There is something very disturbing about comments of the Sheriff, instead of inciting the public (proven by the reader comments at the news site), the sheriff is supposed to be neutral and maintaining order when handling all issues under the guise of the Sheriff's dep't. In fact, his comments and stance may very well violate various federal laws (42 1985 & 1986 )as well as the state registry law (see warning).
5-7-2009 New Mexico:
The Bernalillo County sheriff is blasting an unusual letter that offers to help hundreds of Albuquerque-area sex offenders.
A group wants to provide emotional support along with help finding housing and jobs.
Some convicted sex offenders say they can't escape punishment for their crime because they have to appear on public sex offender websites. Many claim they can't get work or find a place to live because of the stigma.
But that's where the group "Citizens for Change" is stepping in. The group is now offering to help sex offenders find housing and employment, along with emotional support.
East Mountain resident Alice Benson is sending out the letters. Her late husband was a pastor who counseled a sex offender, and she plans to continue his work.
She says the group is working to reform public registries. For instance, Benson says only violent sex offenders or serial pedophiles should be required to appear on public websites.
She says if someone molested a child years ago and has been crime-free for years they should be taken off the site.
Other members say public shame isn't the best way to keep the public safe. They say that can be done by successfully re-integrating sex offenders back into society.
Sheriff Darren White says the group is offering sympathy to the sex offenders, almost like they're victims.
"If this is an inconvenience for them, too bad. It pales in comparison to what they have done to their victims," Sheriff White said.
Benson says of the 500 letters sent out, about 20 people have expressed interest in learning more about the group. ..News Source.. by KOB.com
Thursday, May 7, 2009
NM- Group offers help for sex offenders
MN- Shutting the door to sexual predators
Reading the comments at the news site tell me that the general public does not understand this bill or who it covers, and for how long. Again, the public is bamboozled.
5-7-2009 Minnesota:
A new law will require that sex offenders' computer use be monitored and will bar access to social network sites. (Not quite what this says)
The networking site MySpace has purged 90,000 sex offenders' profiles since 2007, the company said earlier this year. In late March, a Hopkins man classified as a Level III sex offender was charged with repeatedly raping a teenage boy he met through an online service.
Armed with burgeoning examples of online threats, the Legislature on Wednesday approved a bill that would keep the state's most dangerous sex offenders from gaining Internet access to social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace.
Examples? One does not constitute "burgeoning examples" and the one cited would not have been required to follow this law if it was enacted before his crime.
After release from prison, predatory offenders placed on intensive supervised release will be forbidden to log on to, create or maintain a personal Web page or social networking account if it permits contact with anyone under 18. The restrictions apply to chat rooms, instant messaging and popular sites like MySpace and Facebook, as well as operations such as Craigslist that may not be traditionally defined as social networking sites.
Sometimes things are not what they seem. These bills apply ONLY to "sexual predators" (a Minnestoa desigination for some sex offenders) and ONLY during their time on "supervised release," after which they can do as they please.
The Department of Corrections is given authority to examine computers and other devices with Internet capability. Violations could send offenders back to prison to serve out their full sentences. The bill takes effect next year.
The provision was part of a larger public safety bill that was approved unanimously by the House and the Senate, a rarity in the legislative process. There was no debate about the provision. It has the support of Gov. Tim Pawlenty, said his spokesman, Brian McClung.
Another part of the bill would prohibit solicitation of a minor for sex over a cell phone, an expansion of a law that already prohibits soliciting a minor for sex over a computer.
The Senate passed the bill 63-0 on Wednesday; the House approved it 130-0 on Tuesday.
Technology changes, predators don't
Rep. Karla Bigham, DFL-Cottage Grove, the author of the two bills, said the restrictions are important to keep up with changing technology and the unchanging nature of predatory offenders.
"As technology expands and becomes broader and more accessible, we need to make sure our legislation is up to date as well," said Bigham, who worked with Attorney General Lori Swanson on the bill.
"Now we have picture messaging, instant messaging and text messaging. We need to make sure we are not leaving gaping loopholes for predators to create victims."
The social networking ban provides a broad definition to allow probation officers and other authorities leeway in monitoring an offender's computer. It also expands the authority of probation officers to make unannounced visits to monitor computer use.
"The invention of the Internet has been a positive thing, but it also has a darker side," said Swanson's spokesman Ben Woglsand. "These pieces of legislation are a good thing, but you are never going to be able to legislate your way away from predators who use the anonymity of the Internet to do their work. Everyone, parents and children, have to do their part to be vigilant." ..News Source.. by MARK BRUNSWICK, Star Tribune
MA- High court overturns GPS monitoring for sex offense suspects
5-7-2009 Massachusetts:
The state's highest court has ruled that it's illegal for authorities to use a GPS system to monitor alleged sex offenders who are released into the public while they await trial.
The Supreme Judicial Court said today that the law that allows GPS monitoring of people "on probation" for certain sex offenses applies only to offenders who have been placed on probation after being convicted of, or admitting to sufficient facts to be convicted of, the crimes.
"In sum, we must conclude from the language and history of [the law] that the Legislature intended the GPS requirement to apply only to convicted individuals," the court said in a seven-page ruling written by Justice Margot Botsford.
The law went into effect in late 2006. The GPS system consists of an ankle bracelet that is permanently attached to the person and a GPS-enabled cellular telephone that communicates with the bracelet and transmits the person's location to the state probation department, the court said. ..News Source.. by Globe Staff
FL- Lawyer: Jupiter Christian teacher charged with "sexting" was subject of boy's crush
5-7-2009 Florida:
WEST PALM BEACH — The husband of a former Jupiter Christian teacher charged with sending sexually explicit text messages to a 14-year-old boy is standing by his wife.
Matthew Henry, 28, was in court this morning as Geneva Henry, the mother of his three children, faced a judge on charges of lewd and lascivious conduct.
"These are merely allegations," Matthew Henry said after the hearing. "I am in full support of my wife."
The couple has been married for eight years and have three boys, ages 7, 6 and 2.
Geneva Henry, 29, is accused of sending messages such as "I want to rip all your clothes off," and "I want to kiss you all over," to a student through a MySpace account over a two month period. Jupiter police said she admitted to school administrators that she sent inappropriate text messages and resigned her position as an English teacher after the allegations surfaced.
At the hearing this morning, Henry's lawyer, Heidi Perlet, asked Judge Robert Booras to release her on bond, citing her three children and clean record. She was released on a $5,000 bond and was ordered not to have contact with the student.
After the hearing, Perlet declined to immediately comment specifically on the allegations but said "There may have been a crush by the young man on my client." ..News Source.. by CHRISTINA DENARDO, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
NJ- N.J. high court nullifies sex offender residency restricitons
5-7-2009 New Jersey:
The New Jersey Supreme Court today upheld a lower court ruling invalidating ordinances in Cherry Hill and Galloway Township that severely restricted where registered sex offenders could live.
The decision ( G.H. v. Township of Galloway (A-64/65-08)) nullifies similar hundreds of ordinances passed in townships around New Jersey.
The Supreme Court said the state-wide Megan's Law, a systematic law for dealing with paroled sex offenders, takes precedence over local efforts.
In a summary of its decision, the Supreme Court said Cherry Hill and Galloway's ordinances were "precluded by the present, stark language of Megan's Law."
In 2005, the two townships passed nearly identical laws that banned convicted sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, parks, churches, or other places where children might congregate.
In Cherry Hill, the ordinance rendered nearly the entire township off-limits to sex offenders.
Two sex offenders in Cherry Hill and one in Galloway - a Richard Stockton College freshman - quickly challenged.
Those challenges became test cases for municipalities across the state that sought to enact similar bans on sex offenders. ..News Source.. by Troy Graham, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
CA- 3 years in prison sought for MySpace hoax
5-7-2009 California:
Prosecutors argue mother ‘coldly conceived of a scheme to humiliate’
LOS ANGELES - A Missouri mother should serve three years in prison for her role in a MySpace hoax on a 13-year-old neighbor who committed suicide, federal prosecutors said in court documents filed Wednesday.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Krause outlined the government's position while requesting the maximum sentence for Lori Drew. Probation officials have recommended Drew receive a year of probation and a $5,000 fine.
Krause argued that Drew "coldly conceived of a scheme to humiliate" Megan Meier, a neighbor in a St. Louis suburb, by helping create a fictitious teenage boy on the social networking site and sending flirtatious messages in his name to the girl.
The fake boy then dumped Megan in a message saying the world would be better without her. She hanged herself a short time later.
Drew used her then-13-year-old daughter and a business assistant in the scheme, which played on Megan's insecurities, Krause said.
"Both the callousness of defendant's criminal conduct and the extraordinary harm it caused mandate a sentence of more than probation," Krause wrote.
Convicted of three counts
Drew was convicted in November of three counts of accessing computers without authorization. Besides up to three years in prison, she could face a $300,000 fine at sentencing set for May 18.
Drew's attorney, Dean Steward, has asked U.S. District Court Judge George Wu to throw out the verdicts.
Steward said his client couldn't afford the $5,000 fine recommended by probation officials because she no longer draws income from the coupon book business she had for nine years.
During the trial, prosecutors argued that Drew violated MySpace rules by setting up the phony profile for a boy named "Josh Evans." Jurors decided Drew was not guilty of the more serious felonies of intentionally causing emotional harm while accessing computers without authorization.
The jury could not reach an unanimous verdict on a felony conspiracy charge.
Drew was not directly charged with causing Megan's death.
Expert: Prosecutors 'gung-ho'
Some legal experts believe prosecutors are still smarting over the conviction on lesser crimes. In his filing, Krause continued to argue there is convincing evidence that shows Drew set out to inflict emotional harm to Megan.
"They are just totally gung-ho on this case," Matt Levine, a New York-based defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, said about prosecutors. "On one hand, what Lori Drew did was egregious and she should be brought to justice, but they have used the wrong legal theory here." ..News Source.. by MSNBC
VT- Parents told how to protect kids from predators
5-7-2009 Vermont:
BRATTLEBORO -- When Scott French is released from prison on May 12, he has the right to live anywhere he wants, said Eugene Wrinn, Brattleboro's chief of police.
"He has served his time," said Wrinn. "He is free when he walks out that door."
You may see him around town, he said, and as long as French does nothing wrong, that is his right.
"Tonight we are encouraging you to be proactive about your safety," said Windham County State's Attorney Tracy Shriver.
However, she said, town residents shouldn't take matters into their own hands.
Vigilantes around the country have been prosecuted for murder, attempted murder, arson and assault, she said. Vigilantism can include spray painting the home of a convicted sexual offender, stalking or targeting that person or threatening him or her.
"My office would prosecute you for that."
French is 33 years old, weighs about 200 pounds and stands 5 feet 6 inches, is white and has hazel eyes.
He finished a 14-year sentence for furnishing alcohol to a minor, first-degree aggravated domestic assault and violations of probation on his original conviction of sexual assault on a minor.
Because he has served out his entire sentence, the Department of Corrections has no authority to supervise his release.
French is considered a high risk for reoffending, said Phil Damone, a supervisor in the Department of Corrections Brattleboro office. Recidivism rates for similar cases are between 25 and 39 percent over five years, he said.
French did not complete sex offender treatment.
"People have the right to refuse treatment," said Wrinn.
During a meeting in Brattleboro Wednesday night, a handful of town residents learned about the state's sex offender registry, what they can do to protect their children and about French himself.
"It's natural for people to be angry and fearful," said Damone.
Attendees were told to talk with their children and explain how sex offenders can take advantage of them, he said. It's important for parents to talk to their children about "stranger danger," inappropriate behavior or contact and about the intentions of people who might be spending an inordinate amount of time with them or buying them extravagant gifts, he said.
Eighty-six percent of victims of sexual abuse do not report the crimes to police because they don't want people to know or don't want their names in the news or because they are afraid people will think it's their fault or won't believe them, said Damone.
"Offenders will use this to their advantage," said Damone. "Assure your children they will be believed."
Members of the community shouldn't focus too much of their attention on French alone, said Damone.
"There is a whole pool of unknown sex offenders," he said. "Being vigilant for deviant behavior is one of the best defenses."
While sexual predators can be found in any location in the community, said Damone, parents should be especially concerned about what their children are doing on the Internet.
"Sex offenders are anywhere there is opportunity," he said.
The state's sex offender registry is designed to help communities protect themselves and to help law enforcement agencies keep track of offenders but doesn't include all perpetrators of sex crimes, said Damone.
Those who make it onto the registry are considered predators or have prior offenses for sexual or violent crimes.
In Vermont, the names of about 2,400 sex offenders are posted on the Internet, but not all sex offenders on the registry are on the Web site.
Those who commit aggravated sexual assault, the kidnapping and sexual assault of a child, are considered predators, are recidivists, have not met treatment requirements, have been designated as a high risk to reoffend or have an active arrest warrant are listed on the Web site.
And with new legislation pending, said Damone, more people will soon be listed on the Web site.
Because his is considered a high risk, French will be placed on the registry Web site.
If a registered sex offender moves, has a change in employment or goes back to school, he or she has three days to notify law enforcement of a change of address.
High risk offenders have 36 hours to notify police.
"Violent predators must validate their address information every 90 days," said Damone. Others have to validate once a year.
Those who are recidivists or commit aggravated sexual offenses or particularly heinous crimes, said Damone, are required to register for life. Those not convicted of such crimes have to register for 10 years after discharge. ..News Source.. by Bob Audette
MN- Minn. Lawmakers Curb Sex Offender Web Access
Something is missing from this news article because -as written- it is an unconstitutional act to so restrict ALL such offenders. I'll bet it only applies to those on parole or probation, later I'll find the bill and let folks know. See later post!
5-7-2009 Minnesota:
The highest-risk sex offenders will face limits on their Internet access under a bill the Minnesota Legislature voted unanimously to send to Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
Starting in August 2010, predatory offenders put on intensive supervised release won't be able to access, create or maintain a personal Web page or social networking account if it permits contact with anyone under 18.
The restrictions apply to chat rooms, instant messaging and popular sites like MySpace and Facebook.
Computers and other devices with Internet capability could be examined by authorities conducting unannounced searches. Violations could land the offender back behind bars. ..News Source.. by WCCO.com
OH- Search warrant of ex-cop’s home staying sealed
Typical, misconstrue what the RSO has said, what other way can a prosecutor make this case?
5-7-2009 Ohio:
A Lake County judge has refused to unseal the affidavit that allowed law enforcement to search the Wickliffe home of a former Lorain police officer last year.
Joseph Montelon’s attorney had asked Lake County Common Pleas Judge Vincent Culotta to open the affidavit, saying his client has not been charged and police didn’t have a legitimate reason for the Aug. 28 raid on his home.
Montelon is suspected of being the writer of anonymous letters sent to public officials and media for years that were highly critical of Lorain police Chief Cel Rivera and other Lorain police officers.
Lorain County Prosecutor Dennis Will said the investigation, which involves Lorain police, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies, is still ongoing and the affidavit should remain sealed until the investigation is complete.
Culotta agreed in his decision that “unsealing the search warrant affidavit at this point could hamper and harm the ongoing investigation.”
Montelon, a convicted sex offender who resigned from the Lorain Police Department in 1992, has not admitted to writing the letters, which police and prosecutors have called “threatening.”
Terry Gilbert, Montelon’s attorney, said he wasn’t surprised by Culotta’s decision, but he may try again later if his client is never charged. It’s been nearly a year since the raid and no charges have been filed, he said.
Montelon and Lorain City Councilwoman Anne Molnar have both said the raid in which police seized computers, documents, guns and Montelon’s cell phone, appears to have been designed to silence a critic and uncover Montelon’s source of internal police documents.
Montelon has admitted that he has been sending documents to Molnar and others over the years but said he did so to help stop police corruption.
Some of those documents were part of a package that Molnar, Councilman Mitch Fallis and others sent to the U.S. Department of Justice last year requesting an investigation into the Lorain Police Department.
The Justice Department launched an investigation into allegations of police brutality by Lorain police officers in November, and that investigation is ongoing.
Gilbert has said the letters aren’t threatening.
“Whoever wrote those letters didn’t commit any crime, but was being critical of the government,” he said. ..News Source.. by Brad Dicken The Chronicle-Telegram
VA- State Police Powder Scare
Probably some wiseguy sending a message to the registry folks because they ticked him/her off somehow. Hopefully they didn't lick the envelop when sealing it. This is one the police will follow up on and prosecute, if they can find the person. Video here:
5-7-2009 Virginia:
At about 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, investigators say a worker at the Criminal Information Services Division on the second floor of Virginia State Police headquarters found a white substance inside an envelope.
About 100 workers were evacuated -- and the second floor's ventilation system was shut off. The worker who found the substance and two others were quarantined.
The area was closed for two hours, as hazmat crews tested for radioactive and explosive elements. Those tests came out negative, but the substance was sent to the state lab for further testing.
A spokesperson for Virginia State Police said the envelope containing the white substance also had a routine sex offender registry form inside. Investigators are following up on who sent it.
Investigators say the worker who found the substance and two others showed no signs of illness. They, and those who were evacuated, are to report to work on Thursday.
The state lab should know what the substance is within the next 24 hours. Stay with CBS 6 News for continuous updates. ..News Source.. by WTVR.com
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
OH- Lawmakers weigh reduced penalty options for teen 'sexting' messages
5-6-2009 Ohio:
Columbus -- Teens would be prohibited from sending nude photos of themselves to others via cell phones but would face lesser potential penalties for doing so, under legislation introduced at the Ohio Statehouse.
Senate Bill 103 "brings needed balance to Ohio law to hold teenagers accountable for their actions, without having to charge them as sexual offenders, and will raise awareness for how serious and common sexting has become," said Sen. Bob Schuler (R-Southwestern Ohio).
Schuler and Republican Rep. Ron Maag have introduced companion bills in the Senate and House on the sexting issue.
Schuler offered sponsor testimony before the Senate's criminal justice committee April 29.
The phrase combines the words "sex" and "texting" and refers to potentially prurient messages and images send over electronic devices, like cellular phones or laptop computers.
The issue has gained national attention following incidents in multiple states in which teens face child pornography charges for sending nude or scantily clad images to other teens.
The proposed legislation defines sexting as activities involving individuals younger than 18 who take nude or semi-nude photos of themselves or others (with consent) and send them to other juveniles via electronic mail or cell phones.
Those who participate in such activities would face misdemeanor charges.
Under existing state law, such offenders can be charged with felonies and be required to register as sex offenders.
"I don't think [the penalties for sexting] should rise to [a felony] level," Schuler said. "What this bill is doing is providing an alternative to the prosecutors." ..News Source.. by Marc Kovac
TX- De-registration bill for consensual sex offenders passes House
5-6-2009 Texas:
Sex offenders who were convicted despite having consensual sex with their victims would be allowed to petition for removal from the state's sex offender registry, under a bill the House passed on Wednesday.
The bill allows offenders who were no more than four years older than their victims - and whose victims were at least 13 years old - to ask a judge to remove them from the sex offender registry if their relationship was consensual. The bill passed 131-12.
Under current law, young men who were convicted after having sex with their underage girlfriends are often forced to register for years, a stigma that keeps them from finding work or renting apartments. Many of the men who came to testify on the bill this spring were married to the women they were convicted of assaulting.
"This is one of the most morally compelling pieces of legislation that I have ever filed," said Rep. Todd Smith. "We rarely have the opportunity to do something that takes people out of a living hell." ..News Source.. by Emily Ramshaw/Reporter
VT- ACLU-Vermont challenges Barre sex offender residency restrictions
5-6-2009 Vermont:
MONTPELIER - The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Vermont has filed a lawsuit against the city of Barre on behalf of a man who has been told that he cannot live with his wife and children in the city solely because of his criminal record.
The suit was filed in Washington Superior Court on behalf of Chris Hagan, a Vermonter who moved to Barre with his family this spring. The lawsuit challenges the legality of a city ordinance passed last summer that bars individuals convicted of certain sex offenses from living in exclusion zones that encompass much of the city.
The ordinance does not distinguish between individuals who re-offend or bother their neighbors, and those who do not, the ACLU said in a news release issued this afternoon.
In 2001, Hagan was accused of sexual assault as a result of sexual contact with a 15-year-old. Hagan, 18 at the time of the alleged offense, pled guilty to a lesser crime in exchange for a reduced sentence. He served time in prison, during which he completed sex offender treatment. Hagan is not on parole or probation, and is classified “low risk” to re-offend.
After his release, Hagan attended community college, started a contracting business, and met and married his wife, Amy. He, his wife, and their two children moved to Barre this spring, not knowing of the residency restrictions. The family does not live in public housing, but in a privately owned apartment that they rent.
Even though Hagan has been a law-abiding citizen in Barre, the city notified him on April 23 that he had to move out of the apartment or face daily fines beginning next week. The ACLU’s lawsuit against the city includes a request for a preliminary injunction to prevent the city from fining Hagan. ..News Source.. by Times Argus
DC- Prison Awaiting Hostile Bloggers
5-6-2009 Washington DC:
Proposed congressional legislation would demand up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to “coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person.”
Instead of prison, perhaps we should say gulag.
The proposal by Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Los Angeles, would never pass First Amendment muster, unless the U.S. Constitution was altered without us knowing. So Sanchez, and the 14 other lawmakers who signed on to the proposal, are grandstanding to show the public they care about children and are opposed to cyberbullying.
The meaasure, H.R. 1966, is labeled the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act. It’s designed to target the behavior that led to last year’s suicide of the 13-year-old Meier.
In response to Meier’s suicide, prosecutors turned to an anti-hacking statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and prosecuted Lori Drew. She was accused of violating MySpace’s terms of service agreement in what prosecutors said was a complex conspiracy to harass Meier via a fake MySpace online profile.
The judge presiding over the case is weighing a motion to nullify the jury’s verdict on allegations the authorities failed to prove Drew knew the MySpace terms of service existed — allegations that would be mooted had Drew been prosecuted under Sanchez’s proposal. Drew’s case was the nation’s first cyberbullying prosecution under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Sanchez’s bill goes way beyond cyberbullying and comes close to making it a federal offense to log onto the internet or use the telephone. The methods of communication where hostile speech is banned include e-mail, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones and text messages.
We can’t say what we think of Sanchez’s proposal. Doing so would clearly get us two years in solitary confinement.
The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. ..News Source.. by Wired News
FL- Commission Puts Sex Offender On County Board
Follow up story to: "Sex offender wanted! .... to serve on Broward task force" 5-6-2009 Florida:
Martin Kiar (Rep. House District 97) is pissed.
The youthful state representative is upset about one member of a newly-formed county commission task force – a registered sex offender.
The offender is part of a task force that will make recommendations about laws governing where sex offenders can live.
“I get concerned when sexual predators are put on county boards,” Kiar says.
Apparently Kair is not alone.
A number of lawmakers in Tallahassee shook their heads in disbelief when they learned Broward County would appoint a registered sex offender to a board.
They chalked it up to more Broward County liberal foolishness.
The task force will contain one sex offender, two cops, home owners association and American Civil Liberties Union representatives, two members of the Broward League of Cities and representatives of a college and the state Department of Corrections.
The victim’s representative is Lauren Book-Lim. She’s lobbyist Ron Book’s daughter.
Book-Lin was molested by her nanny in a widely publicized case several years ago. She now runs Lauren’s Kids, an advocacy group for molested youths.
Information about Lauren’s Kids is here.
I personally don’t agree with Kair.
Some of the people labeled sex offenders are not a wild-eyed predators that Kair and everybody else rightfully fears. Those offenders should be controlled.
But others are stigmatized for life because of youthful indiscretions, usually made when they are drunk.
They get caught for urinating in public or being in an Internet sex chat rooms. Somewhat victimless crimes.
The offender appointed to the task force appeared at the commission meeting.
He said he had recovered. His victim appeared with him, according to Mayor Stacy Ritter.
Do people like this – who paid their debt to society — deserve input into laws governing their life?
You bet.
“They are people too,” says Ritter.
I agree. ..News Source.. by BUDDY NEVINS
FL- Sex offenders live in legal limbo
5-6-2009 Florida:
OUR OPINION: Unfair laws create dangerous communities of outcasts
In three years, the number of people living in legal limbo on a spit of sand under the Julia Tuttle Causeway has grown to 66 from seven. They are there because state and local elected officials have acted with willful ignorance and fear-mongering to perpetuate the illusion that isolating sexual offenders somehow makes a community safer. They are wrong. They are instead creating colonies of desperate men who live in squalid, inhumane, unsanitary, dangerous conditions.
These same elected officials -- the lawmakers you sent to Tallahassee and members of local councils and commissions -- will react with shock and horror when the tinderbox they created is leveled by storm or fire, crippled by disease or explodes in violence.
Punishment doesn't end
Miami Herald columnist Fred Grimm in recent weeks has documented the sordid conditions in the camps and the lame excuses politicians offer for their existence. On Sunday, reporter Robert Samuels further illuminated the despair and precarious circumstances of 65 men and one woman forced to live out their lives under the causeway bridge. People who commit sex crimes deserve punishment, but not life sentences.
The Miami camp is larger and more humiliating than most, but it is a harbinger of the future if nothing is done about it. The camps are the result of state lawmakers and communities throughout Florida enacting laws that ban sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school, kindergarten, playground or school-bus stop. These laws rely on a 2005 federal-appellate court decision upholding an Iowa law that registers and bans sex offenders under civil procedures.
Challenges in court
However, with camps like Miami's and a much smaller one in Broward County, there is a growing body of evidence that the bans aren't civil at all. The bans clearly are meant to punish sex offenders as a continuing part of their criminal convictions. Proof of this is the fact that sex offenders are required to wear GPS monitoring devices and to report their whereabouts to parole officers. This clearly is a continuation of the criminal process. These issues eventually will be reconsidered in court, thanks to legal challenges by the ACLU and civil-rights groups.
However, the intentional creation of a humanitarian crisis by local and state officials is no less excusable. Their behavior is reminiscent of a practice begun in the Middle Ages of banning people with leprosy and isolating them in colonies. This was largely discontinued hundreds of years later when it became known that leprosy was not highly contagious. Like their forebears, today's elected officials act from a misguided sense of duty, yet they are informed by the same demons: ignorance and fear. ..Opinion.. of The Miami Hearld
MA- Auditor blasts state criminal records system as outdated, inaccurate
5-6-2009 Massachusetts:
A scathing audit today condemned the state's criminal records system as flawed and woefully obsolete, preventing law enforcement agencies from obtaining current information and saddling some innocent people with false criminal records.
The one-year review by State Auditor Joe DeNucci's office found lengthy lag times between updates of criminal records, leading to more than 38,000 cases where convictions did not appear in the database, including murder and failing to register as a sex offender. It also found few safeguards against mistaken information being entered into the database.
"I am deeply concerned that the lack of a modern, state-of-the-art criminal history information system could pose a threat to public safety," DeNucci said. "These are serious public safety concerns that must be addressed."
Massachusetts is the only state that does not use fingerprint verification before changes to criminal records, the audit found. This allows criminal charges to be entered into the system for the wrong person, either by error or if an offender gives a false name.
Kevin Burke, secretary of the state's public safety office, which oversees the Criminal History Systems Board, which maintains the system, requested the audit. DeNucci said a lack of funding is a major reason for the outdated technology, but that an overhaul is expected over the next two years.
Without an overhaul, DeNucci said, the system "cannot guarantee the reliability of law enforcement decisions that depend on this information."
The audit also found that unauthorized users were able to access the system, often illegally running arbitrary background checks on well-known Massachusetts residents without justification.
Curtis Wood, executive director of the Criminal History Systems Board, said the audit accurately portrayed the system's deficiencies.
"There are shortcomings in the system," he said. "We feel the audit was fair and representative of where we need to go."
Wood said the database, which holds more than 3 million criminal records and links with federal and international law enforcement agencies, is more than 20 years old and sorely in need of an upgrade.
"That's the underlying issue here," he said. "It's well past its prime, and we're really playing catchup."
Some 30,000 public safety officials, from prosecutors to probation officers, access the system.
Besides criminal records, the database includes information on missing and wanted persons, drivers' licenses and motor vehicles, and firearms licenses.
..News Source.. by Peter Schworm, Globe Staff
Few residents respond to the sex offender registry
5-6-2009 Cayman Islands:
The period allowing for public comment on the draft of Cayman’s new Sex Offender Registry Bill concluded in April with only five people providing a response.
At the beginning of the consultation period, Minister of Health and Human Services Hon Anthony Eden had said, “Through this public consultative process, my ministry welcomes greater collaboration with government and non-government agencies as a means of raising awareness of this social issue that is threatening the stability of our families.”
As to the five people who contributed feedback, the Ministry’s Chief Officer Diane Montoya said, “The responses focus on whether the Registry should be public or private.”
While two respondents felt that it should be made public, another two felt the information should be kept private. Three respondents also questioned whether such a registry would defeat the purpose of rehabilitation, thereby countering reintegration efforts.
“This information will now be used to formulate a policy recommendation to Cabinet for consideration in revising the Bill,” said Ms Montoya, adding that the bill is “unlikely” to come into effect by June.
In the United States, government statistics suggest there are more than 100,000 sex offenders in the population, or one offender for every 3,000 persons. The American government knows this because of a nationwide Sex Offenders Registry, which includes all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The first state to create a sex offender registry was California, in 1948. However, in the last 15 years, due to a series of highly publicised cases involving sex crimes against children, national attention focused on the possible risks that convicted sex offenders can pose to communities when they are released.
The result is that every parent in the US today can go to the National Sex Offenders Registry website, key in their state and town [or zip code] and a list of convicted sex offenders living in their area will immediately appear, complete with physical description, list of conviction dates, their various alias and often a police photo.
The issue of creating a Cayman registry has been discussed and debated for years.
In February of this year, the Sex Offender Registry Bill was ultimately tabled in the Legislative Assembly as a Discussion Draft and provisions were made to allow 60 days of public consultation.
West Bay Police Area Commander and Chief Inspector Angelique Howell became one of the driving forces behind the concept of a local Sex Offender Registry after her experiences of heading the Family Support Unit for two years.
Regardless of the little public comment, Inspector Howell’s position has been made loud and clear. “I am absolutely in support of a Sex Offender Registry. I think it is a must for Cayman,” she said.
She also feels the information shouldn’t be readily available to the public, as is the case in the United States.
Inspector Howell believes that with Cayman’s compact size (“where everyone knows everyone”) there is potential for abuse. “Also, if the names of offenders were available to the public, there is a good possibility that their victims would be revealed, and this is something that we would not want to happen, especially in the case of children,” she said.
“It is important to have a registry which is accessible to the police as well as various government agencies; because I believe for many sex offenders this is a lifelong problem and a permanent challenge for them to overcome. And so in order to safeguard the community, these offenders need to be monitored over a lifetime. But we also need to be aware of their human rights as well. Once a sex offender is convicted and serves their time and is then in therapy, they have some right to privacy,” she said.
She offers a “however” in terms of staffing child-related businesses, such as a child-care facility. In these cases, she said there should be a registry where the public can apply to have the potential employee checked against the sex offenders’ records. Access would be based on a specific request.
“In fact, I believe that there should be two registries, one for sex offenders that have been convicted and another one for what is called ‘people of interest’ relating to various sex crimes or offences … I feel that the public would need to make a formal application to have limited access to these records,” Inspector Howell said. “But for the police, having a registry will be a very good thing, and I’m very optimistic that it will happen.” ..News Source.. by Steven Knipp
CO- GET NAKED, THE ACLU IS ON YOUR SIDE
5-6-2009 Colorado:
The ever-vigilant ACLU, notorious for defending indefensible fringe behaviors, has a new cause célèbre--public nudity.
Last time I checked, my common sense said public nudity is not normal or practical.
This latest ACLU lunacy stems from last year’s Halloween high jinks on the part of “Naked Pumpkin Runners,” 12 Boulder, CO pranksters running around nude with nothing but pumpkins on their heads. The pumpkin clad streakers were ticketed for indecent exposure. Due to the Colorado’s strict sex offender laws, these bare-bottom trotters could have landed on the state sex offender registry and been lumped together with bona-fide scumbags guilty of criminally obscene activity.
Eleven of the 12 prancing pumpkins pled guilty to a lesser crime and pumpkin #12 beat the wrap altogether.
Last week the Boulder chapter of the ACLU held a forum, “Naked in Boulder.” They hope to tweak the sex offender law and protect streakers, naked bike riders, protesters, etc. from the more serious criminal sex offender designation.
But according to Boulder’s newspaper, The Daily Camera, the opportunistic Boulder ACLU is maxing out the streaker issue by lobbying to “protect nudity as a constitutionally sheltered freedom of expression.”
Strange, I don’t recall “public nudity” in my eighth-grade civics class during discussion of our Constitutional freedoms of expression.
“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Nope, no nudity mentioned there. Probably because our founding fathers never imagined its citizen elites would rally around public nudity as a civil right.
This newly suggested constitutional right defies logic. Even uninhibited three year-olds recognize propriety; they break into giggles, displaying a healthy embarrassment, when another tot cavorts in the raw.
In contrast, many nudies convince themselves that they are progressively beyond us repressed, uptight prudes who don’t want to display our pimples, dimples and privates. Those of us who prefer apparel in public, are classified as “clothing-compulsive, nudo-phobes” by unclad libertines.
The Naturist Society already considers public nudity a civil liberty asking members to “join in our struggle to preserve public land for nude use.”
“We work for clothing-optionality, body acceptance, self-expression, civil liberties…” says the angry Senior Unlimited Nudes with brain-bending rhetoric. “We struggle against prudery, shame and censorship...”
Even some Christians have been seduced to strip and gambol about sans clothes. They salad-bar the Bible by selecting some scriptures while ignoring others. The Naturist-Christians Organization equates clothing with shame, saying, “We all share… a common desire to live a shame free life--naked and unashamed, as our Creator, who formed us in His own image, intended for us.”
Interesting twist.
If the Almighty intended for us to walk around starkers why did He clothe formerly leafless Adam and Eve, post-Eden, once their innate modesty kicked in? And once Jesus delivered the naked demon-possessed wretch from his torment, clothing represented his return to sanity and society.
Ironically, the same time “Naked In Boulder” promoted liaise faire laws for streakers and fellow birthday-suit aficionados, public nudity was banned in high Alpine hamlet Appenzell Outer Rhodes in Switzerland –that’s Europe, folks, where public nude bathing is practically de rigueur.
The Associated Press reports that Appenzellers were fed up with buck-naked freedom of expression. Voters “passed legislation banning naked hiking after dozens of mostly German nudists started rambling through their picturesque region… citizens objected to encountering walkers wearing nothing but hiking boots and socks.”
The ACLU also has a tough uphill hike if it hopes to secure constitutionally protected status for public nudity. Acknowledged or not, our sensible Creator mercifully hardwired us humans with inhibitions as a protective measure. Most of us prefer a dignified modesty for ourselves, and don’t want to be subjected to others’ bare bodies.
But what can you do? There will always be those rebellious humanoid specimens who override their sophisticated divine circuitry and run around naked with nothing but pumpkins on their heads. ..News Source.. by Ellen Makkai
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
MI- DOC looks at releasing some prisoners
5-5-2009 Michigan:
Local prosecutor says letting sex offenders out is dangerous (This prosecutor has no idea what the actual recidivism rates are for Michigan sex offfenders.)
TUSCOLA COUNTY (WJRT) -- (05/05/09)--Major budget cuts were announced Tuesday in state government.
No prisons are being closed in these latest moves, but the Department of Corrections continues to look at releasing prisoners who have served their minimum time.
One group of prisoners the DOC is looking at is sex offenders.
The Department of Corrections says those convicted of sex crimes are being looked at for release if they have served their minimum prison sentence.
One prosecutor says this is dangerous.
"They are the type of offenders that give us the greatest concern," said Tuscola County Prosecutor Mark Reene.
Reene is seeing plenty of requests for the release of inmates to reduce the prison population.
"They are by the vast majority sex offenders," Reene said.
The Department of Corrections is looking at nearly 12,000 inmates who have served their minimum sentence.
"Sex offenders are a special population within our prison system that has one of the lowest parole rates," said the DOC's John Cordell.
According to Cordell, sex offenders have a first-time parole rate of about 25 percent, where the rest of the prison population is around 70 percent.
"We as an agency need to ensure that they are receiving fair consideration for parole," he said.
Reene says he believes sex offenders need to serve closer to the maximum time.
"It's been proven time and time again that individuals engaged in that behavior certainly aren't going to stop doing so," he said. "They are notorious for recidivism."
The DOC plans on reinvesting money for more parole officers to supervise sex offenders once they are released.
Reene says the cost-cutting move by reducing the prison population could prove more costly.
"Can you put a price tag on a child who is victimized by somebody who is released? I don't think there is a price tag on this," he said.
Reene plans on meeting with the Department of Corrections to voice opposition over the release of some of those inmates.
The DOC says it will listen. ..News Source.. by Terry Camp
WA- Washington Joins Iran in Criminalizing Sex Between Consenting Adults
5-5-2009 Washington:
You may remember the school sex bill that set off our unconstitutionality alarm earlier this year—the one that criminalizes sex between high school employees and consenting adult students. Well, the Senate version died, but a House version passed both chambers by a wide margin and was signed by the Governor on Monday.
The bill—which might as well have been written on discarded scraps of the Constitution—would criminalize a few scenarios, the most notable being sex between school employees and students more than five years their junior. This was in response to the Division II Court of Appeals overturning a teacher's conviction for first-degree sexual misconduct, when the teacher had had sex with a consenting 18-year-old student. Now, under HB 1385, not only would that scenario result in a felony, but so would one in which a 26-year-old high-school landscaper had sex with a 20-year-old student. The landscaper would now be a sex offender.
Also, in case you're wondering, it's not illegal for a 26-year-old boss to have sex with her 20-year-old employee. Another thing worth noting is the US Supreme Court opinion Lawrence v. Texas, when the majority held that Texas' gay sodomy law infringed on the ability of consenting adults to engage in private sexual activity, and thus violated Constitutional right to liberty.
Overall, the bill received 126 votes for and 16 votes against. Among the few dissenters was Kirkland Rep. Roger Goodman, who called it "my least favorite bill of the entire session. remember after we passed it, roaming around the House chamber, muttering to my colleagues that we just criminalized consentual sexual relations between two adults for the first time in state history." [It appears that the state enacted sodomy laws back in the day.]
Appellate attorney David Zuckerman had a similar reaction to the earlier version of the bill (which contains the same provisions). "I think there are serious constitutional problems with this bill," he said. "It seems to me this violates the rights to intimate association and rights to privacy that were recognized in Lawrence v. Texas."
The ACLU wasn't immediately available to comment, and the Attorney General's office is checking whether they were consulted about the bill's constitutionality. ..News Source.. by Damon Agnos
IN- UPDATED BREAKING NEWS: Charges against Patterson have been dismissed
5-5-2009 Indiana:
The case against Robert "Bobby" Patterson of Bloomfield was dismissed Tuesday after both the defense and the prosecution had filed motions in Greene Superior Court requesting the case be dropped.
Patterson was charged in late March with failure to register as a sex or violent offender, a class D felony.The 62-year-old Patterson is considered a violent offender because of his conviction on Nov. 12, 1981, of the murder of 15-year-old Kathy Sanford in Bloomfield in late January, 1980. At the age of 35, Patterson was sentenced to 40 years in prison. With "good time" credit, he completed his sentence and was released from prison in 2002.
Patterson current offense was charged under the Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registration Act.
When this registration law was enacted, it only applied to sex offenders. In 2007, the law was amended to include violent offenders -- five years after Patterson was released from prison on the murder conviction.
Both motions for dismissal were prompted by an Indiana Supreme Court decision handed down last Thursday in a similar case involving Richard Wallace, a convicted sex offender. Patterson is a convicted violent offender. Both were required to register under Indiana law.
In both cases, they were charged, convicted and had served their sentence for their crime before the requirement for them to register was enacted. In Wallace's case, it was the requirement to register as a sex offender, in Patterson's, as a violent offender.
The defense motion to dismiss pointed out, "The Indiana Constitution provides that 'no ex post facto law ... shall ever be passed.'""Ex post facto" is a Latin term for "after the fact." A general explanation of an ex post facto law is a law that is retroactive, or that changes the consequences of a crime after the crime was committed.
In the Wallace case, he had already completed a sentence for child molesting before the Act was enacted. When the decision was made last Thursday, the court said Wallace's conviction violated the state constitution's prohibition of retroactive laws.
The Indiana Supreme Court is composed of five justices -- the decision was unanimous.
The Supreme Court said in Wallace's case, the law "imposes burdens that have the effect of adding punishment beyond that which could have been imposed when his crime was committed.
Wallace's conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court.
The first motion to dismiss the Patterson case was filed Monday morning by Greene County Public Defender Alan Baughman who was appointed to represent Patterson.
The defense motion contended that the law under which Patterson has been charged, the Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registration Act, subjected him to punishment which is prohibited under the Indiana Constitution.
The second motion was filed Tuesday by Greene County Deputy Prosecutor Cheryl Jackson-Stone.
The state's motion requested the court dismiss the case for the reason that it cannot proceed with prosecution due to the recent Indiana Supreme Court decision in Wallace v. State.
On Tuesday morning, Prosecutor Jarrod Holtsclaw said he had read the Wallace decision.
"We have no choice," said Holtsclaw. "The Indiana Supreme Court does have the final say on Indiana laws. Unless it's taken to the United States Supreme Court, we have to abide by the Indiana Supreme Court's decision."
After the second motion was filed, Superior Court Judge Dena Martin ordered the case be dismissed and all scheduled hearings were vacated.
The prosecutor acknowledged that public opinion may be opposed to dropping Patterson's case but due to the Supreme Court's decision,Holtsclaw said the prosecutor's office simply cannot proceed with the case.
Holtsclaw said the Supreme Court had made their position clear.
"The right thing to do is to follow the Supreme Court's decision," said Holtsclaw.
Holtsclaw said most people in Indiana's judicial arena have been waiting on this decision for quite some time.
Not only does the ruling affect the Patterson case, but it is expected to affect many other cases in the state.
"This could affect hundreds, maybe thousands, of other cases. We're trying to see how many other cases in Greene County will be affected. I've asked the Public Defender's Office to take a look at other cases," said Holtsclaw.
Since Patterson's arrest, he has been been incarcerated in the Greene County Jail in lieu of $75,000 bond.
As of late Tuesday afternoon, Patterson was still in jail and no information was available about when he might be released -- there was a hold on his release due to a probation or parole violation. ..News Source.. by Anna Rochelle, Staff Writer
DC- Feds Sign More Agreements With Social Networking Sites
5-5-2009 Washington DC:
Last week, the U.S. General Services Administration announced it had signed a service agreement with Facebook, and in recent months reached agreements with Blist which provides a consumer focused service for publishing data on the Web, Slideshare a site for sharing of PowerPoint, Word and PDF documents and AddThis, a bookmarking and sharing platform.
Federal agencies led by GSA have been negotiating agreements with each new media provider that can work across government. Other federal agencies can now choose to sign the same agreement if it meets their needs because it resolves the legal concerns found in many standard terms and conditions that pose problems for federal agencies, such as liability, endorsements, advertising, freedom of information and governing law. ..News Source.. by Wayne Hanson
DC- Future Dangerousness
5-5-2009 Washington DC:
The tricky sex offender case that could trip up one of the judges on the short list to replace Souter.
Barack Obama has said he wants a Supreme Court nominee who will think hard about how his or her rulings will affect people's daily lives. "I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives—whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation," Obama said Friday.
When he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, Obama also worried that "democracy could be dangerous," and "that the majority could be 'unempathetic'—that's a word Barack has used about the concerns of outsiders and minorities," as Geoffrey Stone, former dean of Chicago's law school, told Jodi Kantor in the New York Times on Sunday.
Sometimes, these values can be in tension with one another. Protecting the rights of a minority can mean exposing the majority to potential risk. That tension is very much present in a 2004 opinion in which Judge Diane Wood participated, a case called Doe v. City of Lafayette. Wood, a 58-year-old Clinton appointee, is at the top of just about everyone's short list because of her reputation as being supersmart and her ability to go toe-to-toe with Judges Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook, two of the other big intellects of her court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. The opinion Wood joined in Doe v. Lafayette was written by Judge Ann Williams, who is getting some play for the Supreme Court, too. (Reagan put Williams on the district court, and Clinton elevated her to the appeals court.)
Doe is a tough one: It's about a convicted sex offender who cruised a park in Lafayette, Ind., admitting to "having urges" about a group of kids he saw there, although he didn't actually molest them. The city banned him from its parks. The district court upheld the ban based on his criminal record, his own deposition, and his psychologist's testimony that while she thought he'd learned to control himself, she couldn't guarantee he wouldn't offend again. The ruling Wood joined, and Williams wrote, defends the rights of what may be the most despised minority of all: pedophiles. But John Doe's thoughts took him right to the brink of harming real kids. Williams and Wood framed the case as being about Doe's freedom of thought and his right to some procedural protection. The other judges, who eventually overturned their ruling, framed it as being about his dangerousness. Which was it?
John Doe, as the court calls him, had a long history of sex offenses, most involving child victims. In 1978 and 1979, he forcibly had oral sex with a 10-year-old in the locker room of a school and with a 12-year-old in a school parking lot. He was arrested for masturbating in view of children in 1986; for peeping into the windows of an apartment in 1988; and for beckoning three boys to come into an alley, asking whether they wanted oral sex, and then unzipping his pants in front of them in 1990. He was on house arrest from 1992-96 and on probation until January 2000. He had no convictions on his record after 1991.
In January 2000, Doe's probation officer got a call reporting that Doe "had been 'cruising' parks and watching young children." Doe, in a deposition, explained that he parked his car across from Murdock Park and saw a group of kids on the baseball diamond. Doe says "I stood there and watched them for a while, probably 15 minutes, maybe a half-hour, I said to myself: I've got to get out of here before I do something, I left."
Pause there for a moment: Doe didn't hurt the kids or even approach them. He turned around and got out of the park. Then he paged his psychologist and told her he was upset.
In other words, this is a man with a terrible mental illness who desperately tried to control himself—and who, in this instance, succeeded. But the rest of his deposition reveals just how close to failing he came. Asked why he went to Murdock Park that evening, Doe answers: "I guess I was, for whatever reason, I was in the mood of cruising." He admitted that he was looking for kids and that he was having urges. In response to a question about what he was thinking when he walked into the park, he answered:When I saw the three, the four kids there, my thoughts were thoughts I had before when I see children, possibly expose myself to them, I thought about the possibility of, you know, having some kind of sexual contact with the kids, but I know with four kids there, that's pretty difficult to do. It's a wide open area. Those thoughts were there, but they, you know, weren't realistic at the time. They were just thoughts.
When John Doe's probation officer got the anonymous tip about the cruising, he took it to the police chief and other city officials, and they decided to ban Doe from Lafayette's parks and schools. The ban had no end date, and it covered a sprawling territory, because Lafayette's park system includes large parks, small neighborhood ones, a golf course, a baseball stadium, and several pools.
Doe didn't question the city's decision to ban him from the schools. But he wanted to go to the parks to play softball, go on a company outing, and (this one is harder) watch the teen baseball league play games. So Doe challenged the ban on two grounds: Under the First Amendment, on the premise that he was being punished for his thoughts. And under the 14th Amendment, arguing the ban took away his right "to enjoy and wander through a public park."
The district judge who got the case ruled in favor of the city, based on Lafayette's interest in protecting the health and safety of its residents. A three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit heard the case on appeal. In a 2-1 split, Wood and Williams reversed the district court, finding that the decision to ban Doe from the public parks violated his First Amendment rights, while Judge Kenneth Ripple dissented. Williams wrote the majority opinion. Eleven judges of the 7th Circuit then reheard the case. (This second round is called en banc.) In an 8-3 ruling, the en banc majority reversed Williams' initial ruling. In this second round, Wood and Williams dissented, along with Judge Ilana Rovner. Ripple's dissent became the majority opinion, and Posner and Easterbrook joined it, along with five other judges.
Ripple's majority opinion for the en banc court frames the city's ban as punishing Doe not merely for his thoughts, but for "thought plus conduct." Ripple writes:The inescapable reality is that Mr. Doe did not simply entertain thoughts; he brought himself to the brink of committing child molestation. He had sexual urges directed toward children, and he took dangerous steps toward gratifying his urges by going to a place where he was likely to find children in a vulnerable situation.
To characterize the ban as directed at 'pure thought' would require us to close our eyes to Mr. Doe's actions. ... We cannot ignore, nor can we say the law somehow commands the City to ignore, Mr. Doe's pedophilia and the history of his battle with that affliction.
Williams' dissent, on the other hand, points out that this is "a rare case where thoughts, as distinct from deeds, become publicly known." Williams notes: "It is clear on this record, that absent Doe's thoughts (and arguably his status as a pedophile …) the City would be uninterested in Doe's decision to go to the park that fateful day." We don't normally restrict people's liberties based on their thoughts, Williams argued, and we shouldn't; this is "a cornerstone of the criminal justice system," and it's a crucial limit on government power.
Williams also points out that the city's ban could actually disserve its goal of keeping children safer by deterring other sex offenders from seeking therapy. And she offers this analogy: "By way of comparison, courts would not sanction criminal punishment of an individual with a criminal history of bank robbery (a crime, like child molestation, with a high rate of recidivism …) simply because she or he stood in the parking lot of a bank and thought about robbing it."
But in other settings, the law does allow for punishment based on future dangerousness. In 2000 and 2002, the Supreme Court twice upheld a Kansas law that provides for the civil commitment of a convicted sex offender, after he has finished serving his criminal sentence, if a court finds that he "cannot control his dangerous behavior." The majority opinion in the Doe case relied on those Supreme Court rulings. When I called Yale law professor Robert Post, a First Amendment scholar, he brought up the Kansas law, too. "If you can be kept in jail because of future dangerousness, why couldn't you be kept out of a park?" Post said. "It's a mischaracterization to say this has anything to do with this man's thoughts. The case should be decided on the basis of his dangerousness."
Geoffrey Stone, also a First Amendment expert, says the problem with the case is that Doe didn't frame his appeal correctly. He failed to argue that he'd been banned from the parks without due process—a hearing or a chance to appeal. And so Williams and Wood had to "meld the due process and First Amendment arguments together." Stone cautioned me not to make too much of the case. "I suppose it's of interest because people will say Judge Wood doesn't care about the dangers pedophiles pose to society. But that is a wild misreading. The dissent is really about the need for appropriate procedures and limitations before the city imposes a ban like this. And that's a perfectly reasonable position."
It's striking that Wood and Williams weren't afraid to rule in favor of a sex offender who had made his struggle for self-control clear. That doesn't surprise people who know Wood. "You couldn't find a more principled person," said my friend Aleeza Strubel, an employment-discrimination lawyer who clerked for Wood. "She didn't make decisions based on what the reaction would be."
Wood has taken other bold stances: The right is already after her for her 2001 ruling in NOW v. Scheidler, which allowed a lower-court judge to prevent anti-abortion protesters, nationwide, from blockading clinics. Wood's ruling made novel use of federal anti-racketeering law, and the Supreme Court overturned her in 2003. You could argue that this is precisely the sort of flat-out liberal, unafraid jurist the court now needs. Or you could argue that this is one fight the Obama administration could do without. Either way, the White House should take a look at Doe v. City of Lafayette. If it hasn't already. ..News Source.. by Emily Bazelon
TX- Texas Attorney General Abbott, Senator Shapiro, Representative Pena Mark Texas Senate’s Passage of E-mail Registration Bill
State Attorney General again goes after the wrong persons committing online crimes against minors. The AG refuses to review the actual crimes, if he did he would find it is NEW offenders and not PRIOR offenders. These new requirements waste law enforcement resources and violate the rights of registrants; where are the lawyers willing to fight these senseless feel-good sounds-good laws?
5-5-2009 Texas:
Bills would require sex offenders to register their online information with law enforcement
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, state Sen. Florence Shapiro and Rep. Aaron Pena today marked the Texas Senate’s passage of legislation that would require convicted sex offenders to provide their online and cellular telephone account information to the state’s Sex Offender Registry. Senate Bill 689 passed the Senate on Monday and is now pending in the Texas House of Representatives.
“This legislation will help protect children by ensuring that state law keeps up with modern technology,” Attorney General Abbott said. “By requiring sexual predators to provide their electronic identities, the Legislature is simply improving existing registration requirements – which require convicted sex offenders to provide their addresses to the Department of Public Safety. As Attorney General, I am grateful to Sen. Shapiro and Rep. Pena for their innovative approach and commitment to Texas children.”
Sen. Shapiro added: “I have spent my career protecting the innocent against predatory sexual offenders, beginning with Ashley's Laws in 1995. With today’s new Internet sites, it is now time to take this fight into the virtual world and target those who target our children through social networking sites, chat rooms and live video gaming systems. I commend General Abbott for his work against these most heinous criminals as well, and am grateful to his Cyber Crimes Unit for the strides it has made to bring these offenders to justice.”
Rep. Pena said: “We are closer today to preventing sex offenders from using social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook to prey upon our children. SB689 is an important progression in making the Internet safer from online predators. This legislation will provide law enforcement with new tools, resources and information to track sex offenders online.”
The bills – Senate Bill 689 by Sen. Shapiro and its companion House Bill 1239 by Rep. Pena – include four key provisions that strengthen state sex offender registration laws:
• Registration of Internet accounts and e-mail addresses. If enacted, the legislation would require all sex offenders to register their Internet account and online identifiers, including e-mail addresses and designations used for online chatting, instant messaging, social networking or other similar Internet communication. The law would require that sex offenders notify their primary registration authority or the Department of Public Safety, which manages the state’s Sex Offender Registry, any time offenders change their Internet service providers or other online identifiers.
• Registration of mobile telephone numbers. Dramatic growth within the mobile communications sector has increased children’s access to cellular telephones. As a result, young Texans now frequently send text messages, transfer photographs, and use their mobile telephones to chat online. To help prevent sexual predators from using mobile phones to prey upon children, the law would require registered sex offenders to register their cell phone numbers with the DPS.
• Sharing information with law enforcement. Authorizes DPS to release state sex offender Internet identifiers to the OAG and social networking sites (i.e., MySpace.com, Facebook.com).
• Internet prohibitions for certain sex offenders. Requires sentencing courts and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to prohibit certain sex offenders (e.g., those who committed a sex offense against a minor; are designated a level 3 sex offender; or used the Internet to facilitate the commission of the crime), as a condition of parole or probation, from using the Internet to access obscene material; access a commercial social networking Web site; communicate with other individuals or groups for the purpose of promoting sexual relations with persons under 17; or communicate with a person under 17 when such offender is over 17.
In 2003, Attorney General Abbott established the Cyber Crimes Unit to crackdown on child pornographers and sexual predators who use the Internet to prey upon children. The Cyber Crimes Unit has arrested 105 predators in 25 Texas counties and Indonesia. These defendants were caught trying to arrange sexual encounters online with victims they acknowledged were young children. The “children” actually were undercover investigators. Cyber Crimes Unit investigators have also obtained convictions against 96 individuals on child pornography charges.
Since taking office, Attorney General Abbott has earned a national reputation for aggressively arresting and prosecuting child sexual predators. In addition to arrest roundups, Abbott also launched a series of town hall meetings statewide to educate parents and teenagers about the kind of criminal activity that goes on in connection with Internet diaries, chat rooms and social networking sites. Thousands of concerned Texans turned out at venues across the state to participate in the interactive presentation about the risks of online predators and the steps parents can take to protect their children online. ..News Source.. by Texas AG
TX- Texas Bill Might Require Sex Offenders To Register Gaming Identities
5-5-2009 Texas:
A bill that passed the Texas Senate today would change sex offender registration regulations in the state so convicted sex offenders would have to provide law enforcement with each “alias, assumed name, nickname, or pseudonym, including a screen name, used by the person.” Presumably, the law includes gamertags, twitter user names, facebook names, and other public online identifiers.
The additional information would not be made public but would be available to law enforcement and social-networking sites, and presumably, video game companies. This gives companies the ability reject people from joining based on their inclusion on the list. The bill, introduced by Sen. Florence Shapiro, is headed to a vote by the Texas House, and should it pass, the governor’s desk.
Chicago attorney and video gamer Wesley Johnson said, "It appears this law would apply to gamertags, although the final definition of what's covered in the law is up to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice."
We’ve put in a call to Microsoft and Sony to find out what the companies' policies are regarding these types of non-public databases, and how it would affect membership on Xbox Live and the PlayStation Network. A Microsoft spokesperson issued the following statement:
“While we don’t have all of the details surrounding this specific bill in Texas or any of the implications it would have for online networks, Microsoft remains committed to abiding by all laws and providing a safe and fun environment for Xbox LIVE members.”
I haven't heard back from Sony on the issue yet, but when I do, I'll pass the word on to you. ..News Source.. by Stephen Johnson
MI- Police work to track sexual offender registry absconders
5-5-2009 Michigan:
Some sexual predators have been known to move methodically through communities, patiently singling out their victims while blending in with society. From the child molester to the date rapist, offenders often target and attack those with whom they're familiar; occasionally they strike randomly. To monitor their movements among society, the state requires each convicted sex offender to report his residence on the Michigan Sex Offender Registry. But some offenders try to dodge the system by going underground. In an effort to root out these absconders, Michigan law enforcement officials are conducting coordinated, statewide sweeps that have netted some positive results — including here in the lakes area.
Lt. Robert Yorke, the Michigan State Police's metro-Detroit area coordinator for sex offender registry enforcement, extolled the last two Operation Verify sweeps as victories for the public and law enforcement.
"The last two campaigns netted positive results," he said. "Rounding up all absconders up is unrealistic. If they choose to go underground and don't want to be found, we just can't put up all the resources in everyday police work. Anytime we can identify an offender who is not registering and find out where they're living — even if it's just one, that's better than none."
The sex offender registry, a database containing the names, addresses, and offense information for all people in Michigan convicted of sexual offenses, was established in 1994 by the Michigan Sex Offenders Registration Act. The law established specific requirements for persons convicted of certain crimes against minors and those convicted of sexually violent crimes.
The Michigan Department of State Police manages the sex offender registry and its data.
The sex offender registry law requires offenders in Michigan to register their addresses with law enforcement officials after conviction but prior to sentencing. Offenders remain on the registry for 25 years or life, depending upon their offense. Offenders released from prison must remain listed on the registry for a minimum of 10 years or the duration of their initial registration period, whichever is longer.
According to Lt. Chuck Loader, statewide sex offender registry enforcement coordinator for the Michigan State Police, offenders who must register for life include those convicted of sexually abusive commercial activity after May 1, 2002. If an offender was convicted of that offense prior to that, their registration duration is 25 years. Child sexually abusive activity/distributing or promoting offenders must register for life if convicted after May 1, 2002. If the offender was convicted before that, their registration duration is 25 years.
Criminal sexual conduct (CSC) charges range in degree and are determined by a prosecuting attorney in each case. First-, second- and third-degree offenses are typically classified as felonies; while fourth-degree offenses are typically classified as two-year misdemeanors. Offenders can be sentenced to anywhere between serving probation to spending 15 years behind bars, depending on their record, age, and the nature of their crime. Regardless, each conviction leads to mandatory registration on the state's sex offender registry.
After registering, offenders convicted of felony violations must report to a law enforcement agency, such as a city/township police department, county sheriff or State Police post, to verify their address during the first 15 days of January, April, July and October of each year. Offenders convicted of a misdemeanor offense must report to a law enforcement agency to verify their address during the first 15 days of January each year.
Incarcerated offenders and those who accurately report that they no longer reside in Michigan aren't subject to verification requirements. Failing to verify an address carries a graduated penalty ranging from a 93-day misdemeanor to a four-year felony prison sentence. Failing to change a sex offender registry address is a felony offense.
Sex offender registry absconders are categorized as those who fail to register; fail to change their address when they move or vacate a residence; fail to verify their address either annually or quarterly; fail to pay the $35 one-time registration fee; fail to update campus information; fail to maintain a valid Michigan driver's license or personal identification card; and those who reside, work, or loiter within 1,000 feet of a school.
The State Police compile a list of targeted sex offender registry violators who have a current verification alert. The list is then sent to sex offender enforcement coordinators. The coordinators print activity reporting forms and distribute them to state troopers at the post or other law enforcement agencies. Targeted offenders are investigated, and the activity reporting forms are completed and submitted to sex offender registry enforcement staff for statistical compilation.
Yorke said that the emphasis of statewide sweeps is to target the sex offender registry absconders or those known offenders who have never registered or previously missed registering.
"We are now in a registration period for felons who missed the quarterly registration," he said. "We look and see who hasn't registered and determine if they have moved or registered elsewhere. Then we start with the last listed address, and speak with people there or neighbors. We run databases to see if they are able to be located. Then we seek warrants and enter the warrant into the statewide network. Sometimes we apprehend them in a traffic stop or any other contact with law enforcement. For worse offenders, we would enlist the help of fugitive apprehension teams or the U.S. Marshals Service, which can access federal databases or find offenders through welfare or Social Security checks, for example."
As of Feb. 3, 2009, 43,964 registered sex offenders were listed on the state's sex offender registry. Of those offenders, 14,788 were incarcerated and 25,467 were required to verify their address with police either annually or quarterly.
Following the January 2009 verification period, 39,427 offenders were found to be in compliance, and 4,537 offenders failed to comply.
The State Police conducted a statewide sweep in March that corralled 150 non-compliant sex offenders; an additional 405 arrest warrants were requested during that Operation Verify effort. That was the state's sixth coordinated sex offender sweep in the last four years.
According to Loader, the first step of the operation is to visit an offender's last known address and make contact. If the address is no longer valid, officials look at the local jurisdictions to see if the offender has checked in there to register. Those considered outside the reporting requirements are flagged as an absconder. The State Police assemble a packet that is disseminated to local and other police and distributed to the area's enforcement coordinator, who then pulls together different teams to track down absconders.
"If the offender is not located at their last reported address, law enforcement will search for offenders through investigation processes such as interviewing neighbors and landlords, speaking with relatives, checking to see if the offender has updated their driver's license or personal identification cards, utilizing intelligence reports and other software available to law enforcement, checking with the post office for forwarding addresses, etc.," Loader said. "In a full-scale operation we assign a half dozen troopers, in addition to city, township and village personnel aided by county deputies. If it's determined (that an offender) left the state, U.S. Marshals are called in. We typically assign two-man teams in an investigation."
Michigan leads the nation in aggressively pursuing non-compliant sex offenders, according to Loader.
"The efforts have been absolutely positive," he said. "Michigan by far leads the nation in aggressively dealing with sex offenders. Most offenders are compliant with the registry requirements, but if not we aggressively posture an initiative to invest in the process and return them to the judicial system."
If law enforcement officials are unable to track down sex offender registry absconders through regular channels, it's only a matter of time before an offender will surface.
"Sometimes when the offender applies for a job, a background check can turn up an offender that left the state and now resides elsewhere, where they didn't notify that state, or Social Security can lead us to them," Loader said. "They think that if they leave the state they'll be safe, but the sex offender registry is a national registry. U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals become involved at that point. They then contact the district attorney and take punitive action."
In the lakes area, the Wixom, Walled Lake, and Waterford police departments, along with the Oakland County Sheriff's Department, participated in the most recent Operation Verify effort.
Loader said only three of the 117 targeted offenders in Oakland County were reconciled during the last two Operation Verify efforts.
"Out of those three absconders, one had an existing warrant, one offender was located out of state and one was located in jail," he said.
However, one of Michigan's most wanted sex offenders, Steven Paul Walton, whose last reported address was listed as being in Waterford, was apprehended in Arizona last August. According to Loader, that arrest gives credence to the importance of public intervention.
"We received an anonymous tip from a concerned citizen in Arizona which led to Walton's arrest," he said. "We encourage people to view the sex offender registry and call in if anything seems suspect."
Walton last reported his address to police on Aug. 15, 2005. He was convicted of second-degree CSC and had been named in an outstanding felony warrant for failure to register prior to being apprehended in Arizona.
The most recent Operation Verify effort involved over 70 federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies and was conducted between Feb. 2 and Feb. 13. Officers conducted compliance checks at 2,220 registered residences, resulting in 150 arrests. Similarly in November 2008, 196 non-compliant sex offenders were arrested along with 682 additional arrest warrants being issued.
Overall, since November 2005, 2,546 sex offenders have been arrested as sex offender registry absconders.
Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard was pivotal in writing the state's sex offender registry act when he was serving in the state Senate in 1994. He's initiated several community sex offender sweeps during his tenure as sheriff.
"The sweeps we conduct create higher recognition that we're going to do them to ensure compliance," he said. "If we didn't conduct these then more would be trying to get away with (failing to register on time). Roundups are always positive and that's why we've been doing them for over 10 years. Criminals are aware that we do this but for those that are non-compliant, they are then charged as a new criminal. It lets them know we are watching and ensuring compliance of the law while protecting women and children."
The Oakland County Sheriff's Department acts as the local police department for 14 contracting communities, including Commerce and Highland townships in the lakes area. The department will not only search for sex offenders in those communities but actually seek charges against absconders, whether they be misdemeanor or felony offenders, to ensure punishment, according to Bouchard.
The sheriff's department conducts sex offender registry sweeps on a quarterly basis. It follows the same protocol as other law enforcement agencies in first approaching an offender's last registered address. If the offender is known to be lodged outside of Oakland County, he or she would be considered a "nationwide pickup" and the sheriff would pursue the offender anywhere in the country.
"We have a warrants team and a Fugitive Apprehension Team (FAT) on standby to obtain the highest-priority offenders," Bouchard said. "It's something we routinely perform. Since we do so much verification, we have a much higher degree of compliance."
According to Bouchard, the money spent on checking up on sex offenders is money well spent.
"This is a high priority for our department," he said. "Sex offenders have high recidivism rates. We will utilize our resources to go after them."
Bob McGhee, the sex offender registry contact for both the Walled Lake and Wolverine Lake police departments, said the Oakland County enforcement coordinator sends local departments faxes listing those in their jurisdiction determined to be sex offender registry absconders. It's McGhee's role to verify the listed individuals' addresses.
"If the sex offender hasn't registered by the quarterly mandate, a hit comes up in the computer that the individual is not in compliance," he said. "Within a week, the coordinator faxes us to verify the address. During a sweep, the coordinator sends us facts on about five to six people who haven't registered. We went out and verified all but one (during the last sweep) and faxed back our findings. The remaining individual was a juvenile whose extended family didn't know where he or his family was living. For all we know he left the country because he was originally from Venezuela."
Sex offender registry sweeps are essential, according to McGhee.
"The Michigan State Police keep up with it," he said. "These sweeps are definitely worthwhile since they keep the offender on his toes. Most of them don't want to register. They play the game because they want to live where they want to live, which may be contrary to restrictions, such the requirement that certain offenders stay at least 1,000 feet away from a school. Some are pedophiles and it's important we keep track of them."
McGhee said the majority of sex offenders approach familiar victims.
"I would say 75 percent of the cases are immediate family member pedophiles," he said. "We don't get too many of those stereotypical rapists hiding in the bushes. Usually they are the type that groom the child and are patient. Many are step-parents. I had one who was in the Navy for 20 years and had four stepchildren. Finally one of the kids said she had had enough. I had a strong enough case for probable cause but when I went to the house he said he knew why I was there and admitted to everything."
According to White Lake Township Police Chief Ronald Stephens, White Lake police didn't participate in either of the last two Operation Verify efforts. However, he praised the Operation Verify program as an integral campaign to root out sex offenders across the state.
"It's a worthwhile objective," he said. "We couldn't participate because it means signing officers out from regular patrol. It's a matter of manpower. We couldn't take people off the streets but we conduct periodic spot checks on our own."
Stephens said participating in efforts like the Operation Verify program comes down to being a financial or manpower decision, and White Lake can't afford the expense or personnel.
"Any effort always becomes a manpower or financial decision," he said. "We would need to take officers away from their daily duties and assign them responsibilities or pay overtime for someone to join a task force, and we're not currently in the position to do so."
The Wixom Police Department participates in the statewide sweeps if absconders are present in the city, but between the last time the sex offender registry was published and the date of the last roundup, each local case in question had been put to rest.
Charlie Yon, an administrative sergeant with the Wixom Police Department, said the city was able to verify offenders' whereabouts prior to the roundups.
"We conducted our own investigation on Feb. 4," he said. "Of the two absconders listed in Wixom, one cleared up his address. The other, Takeshi Saito, listed a false address and never registered with the city and therefore was turned over to the Michigan State Police. Similarly in November 2008, one offender came into compliance; one passed away; and one was not found in our jurisdiction. We only participate if there are absconders in the city. That being said, these roundups are essential to the state. It keeps everyone in compliance with state requirements."
According to the State Police's Loader, plans for subsequent Operation Verify roundups are being considered.
"Throughout the state, federal, state, tribal and local law enforcement may initiate compliance roundups at any time," he said. "Currently, there are several jurisdictions in the state that have ongoing initiatives while others are developing operational plans that will take place throughout the year. The Michigan State Police sex offender registry section routinely provides information on offenders to not only in-state law enforcement, but out-of-state law enforcement whenever a request comes in. Cooperation, collaboration, and investigation remain an ongoing effort by all agencies involved to assure offender compliance and provide for an informed Michigan citizenry."
The public has access to a separate database containing the names, addresses, and listed offense information of persons residing in Michigan convicted of sexual offenses after Oct. 1, 1995, called the Public Sex Offender Registry. In 1999, the public registry became available online.
Under the sex offender registry act, certain offenders are exempt from being listed on the public sex offender registry — despite remaining on the main sex offender registry — including all juveniles and offenders who have successfully completed their probation. Any juvenile convicted of first- or second-degree CSC is listed on the public sex offender registry following his or her 18th birthday.
As of February 2009, 41,339 offenders appeared on the public sex offender registry. ..News Source.. by Leslie Shepard-Owsley
