. Such generosity!
Within 24 hours of the governor signing it, a new class-action lawsuit against the revised measure was filed, as well it should have been.
What really should have given legislators second thoughts (assuming they even had first ones on this measure) is the fact that now the groups most concerned with stopping the very thing the legislation purports to address are lining up against it. They argue it only creates the illusion of safety while putting women and children at even greater risk.
“We can scare people into believing that we are doing something, and that does nothing in my mind but endanger people by luring them into a false sense of security,” said Shawn Paul, president and CEO of the Georgia Network to End Sexual Assault, a coalition of sexual assault centers, speaking to the Athens newspaper.
NOTING THAT an estimated 94 percent of sexually abused children are the victims of their parents or other family members, he said the law provides no actual assurance children will be any safer. And, he added, most such assaults take place in the victim’s home, not that of a convicted sex offender nor at a church or school-bus stop.
Moreover, roughly 15,000 Georgians are on the registered sex-offender list, which is a lifetime proposition — meaning no number of decades of good behavior can get one off it and free of the restrictions. The offenses of most were not against children to boot, though this is the fear tool used to gain support for such draconian measures.
Actually, it is the state itself — and the General Assembly — that is at fault for the situation. If it actually believes these 15,000 pose a continuing and constant risk, and some few probably do, then why did it release them from incarceration and back onto the streets? Why are they not in secure treatment facilities, being rehabilitated ... or kept away from doing what they do? It can’t possibly be that state officials and politicians don’t want to spend money on protecting all those children and others they vow are at risk, can it? Do they really believe that fixing the state’s problems involves throwing them outside the state’s borders?
IF THAT’S THE CASE, then the water shortages in Atlanta could be solved by exiling all transplanted Yankees back to their native states, and deteriorating roads could be remedied by the simple measure of banning cars.
It is not only sex offenders, particularly those trying to reform themselves, who deserve better from the legislators. It is all of us. ..News Source.. Rome News Tribune Editorial
May 27, 2008
IL- DNA exonerates man convicted of sex assault
Faulty witness account put South Sider in prison 14 years
5-27-2008 Illinois:
DNA tests have exonerated a South Side man who has served nearly 14 years in prison for the sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl who was attacked in the fall of 1994 as she walked to school near 69th and State Streets, the prisoner's lawyer said Tuesday.
Dean Cage, 41, was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 40 years in prison despite his assertions that he was innocent and was home at the time of the attack.
Attorney Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the New York-based Innocence Project, which investigates wrongful convictions, said that he was informed by the Cook County state's attorney's office that it had the case dismissed after DNA tests eliminated Cage as the victim's attacker.
Cage, who has been confined to the Illinois River Correctional Center in Downstate Canton, is expected to be released within 24 hours, Neufeld said.
The exoneration of Cage is the 29th such case of innocence in Illinois and the 217th DNA exoneration in the nation, according to the Innocence Project.
The case is another example of an erroneous eyewitness identification leading to a wrongful conviction, Neufeld said. More than 75 percent of the wrongful convictions that have resulted through DNA testing involved faulty eyewitness testimony, he said.
The victim had testified in a trial before Circuit Judge Michael Bolan that she was walking to catch a bus about 6:25 a.m. on Nov. 14, 1994, when a man wearing blue jeans, a black leather jacket and a hat with a snap on it grabbed her and dragged her between two porches of an apartment building. She was then slammed against a wall and sexually assaulted, she said.
After her attacker fled, she ran into the street where a newspaper truck driver saw her and notified police, according to trial testimony.
A computer-generated composite sketch was circulated in the neighborhood and about a week later a tipster told police that a possible suspect worked at a meat-packing plant nearby.
Police took the victim to the business, where Cage was employed. The woman identified him as her attacker, according to trial testimony.
Cage testified at the trial that he was home on the morning of the crime and did not leave until about 7:30 a.m. ..News Source.. by Maurice Possley Tribune reporter
The Folly of S-431 `The KIDS Act of 2008' Part 4
5-27-2008 National:The Constitutional Rights!
Holiday is over and time to get back to business.
In Part-1 we talked about how it is impossible for RSOs to comply with the Kid's act as written. In Part-2 I revealed how, verbally, both Sponsors of the bill say the intent is to have RSOs expelled from Internet sites, but that is not how the bill is written. The likely reason is to gather public support under a pretext. Part-3 shows that, Dr. Finkelhor, highly recognized in the child abuse field also disagrees with S-431, saying it will not solve the problem and it fails to analyze the nature of the problem or the way in which kids get harmed.
The bill, as a resolution to the problem, is useless, but it does put further restrictions on RSOs and with further restrictions, creates more ways to prosecute them for doing nothing but exercising their constitutional rights.
Yes, RSOs have a constitutional right of freedom of speech and the right to assemble, using the Internet, for political discussions as to their rights. Oh yes, thats not what the politicians are saying RSOs are doing on the Internet, but has ONE politician shown any proof of their false claims? Not one, not a single one.
Remember what Dr. Finkelhor said, in essence, S-431 "doesn't analyze the nature of the problem -OR- the way in which kids get harmed." The nature of the problem is, who is attacking kids on the Internet, its not RSOs but it is new offenders. Lawmakers refuse to analyze how the crimes are occurring, if they did they would know RSOs are not the cause of the problem. So, S-431 will not solve the problem, it deals with the wrong group of people who are causing the problem.
The Key Constitutional Right: The 4th Amendment-
The most important place to any person is their home, and everything in it as well, the home is sacrosanct, it cannot be invaded by anyone lest they get charged with a crime, or, if the state wants to go into someone's home, they need a warrant and must show probable cause that the person committed some crime:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 4th Amendment
The constitution recognizes, through the 4th amendment, that ones home is sacrosanct, it cannot be violated by the police (the government). The door prevents them from entering, unless the occupant waives that right and gives them permission to enter. There are exceptions such as, if the police hear someone being harmed inside, or they can see drugs through the window, or if there is some other emergency -a fire-, etc., only then can they enter without a warrant.
The 4th clearly says it protects everything INSIDE the home, where is the RSO's computer, right INSIDE the home; its protected by the 4th amendment. Everything about the computer is inside the home, and as long as there is not some proof of a criminal act involving the computer, the police cannot get to it without a warrant.
Where is the e-mail address, it is in the computer, and protected by the 4th amendment just like all of a person's papers and other effects clearly mentioned in the 4th. So, until the door is opened, the police or the state or government is stopped.
Just last week was a wonderful case in the Michigan court of appeals (cited for explanation not authority) and although it speaks to a drug case, the essence of the case says, the door stops the police, they cannot enter. Now, while the justices did permit the police to use a drug sniffing dog at the offender's door, the justices said, they could not enter but allowed the "SNIFF" of the dog, which smelled drugs on the doorstep, to be probable cause for a warrant. Yes, they still needed a warrant to enter, to search for drugs.
So, the essence of S-431, DEMANDS from the RSO something which is in his home, and if s/he doesn't give it willingly, they will be prosecuted for violating the registry law. Can the government force a person to waive his constitutional rights under the threat of imprisonment? Simply, NO! S-431, like many of the recent state laws which are forcing RSOs across the country, to give up something in their home, their e-mail addresses.
Why the government wants the e-mail address does not matter, even whether that is a logical reason doesn't matter, the threshold issue is, whether they violate the 4th amend. Remember, none of these RSOs have committed any crime using their computer from INSIDE their home, that would be a different matter. The home is sacrosanct!
Next, is how the state forces the RSO to provide the e-mail address. If they ask the RSO to submit a list of e-mail addresses on paper and the state creates its data base, that is one way. However, if the state forces the RSO to provide the e-mail address FROM his/her home computer, that is a search of the computer.
Referring back to Part-1 of this discussion I mentioned that lawmakers do not know how the Internet operates and have not geared their laws to reality of how the Internet operates. Likewise is forcing the RSO to provide their e-mail address from his/her home computer.
As soon as the RSO signs on wherever the state says to register the e-mail address, the state computers automatically gathers information from within the RSO's computer, that is a search, and the name of the Internet Service Provider as well. All without a warrant, and all in violation of the sanctity of the home, and the 4th amendment.
Lawmakers are gearing laws to circumvent and violate RSO rights!
In addition, what if the RSO is using a computer belonging to someone else, for instance, his/her parents if living at home, or spouse, or a friends computer, etc. there are many ways that could be cited which show rights of others are also violated.
Until RSOs speak up, and they can interpose, assert, constitutional rights to stop the government from violating those rights, the government will violate their rights because lawmakers simply do not care!
I strongly urge all RSOs and their families to seek legal counsel to stop this wholsale destruction of constitutional rights.
eAdvocate
May 26, 2008
Housing bailout bill creates national fingerprint registry
Will the fingerprint registry be cross-checked to other data bases to exclude certain people? i.e., Registered Sex Offenders from working in any aspect of finances related to housing.
5-26-2008 National:
The Senate housing bill approved by a committee this week was already drawing fire from fiscal conservatives and financially responsible homeowners opposed to bailing out housing speculators.
Now it may be time to add privacy advocates to the chorus of voices urging President Bush to veto the bill, which could put taxpayers on the hook for billions of bailout dollars in new taxes or deficit spending.
Buried in the text of the revised legislation, approved by the Senate Banking Committee by a 19-2 vote this week, is a plan to create a new national fingerprint registry. It covers just about everyone involved in the mortgage business, including lenders, "loan originators," and some real estate agents.
"We know that today the rules governing mortgage brokers and lenders are inadequate," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a statement. "There is just a thin patchwork of regulation that varies from state to state. This legislation will create basic minimum standards for states to utilize to protect consumers." Feinstein and Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) wrote a separate bill introduced in February that has been glued onto the revised Senate housing legislation.
What's a little odd is the lack of public discussion about this new fingerprint database. No mention of it appears in the official summary of the revised Senate bill. No fingerprint database requirement is in the House version of the legislation approved earlier this month. No copy of the revised Senate legislation is posted on the Library of Congress' Thomas Web site, which would be the usual procedure.
The feds' new fingerprint database would function like this: Any "loan originator" must furnish "fingerprints for submission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation" and a wealth of other unnamed government agencies. Loan originator is defined as someone who accepts a residential mortgage application, negotiates terms on a mortgage, advises on loan terms, prepares loan packages, or collects information on behalf of the consumer. Real estate agents are covered if they get "compensation" of any sort (including kickbacks) from loan originators.
It's true that some states already have fingerprinting requirements. Colorado requires "mortgage brokers" (a narrower category) to get fingerprinted. So do Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana, for instance.
In the proposed federal system, what remains unclear is what happens to the fingerprints once submitted. The legislation talks about a "background check"--which would imply a one-time use--but also creates a Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry that "provides increased accountability and tracking of loan originators." Neither Feinstein's nor Martinez's offices returned our phone calls and e-mail messages asking for clarification on Friday morning.
The bill does specify that the registry will be run by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators. Those two groups are currently developing a "central repository" of information with document collecting and fingerprinting that "will be accessed through a secure Web site over the Internet."
"I imagine that, yes, a fingerprint registry might stop an ex-con from handling loans, but I doubt it will make even a dent in the lending problems the bill aims to stop," says John Berlau, director of the Center for Entrepreneurship at the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute. "And I would venture to guess that the vast majority of the problem mortgages were handled by employees with no criminal record. Rather, this seem like another thoughtless idea that lets politicians brag that they are 'getting tough' about a particular problem."
Berlau makes a good point. Creating a database of fingerprints of "loan originators" and a subset of real estate agents might make sense. It might not. But it surely would have been reasonable to have an informed debate on the topic before politicians rushed to enact federal legislation before the Senate's Memorial Day recess, and it would surely be wise to insist on security and privacy protections when the bill goes to the full Senate. Unfortunately, there's little reason to believe either will actually happen. ..News Source.. by Declan McCullagh
Main Cases Cited in Sex Offender Actions
zipzipzip
These are the often cited cases lawyers use when defending sex offenders on their issues. Many of these have direct links to the Oral Arguments. It is my intent to bring these cases together over time. Should anyone have other relevant cases that can be added, please forward them.
Thanks,
eAdvocate
====================================================
Issue: United Nations Declaration of Human Rights:
In 2003, "Sex Offender Registries -v- United Nations Declaration of Human Rights," eAdvocate showed what Articles of that U.N. document are violated by sex offender registries. Most recent update was in 2008.
Issue: U.S. Constitution:
Apparently a federal agency is charged with updating the U.S. Constitution regularly as new cases construe it. 2002 is the latest update.
Issue: Sex Offender Registration:
Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe 3-5-2003 Question:
Does the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause require that persons convicted of sexual offenses subject to Connecticut's "Megan's Law" receive a hearing before the public disclosure of their registry? See this: Decision
Note: 2nd circuit Appellate case that was the basis for this U.S. Supreme court case was DOE v PUBLIC SAFETY
Smith v. Doe 3-5-2003 Question:
Does the Ex Post Facto Clause of Article I Section 10 prohibit the Alaska Sex Offender Registration Act's registration requirement as a retroactive punishment?
Note: 9th circuit Appellate case that was the basis for this U.S. Supreme court case was JOHN DOE I, JANE DOE, and JOHN DOE II v OTTE and BOTELHO
Issue: Ex Post Facto Clause:
Stogner v. California 6-26-2003 Question:
Does the Ex Post Facto Clause bar the application of California's retroactive extension of the statutes of limitations for sexual offenses committed against minors?
Carmell v. Texas 5-1-2000 Question:
Does an amended Texas statute that authorizes the conviction of sexual offenses on the victim's testimony alone, whereas the statute previously required the victim's testimony along with corroborating evidence, violate the constitutional prohibition against State "ex post facto" laws when applied in a trial for offenses committed before the amendment's effective date?
Department Of Revenue Of Montana v. Kurth Ranch 6-6-1994 Question: Missing but see decision here and here.
IN RE MEDLEY 3-3-1890 Question:
In essence, a death row prisoner was sentenced under laws that permitted certain visistation rights, however, under the new law those rights are to be denied. Excellent example of a violation of ex post facto clause construing those visitation rights denied as further punishment.
Cummings v. Missouri 1-14-1867 Question:
Do the state and national oaths violate prohibitions against ex post facto laws and bills of attainder of the Constitution?
CALDER v. BULL 8-1-1798 Question:
This is the source of all ex post facto cases: The court holding a law is a ex post facto violation if any of the following have occurred:
1st. Every law that makes an action , done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action.
2nd. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed.
3rd. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed.
4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offence, in order to convict the offender.
Issue: Punishment Yes/No:
Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez 2-18-1963 Question:
Did Section 401(j) of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, divesting U.S. citizens of their citizenship for remaining outside the United States during a time of war or national emergency in order to avoid the draft, violate the procedural safeguard of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments?
Issue: Civil Commitment:
Kansas v. Crane 1-22-2002 Question:
Did the Kansas Supreme Court interpret Kansas v. Hendricks in an overly restrictive manner by ruling that it requires a finding that a sexual offender, who has only an emotional or personality disorder, rather than a volitional impairment, has an inability to control dangerous behavior?
Kansas v. Hendricks 6-23-1997 Question:
Did the Act's civil commitment provisions, based on its definition of what constitutes a "mental abnormality," violate substantive due process and double jeopardy requirements?
Issue: Due Process:
Lambert v. California 12-16-1957 Question: No question in Oyez, but see opinion here and here
Issue: Anonymous free speech:
McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission 1995: "“Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.”"
Issue: Plea Bargains (Contracts / Sacrosanct):
Santobello v. New York 12-20-1971 Question: No question in Oyez but see opinion here and here
Issue: Status:
Robinson v. California 6-25-1962Question: Was the California law an infliction of cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment? See also: HERE
Facts of the Case
A California statute made it a criminal offense for a person to "be addicted to the use of narcotics." Lawrence Robinson was convicted under the law, which required a sentence of at least ninety days in jail. A state appellate court affirmed Robinson's conviction on appeal.
Conclusion
In a 6-to-2 decision, the Court held that laws imprisoning persons afflicted with the "illness" of narcotic addiction inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court likened the law to one making it a criminal offense "to be mentally ill, or a leper, or to be afflicted with a venereal disease," and argued that the state could not punish persons merely because of their "status" of addiction. The Court noted that the law was not aimed at the purchase, sale, or possession of illegal drugs.
Issue: Fourth Amendment:
Katz v. United States 12-18-1967Question:
Does the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require the police to obtain a search warrant in order to wiretap a public pay phone?
Issue: Privacy of Home:
Silverman v. United States 3-6-1961 Question: No question in Oyez but see opinion here and here
Issue: Protecting Home Addressees & Phone Numbers:
United States Department Of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority 2-23-1994 Question: No question in Oyez, but see opinion here and here
Paul P. v. Verniero, 170 F.3d 396, 404 (3d Cir. 1999). and here.
See New Jersey's Report on Home Addresses and Telephone Numbers dated 12-20-2004.
Miscellaneous Issues:
Seling v. Young 1-17-2001 Question:
May an act, found to be civil, be deemed punitive "as applied" to an individual in violation of the Double Jeopardy and Ex Post Facto Clauses, thereby providing a cause for release?
Foucha v. Louisiana 5-18-1992 Question: Missing but see decision here and
Court forms:
U.S. Court forms
