This story is unique because it evaluates the iPhone applications that have been withdrawn from the Apple store and why. It does get into the "Offender Locator" -PAID VERSION- but feels it was removed because California prohibts the sale of criminal information.
If you have read our Jan-2008 Research paper (specifically reason #4) you will know that, California specifically prohibits using "Registrant Registry Information" commercially.
However, why Apple has not pulled the -FREE VERSION- (Offender Locator Lite) also by ThinAir Wireless, is unknown. It appears that the Apple decision is based on "paying for the information" but that is not what the law specifically prohibits. We will have to see how this plays out...
8-7-2009 National:
Yet another iPhone app has been given the boot by Apple
On Thursday, Apple removed Offender Locator, a popular application that had been among the top ten best-selling paid apps in the company's App store.
The application lets users view the locations of registered sex offenders living in their area.
Though the 99-cent version has been pulled, a free version is still available.
The application was developed by ThinAir Wireless, a GPS-tracking and wireless monitoring company.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment from ABCNews.com. But in a statement released today ThinAir said its paid application "was removed due to unsubstantiated, inaccurate legal concerns."
The specific legal concerns have not been spelled out publicly at this point, but commenters on the technology Web site CNET and the blog TechCrunch suggested the state of California prohibits the sale of criminal information for profit.
In its statement, ThinAir also said that the second version of its application, which had been submitted to Apple last week, included a structure to donate 10 percent of the proceeds from its app to support philanthropic organizations, including Stop Child Predators.
App Pinpoints Registered Sex Offenders in a Neighborhood
In July, ThinAir CEO Howard "Trip" Wakefield told ABCNews.com that the app is one part of the company's suite of "Peace of Mind" products. Other services in markets include a GPS tracking system for teenagers and an alert system that sends subscribers real-time text messages from government agencies about weather and emergency situations.
"The offender locator is kind of like the first step in peace of mind -- who's your neighbor," he said. "Our goal is really to allow parents to be aware of the different people that are just living right around the corner from them."
Although he wouldn't provide specific numbers, he said both the free and paid versions have been downloaded tens of thousands of times since early June. The free version provides fewer locations of sex offenders in the area than the paid version, and only lets users access the app a limited number of times each day.
The app prompts users to type in their address and then generates a map of the area with pinpoints showing where sex offenders have said they live.
Although the information is available for free on each state's sex offender registry Web site, Wakefield said they charge a price for the full version because the technology to power their service is expensive. The information may be free online, but their tool makes it easier for the public to access it, he said.
While ThinAir's paid application is no longer available in the App store, other paid applications that say they track sex offenders, including Sex Offenders Search and StaySafe Personal, remain.
However, ThinAir's Sex Offender Locator isn't the only app that's run into problems. Here are few others.
'Zombie School' Courts Controversy
About two weeks ago, "Zombie School" attained hot-button status for its controversial treatment of school violence.
The app's premise, as articulated by its developer, Retarded Arts, is this:
"Your local campus has been infected by the Zombie Virus!!! Every one is infected!!! Will you run or will you fight to eliminate all the Zombies... You have the control over the Zombie shooting tower that your supporters have made you. Starting with a single bow and arrow start eliminating the Zombies. As you progress, you can buy Grenades, Gun or even upgrade your bow to shoot double or triple arrow at a time!"
The application had been available for 99 cents in Apple's App store before it was pulled by Apple.
Apple, which didn't immediately respond to ABCNews.com' requests for comment, has not explained why it pulled "Zombie School" from its store.
But the application's thorny subject matter presumably had something to do with it. In an email to ABCNews.com, the developers of "Zombie School" acknowledged the sensitive nature of their application but contested the notion that it was in bad taste.
"We fully agree that violence should be kept out of school but the game never was intended to invoke this concept," the developers wrote.
Developers Indicates They Will Demonstrate Extra Caution in the Future
The developers argue that Apple excised the application not out of concern for its message but out of fear of a public backlash. As proof, they cite the fact that "Zombie School" had been approved for more than a week and that it was only removed after tech blogs began covering it.
"They (Apple) approved it and the game went on sale on July 12th 2009," the developers wrote. "This shows that neither us or Apple, clearly, thought that this game would be related to school violence."
Retarded Apps, though, despite their current stance, indicated it would demonstrate extra caution with future projects.
"Because of this controversy, we will now make sure that our future games are miles away from anyone relating it to serious problems like school violence," they said.
Apple Gives 'Porn' App the Boot
The tech community couldn't believe it when it appeared that Apple had approved a salacious iPhone application offering up photos of nude women.
In late June, Macenstein, a blog on all things Apple, wrote, "Today, the iTunes app store became a man." The tech site CNET took another tack: "Apple goes topless," it declared.
But it looks as if Apple's affair with X-rated content wasn't meant to last.
Developer Allen Leung had proudly told Macenstein, "We uploaded nude topless pics today. This is the first app to have nudity."
Leunge may have made one boast too many. The application, "Hottest Girls," which had been available to users of the iPhone and iPod Touch, was soon pulled from the store. "Apple will not distribute applications that contain inappropriate content, such as pornography," Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr said. "The developer of this application added inappropriate content directly from their server after the application had been approved and distributed, and after the developer had subsequently been asked to remove some offensive content.
"This was a direct violation of the terms of the iPhone Developer Program. The application is no longer available on the App Store."
The application previously displayed photos of women in lingerie and bikinis. But earlier this week -- about a week after Apple unveiled a new operating system that includes parental controls that could filter out explicit content -- the developers took off what was left of the clothes and turned up the heat on their product's content.
Neither Apple nor Leung immediately responded to requests for comment from ABCNews.com.
Baby Shaker
The 99 cent Baby Shaker, was pulled from the App Store after it prompted outrage from organizations such as the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome and the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation.
The description of the app said, "See how long you can endure his or her adorable cries before you just have to find a way to quiet the baby down!"
The program displays a black and white picture of a baby with the sound of crying. Users shake the iPhone to stop the crying until Xs appear on the eyes of the baby. The company behind the app, Sikalosoft, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Apple offered an apology soon after it appeared, the same day the App Store reached 1 billion downloads.
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris said the game was "deeply offensive" and should not have been approved for sale, according to The Associated Press.
"We sincerely apologize for this mistake," Kerris said in a statement.
'I Am Rich'
Before Apple yanked this $999.99 iPhone and iPod Touch application from the App Store in August, eight people had purchased the functionless application.
Designed by German developer Armin Heinrich, the program did nothing but broadcast to the world the wealth of the owner. Once downloaded and activated, "I Am Rich" displayed a glowing, red "ruby" on the user's iPhone screen.
In its official App Store description, the developer wrote: "The red icon on your iPhone or iPod Touch always reminds you (and others when you show it to them) that you were able to afford this. ... It's a work of art with no hidden function at all."
According to tech blog Valleywag, one curious patron accidentally downloaded the application, thinking it was a joke. But it seems that seven others -- five in the United States, one in Germany and one in France -- meant to actually buy the pricey program.
'I Am Poor'
When another developer tried to spoof the "I Am Rich" app with a "poor man's version," Apple denied that one, too.
Submitted to Apple later in August, "I Am Poor" was intended to be the ultimate un-status symbol.
"It displays my artistic rendition of the poor college students standard meal -- ramen, mac & cheese, and tuna fish," Hardy Macia, the app's developer and owner of Canterbury, N.H.-based Catamount Software, wrote on his blog after getting Apple's rejection notice.
Apple told him it was turned down because it didn't contain any user-accessible functionality, he said.
Macia said he adapted the app in March so that it's now an E-Book of P.T. Barnum's "Art of Money Getting." But he's still waiting for word from Apple.
"Their process -- why they approve stuff and why they don't -- is really a black-box type of thing," he told ABCNews.com.
'Prohibition 2: Dope Wars'
Still, Apple's vague process has not stopped Macia from trying, and failing, again on another app. He learned in January that his game "Prohibition 2: Dope Wars" had also been rejected.
In the game, users pretend to be drug dealers in New York City trying to make as much money as possible in 30 days by trafficking illegal substances.
Macia said Apple rejected him because it violated the company's guidelines for developers.
In its Software Development Kit (SDK), it says that "Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple's reasonable judgment may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod touch users."
But Macia told ABCnews.com that it's not like iTunes and the App Store don't contain any potentially offensive material. "The iTunes store has so many songs and movies about cocaine and killing people," he said.
And the number of farting applications easily exceeds 100, he added. "I find 137 farting applications objectionable," he said. "I find that a lot ruder than a game."
Macia went back to the drawing board, changed the name of the game to "Prohibition 1: Bootlegger," replaced the names of drugs with the names of alcohol and went back to Apple.
This time, the company approved it. Encouraged, Macia successfully submitted another game "Prohibition 3: Candy Wars," set in a future in which candy is illegal.
Since he'd scored with two games that were only cosmetically different from the original one that had been rejected, he tried once more. But, no such luck: It got the thumbs down again.
My Shoe
When an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoe at President George W. Bush during a news conference in December, he inspired a monument, a host of Web games and, of course, an iPhone app.
But the glory of that game was short-lived.
The popular social media blog Mashable reported in February that "My Shoe," created by a developer in Pakistan, had been given the no-go by the App store team.
The game used the phone's accelerometer to let users pretend to throw a shoe at the former president.
In a rejection letter, Apple told the developer it determined that it could not "post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store because it contains content that ridicules public figures," according to Mashable.
But the developer reportedly took issue with Apple's rejection, writing, "I feel this is huge discrimination against public opinion, as a major portion of world rejects Bush polices on Iraq and attacks on Pakistan."
'Obama Trampoline'
Patrick Alphonso, president of Swamiware, received a similar response from Apple when he submitted "Obama Trampoline."
The game, he thought, was pretty innocuous. You choose a U.S. politician from either side of the political aisle and have him or her jump on a trampoline in the Oval Office. Using the accelerometer, you could make Sarah Palin do a flip, tilt a pants-less Bill Clinton to the side or turn Barack Obama upside down.
Having already successfully submitted strategy, word and card games, he expected it to get the green light. But Apple gave a firm "no."
"I was shocked. I was expecting to make millions of dollars on this game," Alphonso told ABCNews.com. "It's fun. People were crazy about Obama, about Palin. The artwork was great."
The reason?
"They said it ridiculed public officials," he said, adding that the rule seemed to be: no cartoons of politicians.
But when he explored the back alleys of the App Store, he said he found another approved app that also featured a cartoon of a politician: "Pocket Arnold."
"[It] really killed me," he said.
But when he e-mailed Apple for further explanation, he said the company didn't provide more specifics.
iBoob
iBoob is another program to land in the App Store junk pile.
Developed by Mystic Game Development (MGD), the app does just about what the name implies. When you shake your iPhone or iPod Touch, you also shake an animated image of a woman's chest.
Apple told the developer it was "inappropriate sexual content," according to PCWorld.com.
But MGD Development Director John van der Burg said, "Watching an episode of Baywatch on TV shows a lot more than iBoobs. Besides that, iBoobs is just a 3-D model and not even real."
'Slasher'
The developer behind "Slasher" was also told his app was out of line.
Created by Josef Wankerl of Austin, Texas, the app displays a kitchen knife on the screen and plays the "horror" sound when you make a stabbing motion with the phone or iPod Touch.
He said it appeared August 6 but was yanked August 7.
Apple told him it violated the part of the guidelines that objected to "obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content," he said.
"I have no problem with people objecting to 'Slasher.' After all, everyone has their own personal taste. I do have a problem with the App Store refusing to publish 'Slasher' because they don't like it," he wrote to ABCNews.com in an e-mail.
He also said it bothers him that other approved Apps could also be seen as obscene or offensive. "Bar Fight Bottle," for example, lets you pretend to smash a bottle with your phone and other apps serve as pretend pistols, shot guns and ray guns.
He said he improved the app and was told, upon resubmitting it, that it had been approved. But despite weeks of e-mails, the status still says "Removed from Sale."
'Freedom Time'
Although Apple is notoriously tight-lipped in its external relationships, one intrepid developer was able to get none other than the man behind the curtain, co-founder Steve Jobs himself, to weigh in on his rejection.
Almost on a whim, Alec Vance and Court Batson submitted "Freedom Time" to the App Store gatekeepers last summer.
"It's been a long eight years, but a new dawn is coming to America and the world. Our long international nightmare is almost over," the pair wrote on their company Juggleware LLC's Web site.
"In anticipation of that sweet moment," the company unveiled its app that gave a precise (to the tenth of a second) countdown to the inauguration of President Obama and the end of the Bush administration.
But Apple wouldn't have any of it.
"I thought there was a decent chance they would reject it but it was a chance I was willing to take," Vance told ABCNews.com. "I was disappointed."
He said Apple told him the app was defamatory. But Vance disagreed and decided to let the company's CEO know about it.
Surprisingly, Jobs wrote back: "Even though my personal political leanings are democratic, I think this app will be offensive to roughly half our customers. What's the point? Steve"
Vance wasn't entirely pleased with the company but was impressed by the CEO and took it as a good omen, he said. ..Source.. by LIAM BERKOWITZ and KI MAE HEUSSNER
Friday, August 7, 2009
Sex Offender Locator App Yanked from App Store
ME- Sex Offender Sues State, District Attorney
8-7-2009 Maine:
A convicted sex offender from Steuben is suing the State and a District Attorney, claiming they violated his rights.
Hancock and Washington County District Attorney Michael Povich and Maine State Police Chief Patrick Fleming are both named in the suit brought by Frank Sawyer.
He was convicted of four counts of sexual abuse of a minor back in 1999.
Sawyer claims that because he was required to register as a sex offender, his right to privacy was violated.
Sawyer says he would not have pleaded guilty had he known he'd be required to register for ten years. ..Source.. by Amy Erickson
NJ- Offender Locator: Is the new iPhone app a good thing?
8-7-2009 National:
Now you can have sex offender information on your iPhone - but should you?
Cruising for iPhone apps yesterday I found Offender Locator. It gives you access to information about the location of sex offenders in your area (or anywhere in the U.S.) posted on a map using your iPhone's GPS. You can download the app for a mere ninety-nine cents or test out the "lite" version for free.
The sales rhetoric on their page is about what you'd expect: "They know where you and your family are... now it's time to turn the tables." In some ways, my discomfort with this app echoes how I have always felt about registering sex offenders and disclosing that information to the public.
But the Offender Locator app takes my objections to the next level.
I hold what I have found to be the unpopular opinion that once a person has finished serving his or her sentence, the offender shouldn't be further stigmatized (as if being on parole, not able to vote and having to disclose your criminal background every time you apply for a job isn't stigma enough).
If sex offenders continue to pose a risk to the public, either don't let them out or monitor them electronically, but don't give everyone access to their home address. Leave that information in the hands of law enforcement, where it belongs.
First, by making the information mobile, it cuts down whatever "thinking period" there was between finding the information and possible acts of violence or harassment. With approximately 20 million iPhones sold, that's a lot potential anti-sex offender "vigilantes."
Secondly, there are questions about whether it's ethical for a company to be profiting by selling this information. Offender Locator is currently listed among the "Top Ten Apps" - meaning that the creator is probably making thousands of dollars a day selling it.
It may not even be legal in at least one state (California). The company that puts this app out compiles it from state databases, which are public. But they place disclaimer on it: the information may not be up-to-date, since databases are constantly being updated.
And at least one comment on the iTunes store page describing Offender Locator suggests that the number of offenders listed in the app do not match the number in his state registry, leading to questions about just how often the information on Offender Locator is updated and how it's checked for accuracy.
There are inherent problems with Megan's Law, the law that requires sex offenders to register, and this app brings them to the fore again. For example, offenders must register for life - including juveniles. That's right, if your 15-year-old child makes a dumb mistake and is convicted, he is registered for life. What's worse, a recently released, federally funded study indicates that Megan's Law may not even work.
Lest I be accused of favoring the rights of sex offenders over the protection of our families, let me unequivocally say that sex crimes against children are heinous and should be punished sternly. And, while I can disagree with whether that punishment should involve a lifelong stigma, I recognize that is now the law. But do we need access to it between our flashlight app and our Trivia Quiz app? I say not. ..Source.. by Maria E. Andreu
A Couple of Interesting reviews of the iPhone "Sex Offender Locator" Service
These stories reviewed the iPhone "Sex Offender" locator software and are worth reviewing..
8-7-2009 National:
STORY-1:
iPhone 'Offender Locator' app review
The 'Offender Locator' is sitting at number four in the top 10 iPhone apps today. It seems that everyone wants to find out who their local neighborhood sex offender is.
After covering so many stories of teachers assaulting students and other unsundry tales of sex assault, we decided to give this app a try.
Before downloading it yourself though, remember that ignorance is bliss. Within seconds of purchasing this $.99 app we located no less than fifteen sex offenders living in a five mile radius of my home, including one just around the corner. Searching the area around my friend's home yielded over 40 offenders within only four miles. Neither of us live in "high crime" neighborhoods.
You can view the offenders as a list, or use the "map all" feature to see just where the offenders are in relation to you. Seeing my green pin surrounded by all those bad guy's red pins made me feel a little bit overwhelmed.
Recalling that people who urinate in public, get caught getting it on with their lovers in bathrooms, and take "naked pumpkin runs" sometimes get slapped with a sex offender charge, we had to wonder how many of these red pins represented actual rapists and child molesters.
To answer this, all we had to do was look at the offender's detailed profile. Here we found intimitate details about each offender including a list of all their convictions and their full name, D.O.B., race, sex, height, weight, address, and a full mugshot. Some listings however did not include a list of convictions - are these the public urinators?
So what makes this different then pulling the info from registered offender databases found on your computer? The app uses GPS so that one can find out how many predators are in any given area, at any given time. (Not reaslly true because it merely shows where these people sleep.) Bored at a barbecue? Look up the local sex offenders! Staying the night at a friend's place? Look up convicts in her apartment building. The information is literally at one's fingertips.
Honestly though, who needs to know this stuff? It'll just lead to worry and paranoia.
..Source.. by Jordan & Samantha O&C
Story-2:
You have reached your destination sex offender: Let the iPhone GPS App get you there faster.
There’s something comforting about the cherry voice of Homer Simpson delivering you Tom Tom GPS directions on your iPhone. That is, of course, until that friendly voice delivers you to the lynching of your nearest sex offender. Yes, navigating those tricky turnpikes and motorway exits to get to that hard-to-find sex offender, just got easier with the Offender Locator app from iTunes.
I’d like to say that I’m regularly scanning the media about relevant cybersafety issues, however, the truth is that I’m usually feeling too guilty about not finishing the Convergence Generation project to allow myself to get lost in news reports – ironically it’s already after lunch now and I seem to have spent the morning reading media articles about sex offender registries. Anyway, I digress, so how did I stumble upon Offender Locator? Last night I was hunting round for an app for the iPod Touch to enable us to use them as a survey tool for students (Surveyor is my pick so far – any other ideas are welcome) and when I went to the iTunes Store I noticed that the Offender Locator tool was the fourth most popular paid download app:
.....
Intrigued, I clicked on the icon for more information. I thought it was going to be a joke game reminiscent of the old skool palm apps (e.g., gaydar, fart detector, etc.) that jokingly ‘identified’ offensive farting behaviour just by pointing it and ’scanning’ them in a mock star-trek “away team” way (Yes, I know, I am a gerd). Imagine my surprise when I realised this was actually a bona fide app, and the “offenders” in question weren’t those letting ’silent but violents’ distract you, or your nearest colleagues needing distraction with gaydar scans, but one of the “nearly 500,000 registered sex offenders in the US”.The “P*M” (Peace of Mind) product is sold to enable “anyone” to “find” sex offenders in the US that live next door to them. The ethos of the site is that “Knowledge = Safety”, and in this case the knowledge is knowing where sex offenders live, and safety is derived from your ability to “turn the tables” and control where your kids play. On the surface that kind of makes sense, however, digging a little deeper things become problematic.
As a safety strategy sex-offender registries are hypothesised to work by helping parents and caregivers enable their children to avoid sex offenders, either by controlling the places where children would be exposed to them when playing, or by enabling the community to identify them and run them out of town, thus enabling kids to play safely without this fear. This safety strategy is limited in my opinion for the following reasons:
1.) As this ABC news story notes the state lists from which these devices take their raw data are not always “up to date or accurate”. Um, I think I’d see this as a major stumbling block, if the lists are not accurate then how effective can this approach be?
2.) Furthermore reports from the US of children being added to the list as sex offenders call into question the utility of a list of “predators” and produce a lot of confusion or derision about such lists, further deminishing their power.
3.) Additionally, if we were to frame all sex offenders as equally predatory (which given that some kids have ended up on the list would be a real jump in logic), wouldn’t we hypothesise that they may, um, I don’t know, travel further than their neighbourhood and “risk” the safety of children in “safe” communities?
4.) Concerns have been raised (see Asmara Tekle-Johnson) below that by humiliating and placing sex offenders on public lists and haranguing, harassing, and isolating them from communities we may produce the ideal conditions for mental stress, break down, and subsequent reoffending… which, I don’t know, kind of defeats the purpose doesn’t it?
5.) And, ironically this is where we get to the heart of the issue. The problem with knowledge = safety is that the knowledge that offender locator is selling us implicitly is that sex offenders are “out there” somewhere and that to keep our kids safe we need to control their play and keep them away from the bad guys. However, as Asmara Tekle-Johnson from Thurgood Marshall School of Law notes in this abstract, over 90% of sex offences are committed by family members and acquaintances of children. It’s a sad fact, and one that I think society would rather not admit, but the reality is that stranger danger – be it offline down the street or online - is rarely the reason for child sexual abuse. This is the knowledge that can keep children safer.
Instead of framing sex offenders as scary abducting strangers, of which some, though few are, we need to continue to educate young people that acquaintances and family members should not be excluded from suspicion or blame as a category of people simply because they aren’t the freaky guy down the road. Likewise, online contacts and meetings may present some (though little) risk to young people sexually, however date-rape and more subtle forms of sexual coercion and forced sex from same-aged peers in their schools are much more likely to present abuse scenarios for young people. With this in mind, the NZ Police’s Keeping Ourselves Safe programme, though the videos are a bit retro, hits the nail on the head by highlighting the relevance of acquaintance assault rather than focusing solely on stranger danger. Tim Gill’s book No Fear: Growing up in a risk averse society highlights this and other ‘child protection’ issues excellently.
So while Offender Locator is touted as another tool to help parents keep their kids safe, I’m wondering if it again will do more of the opposite in practice.
Will it simply enable more people to find, isolate, and target sex offenders, or supposed sex offenders, more quickly, easily, and conveniently? Will it enable us to sleep more soundly knowing that the boogie man out there can’t get to our kids while the threat for them remains?
Or will Homer Simpson’s cheerful voice emerge from our GPS unit and alert us as we continue down this path that we need to “turn around when possible”? ..Source.. by John Fenaughty
FL- Miami threatens to fine state over Julia Tuttle Causeway sex-offender camp
I find it really stupid of Miami to get in a hissing match w/the state, after all I think it is the state that has control of the legislature and could cause Miami a world of hurt. Well, what does one expect from the place with the dumbest residency laws. Hopefully Miami will get nailed in the courts very soon, after all, who caused the problem? Hummm, just a minute, is this another way cities can USE sex offenders to generate income?
8-7-2009 Florida:
In the latest twist in the fate of sex offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway, the city of Miami says state authorities have violated city code.
In the latest push to relocate a camp of sex offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway, a Miami code enforcement board this week said it will fine the state if the offenders are not relocated.
At a meeting Wednesday night, the city code enforcement board found the state guilty of violating city code. The city plans to send a letter to Gov. Charlie Crist and the Florida Department of Transportation in the next few days giving the state 24 hours to move the people living under the bridge, City Manager Pete Hernandez said. If the state doesn't comply, the city will fine the state $250 a day.
The latest legal wrangling over the camp of about 70 sex offenders started last month.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued Miami-Dade County, arguing that the state's rule that sex offenders must live at least 1,000 feet from where children congregate supersedes the county's stricter 2,500-foot ordinance.
The next day, Miami sued the state, saying the camp is too close to Picnic Island No. 4, an island park in Biscayne Bay accessible only by boat. The sex offenders are monitored by the Florida Department of Corrections.
Ron Book -- who is chairman of Miami-Dade's Homeless Trust and has been working to relocate those living under the causeway -- said he wasn't surprised by the code enforcement board's actions.
He said he hoped the decision doesn't cause any friction with the state in the effort to find a place to move the offenders.
``No one contests there's a nuisance under that causeway,'' he said. ``The city wants to get the state's attention.''
Book said he's working to find suitable housing for the offenders.
Using monies from the county's Homeless Trust, Book on Thursday authorized checks for first and last month rent for three sex offenders to move from the bridge.
The search continues for a location that would be able to house a larger number of offenders. He has found a centrally located building that is ``totally unoccupied that has a lot of promise'' but declined to say where it is.
He recently found a private apartment building in South Miami-Dade to house eight people -- but he said they aren't happy about moving so far south where public transportation is limited. ..Source.. by JENNIFER LEBOVICH
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Apple pulls another popular application from the App Store
8-6-2009 National:
You may have read about a popular two dollar dictionary called Ninjawords being pulled yesterday from the App Store over objectionable content. You also may have read the article last week about the application that locates sex offenders in a neighborhood on your iPhone.
Well, according to Tech Crunch, Offender Locator has been in the top 10 paid applications in the last several weeks yet has now been completely removed from the App Store without a trace. If you aren’t familiar with what it does, it basically showed, using little red balloons, where sex offenders in your selected area live.
That probably wasn’t part of the problem though.
There is speculation that because Offender Locater had a price, it could be violating California law.
Why?
Well according to some Tech Crunch readers, selling people’s information for profit is illegal. However, the information used within the program is public, so that doesn't make a lot of sense. While this has not been announced as the reason the application was pulled.
Authorities also might have pressured Apple to pull it out of fear of vigilantes going after sex offenders.
But again, the flaws in the App Store are brought to the surface once again. Is there a screening process at all? There are quite a few applications that have come out lately that are pretty subjective in their purpose, but one that could possibly be violating a state law should never get passed.
The developers of Offender Locator also might sue Apple, so we’ll see how this plays out.
..Source.. by Adam MillsFL- Picture Depicts Kids Present At Sex Predator Camp
Hey world, even former sex offenders have family and likely someone was visiting!
8-6-2009 Florida:
There are fresh worries and renewed anger about the camp under and around the Julia Tuttle Causeway--one populated by more than 70 sexual offenders--after a new picture was revealed at a commission meeting Thursday.
Miami's code enforcement board showed pictures of children playing under the causeway at their city hall meeting Wednesday night. There was worry the children were living with relatives in the squalid camp, but those concerns appear to be unfounded.
Still, its cause for louder outcry that the state do something about offenders it is supposed to supervise upon their release from prison—something more, that is, than let them set up camp on Biscayne Bay.
Miami commissioner Marc Sarnoff said, "It is an abject failure of the State of Florida to continue to have sex offenders under the bridge."
The failure has blame being spread in many directions. That includes the critics of the Miami-Dade ordinance that say sexual offenders and predators must stay at least 2,500 feet away from any place where children congregate, including schools, parks, and daycare facilities. The state rule requires offenders to stay at least 1,000 feet away from such places.
The critics argue local restrictions make it doubly tough for sexual offenders who have served their time to find a place to live. The Miami-Dade Homeless Trust chairman, Ron Book, keeps pressing for an answer but a lot of help is not forthcoming, at least not yet.
Book says that whatever one's view of the people under the Tuttle causeway, it is not serving community safety to have them living there. What's more, he worries about legal action to force them out, without first making sure there is housing available somewhere. Book says, "Having 71 offenders running around the community without knowing where they are is a worse solution."
The frustrations keep growing and the national—indeed international—coverage keeps building. It is not a pretty picture, but from the governor's office to local government halls, no one has stepped up yet to embrace a solution. ..Source.. by Michael Williams
CA- Jerry Brown denounces court order on release of California prisoners
8-6-2009 California:
The attorney general says state officials are deciding whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court a ruling requiring a reduction of nearly 43,000 prisoners over the next two years.
Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown has denounced a court order to release more than one out of every four state prisoners in California as counterproductive interference by judicial activists, and said state officials were still deliberating Wednesday whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
While acknowledging that Tuesday's ruling by a three-judge federal panel aims to resolve the same problems with severe prison overcrowding that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to, Brown said the court's latest edict on how to improve the corrections system has only contributed to the "Kafka-esque nightmare" confronting the cash-strapped state.
Federal court edicts already have imposed 19 consent decrees on state agencies trying to improve conditions in the prisons, requiring state officials to devote scarce resources to legal reports and to pay the costs of prisoners' lawsuits as well as those of the state attorneys who defend against them, Brown said.
"There are too many cooks in the kitchen here," Brown said of the court orders governing prison management. "There's no limit to what the courts want the state to spend on its prisoners."
Brown, who is expected to run for governor next year, said he would recommend to Schwarzenegger that the state appeal the court decision imposing a cap on California's prison population that will require the release of nearly 43,000 prisoners over the next two years.
The judges gave the state 45 days to come up with a plan for reducing the number in state custody or face a court order on how to do it.
Asked if Californians were in peril if the state meets the court's demand to bring the prison population down to 137% of designed capacity, or 115,080 instead of the roughly 158,000 currently in state prisons, Brown wavered, noting that about 10,000 prisoners are already released every month after completing their sentences.
A 70% recidivism rate keeps them coming back though, he said.
"The formula for letting out 40,000 prisoners and cutting cops is not a smart one," Brown said, referring to the budget crises forcing local communities to make trims in law enforcement.
Although he excoriated the judges' order as unnecessary and costly interference in a problem already being tackled by the governor and the Legislature, Brown acknowledged that state lawmakers also were to blame for letting partisan politics prevent their agreement on reforms needed to improve rehabilitation programs, pre-release screening and parole.
The judges' involvement in the prison crisis contributes to "an endless process of bureaucratic regulation," Brown said, but he also conceded that the order could provide the necessary "stimulus" for lawmakers to work out a long-overdue reform plan. ..Source.. by Carol J. Williams
IL- Sex-offender status stalls would-be barber
8-6-2009 Illinois:
State refuses to grant license to man after recommendations from parole officer, psychologist
To the customers who've flocked to his small Braidwood barbershop for 50 years, Joseph "Muzzy" Muzzarelli is a master of the flattop cut and straight-razor shave who offers an endless stream of true-life tales, no extra charge.
His hometown recognized his longevity last month, awarding him a plaque that now hangs from his shop wall and naming him the 4th of July parade's grand marshal.
But as Muzzarelli, 79, considers retiring and installing his son Jay as the maestro at Muzzy's Barbershop, he finds himself embroiled in one of the nation's most emotionally charged issues -- how and if sexual offenders should be brought back into society. Most people in town don't know it, but his son Jay Muzzarelli, 43, was convicted in 2003 of aggravated criminal sexual abuse involving a 7-year-old girl in Kankakee County.
Yet his licensed, court-appointed clinical psychologist, Dr. Jim Simone, calls the younger Muzzarelli an outlier -- no prior criminal history and one of only about 20 people out of more than 500 to successfully complete their probation and court-ordered sex offender treatment program.
The state initially rejected his application to become a licensed cosmetologist, but after a hearing last year at which his parole officer and psychologist took the unusual step of testifying on his behalf, an administrative law judge and a state committee recommended the license be granted. Their conditions included two years of probation and that there be a sign in Muzzy's Main Street window warning customers that a sex offender works there.
In December, the state regulatory agency's top official overruled them, finding that it was "against the public's interest" for Muzzarelli to be a cosmetologist who could potentially come into contact with children and legally perform treatments -- like body wraps -- beyond just cutting hair.
The case now has landed in Will County Circuit Court, where a judge will decide whether a license should go to someone who fulfilled his sentence -- and whose close friends have stuck by him, with one even naming him godfather to his children -- but has committed a particularly horrific crime.
To Joseph Muzzarelli, leaning back in his cast-iron barber's chair recently, it seems simple. His son did all the law required of him, though Muzzarelli -- despite his son's guilty plea and repeated, unequivocal admissions of guilt since -- doesn't believe Jay abused the girl.
"I pray every night that this is cleared. ... I'll keep fighting for him if I have to wait to be 100 years old," said Muzzarelli, who'd willingly put up the sex offender warning sign in his window. "You want to stick around to see everything straighten out. Oh, I hope I live long enough to see that his path is clear."
A spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation declined to comment in detail about its finding against Muzzarelli. "We think it's a fairly high standard that must be met for someone to be able to have a license in light of a conviction where it has involved such [a] type of encounter with a child," Diane Para, the department's attorney, said at the October license hearing, according to a transcript.
Para said the department director had twice in recent years denied probationary licenses to sex offenders who were recommended for them by the oversight committee and a judge.
Braidwood residents struggle with the question. The Muzzarellis are well-known and most people interviewed said they'd stick by the family. Some said they didn't know how the community would react, but believed loyalists would continue to frequent the shop while others would see the sex-offender sign and never set foot inside again.
"I didn't know about any of this but I know both of them and, yes, I would trust them," town Commissioner Fay Smith said, adding she has been getting her hair cut at Muzzy's for some 40 years and would continue to go if Jay took over.
Police are aware Muzzarelli is a registered sex offender, Acting Police Chief Brandon Meyers said. Various officers get their hair cut there, Meyers said, adding the town would be fine with "whatever the courts decide."
Richard Burton, the family's attorney, said it was "astonishing" that his client hadn't been granted a probationary license. He declined to let Muzzarelli be interviewed, but he was questioned at length during his license hearing last year.
"My intent is to provide a safe barbershop for the community, carry on my dad's tradition of cutting hair in this one location and never branching out, be an active member of society, provide for myself," Jay Muzzarelli said at his October hearing. "I don't want to hurt anybody. I go by the motto, 'No more victims.' ..Source.. by Steve Schmadeke Tribune reporter
CA- Legislation signed giving law enforcement additional resources to monitor, prosecute sex offenders
Obviously the Gov's cronies are still misleading him as to who is committing the majority of new sex crimes, it is not former sex offenders. Further, what does the type of residence have to do with monitoring former offenders? Any ideas would be helpful..
8-6-2009 California:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today announced the signing of two bills that will give law enforcement officials additional resources to more effectively monitor and prosecute registered sex offenders and sexually violent predators.
"We must do everything in our power to provide law enforcement with the resources necessary to protect the public," said Governor Schwarzenegger. "Public safety is a top priority and with these bills, we will be able to better monitor and prosecute sex offenders and sexually violent predators to the fullest extent of the law - making our streets safer from these dangerous predators."
The following bills have been signed into law by the Governor:
SB 583 by Senator Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta) requires the Department of Justice to record the type of residence at which registered sex offenders reside and to provide the information to state agencies for investigative and law enforcement purposes. This will allow law enforcement officials, licensing authorities and child care officials to cross check the residencies of sex offenders.
SB 669 by Senator Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta) provides that a sexually violent predator's refusal to participate in treatment may be considered evidence in a jury trial to show that his or her condition has not changed.This one will be declared unconstitutional as it has already been decided by the U.S. Sup court. One cannot be punished for refusal of medical treatment which includes psych treatment. However, as usual there is no checking of constitutionality of a lawmakers proposals, its no wonder the state is broke.
Throughout his Administration, the Governor has approved tough measures that protect victims and increase public safety, including:
In 2008, the Governor signed a package of bills that increases the victim notification requirement from 45 to 60 days prior to when a sex offender is released from an institution, protects victims of continuous child abuse by prohibiting an offender from going within 35 miles of the child's residence and makes clarifications to Jessica's Law for more effective implementation. Additionally, the Governor also signed a measure that will shield the identities of victims of certain sexual assault from being disclosed to the public.
In 2007, the Governor approved legislation to increase penalties for child rapists, child pornographers and Internet predators. He also approved measures to: create a sex offender management board to help better track dangerous parolees; make use of GPS to monitor sex offenders a permanent program and require registered sex offenders to disclose their registration status to prospective employers when applying for certain jobs and prohibit child molesters from employing minors. Additionally, the Governor established the High Risk Sex Offender Task Force to make immediate recommendations on improving the state's program to track and monitor paroled sex offenders. The Governor extended the timeline and expanded the scope of the task force to include sexually violent predators. He also ordered the implementation of the task force's recommendations that include ten initiatives to help protect communities from paroled sex offenders.
In 2006, the Governor signed the Sex Offender Control and Containment Act, a comprehensive bill that enacts tougher penalties for sex crimes including child pornography, assault with intent to commit a sex crime and using the Internet to lure children. Among its many provisions, the bill keeps sex offenders away from schools, parks and other places where children socialize and spend time.
In 2005, the Governor signed legislation to create the California Sexual Violence Victim Services Fund and to require that consideration be given to the age of the victim when sexually violent predators are placed for outpatient treatment.
In 2004, the Governor signed legislation to put the Megan's Law database on the Internet, which requires the information of certain sex offenders' conviction, physical description and home address to be listed and available to the general public. ..Source.. by Californian.com
MA- A Loss for Voting Rights
8-6-2009 Massachusetts:
Voting rights advocates have had little success challenging felon disenfranchisement laws in court. Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in Boston, became the latest federal court to uphold a ban on voting by convicted felons. Despite these setbacks, the cause is important. Voting rights advocates should keep fighting in the courts, state legislatures and Congress.
In 2000, Massachusetts changed its laws to prohibit felons in prison from voting. Until then, it was one of only three states that let felons vote from behind bars. Even with the change, Massachusetts remains one of just 13 jurisdictions that disenfranchise felons while they are incarcerated but not after they are freed.
A group of prisoners sued, arguing that their disenfranchisement violated the Voting Rights Act. The felons whose right to vote was taken away in Massachusetts are disproportionately black and Hispanic, the prisoners said, partly because of a bias in the justice system.
The appeals court, voting 2 to 1, threw out the suit at an early stage. When it passed the Voting Rights Act, the majority said, Congress did not intend to prohibit states from disenfranchising incarcerated felons.
In dissent, Judge Juan Torruella argued that the ban violated the Voting Rights Act’s plain language, which refers to adding voting qualifications in a manner that results in the denial of the right to vote on account of race. He would have allowed the case to proceed further so the plaintiffs could try to prove their claim.
Judge Torruella was right. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, reached a similar conclusion in another case, ruling that the plaintiffs should be able to try to prove their case. In a New York suit, Judge Sonia Sotomayor — in a dissent that has gotten considerable attention — also argued that the Voting Rights Act applies to felon disenfranchisement laws.
Letting the case go forward would not have meant the prisoners would have won. But it would have recognized that the law could violate the Voting Rights Act, depending on the facts that emerged about it in court.
The United States aspires to be a nation in which the government rules by the consent of the governed people. Prisoners do not cease to be people.
Felon disenfranchisement is also bad prison policy. In recent years, the prison system has all but given up on trying to rehabilitate prisoners. Allowing felons to vote is good preparation for making them free, law-abiding citizens. ..Editorial.. by NY Times
AR- Roberts: DNA sample given under false name to protect task force
8-6-2009 Arkansas:
Faulkner County Justice of the Peace Jerry Roberts said he provided a DNA sample under a fictitious name for the 1990 abduction, rape and murder of Pamela Faye Felkins. Roberts provided the sample to rule out his brother Ed, who operated a business in the proximity of Felkins’ place of employment, Roberts said Tuesday afternoon.
According to Roberts, who was the chairman of the task force investigating the Felkins murder, Bobby Brown, then an investigator with the Faulkner County Sheriff’s Department, wanted a DNA sample to rule out Ed Roberts’ involvement in the Felkins murder after Jerry Roberts and Bobby Brown “had words.”
Jerry Roberts said Brown was in charge of the evidence room and had the only key. Roberts maintains Brown told him that evidence was not being forwarded to the crime lab because the evidence room was a mess.
“It is obvious by not taking the evidence to the lab, he was withholding evidence,” Roberts said.
When Jerry Roberts continued to ask why the evidence seized during the investigation had not been taken to the state crime lab, “He became argumentative and threatened me,” Jerry Roberts said.
Jerry Roberts said requesting a DNA sample from his brother would have caused problems within the task force because many of the task force members knew his brother. Jerry Roberts said he and Brown then decided on a plan where Jerry Roberts would submit his DNA under a fictitious name. Jerry Roberts said he used a cigarette to collect his DNA and then placed the DNA in an envelope, which he licked. He asked then-Sheriff Marty Montgomery’s approval of the plan and, according to Jerry Roberts, Montgomery “agreed it would be a good idea.”
Montgomery could not be reached for comment by press time.
Jerry Roberts said he left fingerprints on the envelop as well as the saliva so it could be used to identify his DNA if the evidence was tampered with later. He said the sample was requested to “discredit me and my family.”
“This would eliminate his DNA easily. If it was brought up in front of the task force, it would have broken up the task force,” Jerry Roberts said, noting that the DNA could be checked to see if a sibling or parent of the provider matched DNA material found at the crime scene.
“My brother was ill, and I didn’t want to break up the task force,” Jerry Roberts said.
Much later, Ed Roberts submitted a DNA sample and was officially ruled out as a person of interest.
Jerry Roberts’ scenario is one that Brown said didn’t happen.
“He did that all on his own,” Brown said Monday afternoon.
Brown admitted that Ed Roberts’ DNA was sought because he ran a business near Felkins’ workplace.
“The alleged person had to have walked in front of his business, so he had to be eliminated,” Brown said.
Brown said he didn’t learn about Jerry Roberts submitting a DNA sample until “after the fact.”
Brown acknowledged that Roberts has said Brown was “covering up” the murder.
“I never hid anything,” he said, noting that as the chairman of the task force, Jerry Roberts was in charge of getting evidence to the crime lab.
Brown said he never knew Felkins because when the murder occurred, he was working for the Pine Bluff Police Department.
“I had no knowledge of the case until I joined the task force. I was just one of many on the task force,” he said. “When the task force was formed, I was not involved. I was pulled more into it for support.”
Brown said since Jerry Roberts was in charge, he should have known what was submitted to the crime lab. Now, Brown said he has no authority over the evidence in question.
“I have been out of that picture for a while,” he said, noting that he has been in jail administration since 2005.
Sheriff Karl Byrd, who according to Jerry Roberts, has also not submitted evidence to the crime lab, said that Roberts “had plenty of opportunities to submit these things himself.”
Byrd said the task force and many of the things that Jerry Roberts has talked about “occurred before I was involved.”
Byrd has employed a part-time officer to work on the case in addition to investigators and the task force.
“We have not forgotten. We are working on this case every opportunity we get,” Byrd said.
Byrd said there was no need for Jerry Roberts to submit the DNA sample under a fictitious name.
“His brother was available,” Byrd said. “He cooperated fully. There was no reason for Jerry Roberts to do what he did. His brother was never a serious suspect, but because of his proximity he needed to be eliminated.”
Although Jerry Roberts said Byrd has evidence that still needs to be sent to the state crime lab, Byrd said he can’t second guess his investigative team.
“It is important to protect the integrity of the case and the integrity of the family,” Byrd said. “We are working this case actively. The things that need to be done are being done.”
Byrd said he cannot get into the details of the case as it is an open investigation. The release of details is another debate between Byrd and Jerry Roberts.
Byrd said information is used to weed out suspects. Releasing information to the general public “makes it a lot harder to work,” according to Byrd.
“I have investigators on it. They will determine what needs to be done by the sheriff,” Byrd said. ..Source.. by Holly Latimer
MI- Hysteria over parolees threatens rehab efforts
8-6-2009 Michigan:
Recidivism and crime rates have fallen in the last two years, as parole rates have gone up. You wouldn't know it, though, by listening to Warren Mayor James Fouts, or Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper, or many other politicians and pundits across the state who suggest that hordes of newly released felons are putting us all at risk. Fearmongering and hysteria threaten to take Michigan back to the failed lock-'em-up-'till-they-drop prison policies of the last three decades.
The latest battleground is Warren, where Fouts has accused the state of turning his city into a dumping ground for sex offenders and drug addicts. He wants the Self-Help Addiction Rehabilitation (SHAR) center on Chicago Road to move, charging that he was not properly notified that the residential treatment center would take ex-prisoners after opening in June. Not so, say SHAR administrators, who showed me a July 1 letter, signed by Fouts, welcoming SHAR to Warren.
In any case, this beef has generated more heat than light. "Warren is not a penal colony," proclaimed a sign across from SHAR on Saturday. When I spoke to protesters, they objected to prisoners getting "early releases" and feared Michigan would become a dumping ground for California convicts.
In truth, the state has granted no early releases. All released prisoners, including those at SHAR, have served at least a minimum sentence. As for California, even if Michigan takes some of its inmates, it would send them back before they're paroled.
Michigan has increased parole rates, including those for sex offenders, who make up 20% of Michigan's 47,500 prisoners. But state prisons still hold more than 11,000 inmates who have served their sentences and are eligible for parole. It's worth noting, too, that most sex offenders are not pedophiles. A 17-year-old boy convicted of having sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend, for example, would be classified as a sex offender and placed on the state's sex offender registry.
Fouts objects to SHAR's location across from a private volleyball club. But where should SHAR go? So far, the Warren center has two dozen clients, mostly parolees who come from the Macomb area. About half are sex offenders. No one wants them around, and state law restricts them from living within 1,000 feet of a school, park, day care center or playground. So urban settings are largely off-limits. Ann Arbor, for example, has 134 parks.
In Miami, local laws have virtually forced sex offenders to live under a bridge linking Miami to Miami Beach -- and now they're getting booted out of there. Such restrictions force parolees into homelessness and make it nearly impossible for police to track them.
The risks are far smaller at SHAR, where parole officers and police will have on-site offices. Most offenders wear electronic tethers and get treated for addictions and other problems. SHAR has had no problems with residents, said chief executive officer Dwight Vaughter. Nor has the Detroit-based nonprofit had any serious breaches in working with corrections clients for more than 20 years.
Warren isn't the only spot hyperventilating. Prosecutor Cooper is suing the state for a list of felons scheduled for release. Television crews have camped outside hotels in Grand Rapids where some sex offenders stay. Some YMCAs are expelling registered sex offenders. This isn't public safety; it's a 21st Century witch hunt.
Nearly all prisoners will get out after serving their sentences. The state can either release them into supervised treatment, or cast them aside like lepers and push them into more crime.
Fear and hysteria will drag Michigan down. Spending $2 billion a year on prisons -- more than the state spends on higher education -- has failed to make Michigan citizens any safer than states with far fewer prisons.
Lowering the state's bloated prison population by 3,500 this year is the only bold step Gov. Jennifer Granholm has taken, but so far her critics have dominated the debate. It's time Granholm grabbed the mike and told the people not to believe the hype. ..Source.. by JEFF GERRITT
NH- Sex Offender Calls Rejected Ordinance Too Broad
8-8-2009 New Hampshire:
Jennings Successfully Fought Dover Residency Restrictions
ROCHESTER, N.H. -- A convicted sex offender who took his case against the city of Dover's residency restrictions and won said Wednesday that he fought the law because the ordinance painted sex offenders with the same broad brush.
Richard Jennings successfully fought Dover's ordinance that prohibited convicted sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school or day care. This week, a judge agreed the ordinance violated Jennings' rights and threw it out.
"There are a lot of decent men and women out there who are registered sex offenders," he said. "Very decent people that have just made some really poor decisions in their lives."
The ordinance meant that Jennings couldn't live in a Locust Street apartment with his then-fiancee because it was too close to a kindergarten.
"This ordinance blanketed all sex offenders," Jennings said. "And to me, there's so many levels of sex offenses."
Ten years ago, Jennings admitted, he had sex with a teenager when he was 32. He said that he has owned up to his past. During an interview with News 9, he was quick to correct his wife when she tried to defend what he did as "a simple mistake."
"No, it wasn't a mistake, not a mistake," he said. "It was a poor decision. There's no such thing as a mistake on something like this. There's just not."
But Jennings said Dover's ordinance wouldn't let him move on after serving his sentence. He and his wife now live in Rochester.
Jennings maintains he is not violent. But he and his wife said they did consider the ramifications of sex offenders of all kinds now being able to live anywhere they want in Dover.
"Well yeah, we both did," said his wife, Janice Jennings. "At one point, he almost wanted to drop the whole case because of that."
"The ordinance has basically portrayed to the public that all sex offenders are dangerous -- watch out," Richard Jennings said. "And I think that's really ethically wrong."
City officials have a different take on this. On Tuesday, Dover's police chief said the ordinance was a tool to help protect children, and now it's one less tool police have. He said the city hasn't yet decided whether to appeal the judge's ruling.
There are at least five other communities in the state with similar ordinances that restrict where sex offenders live, including Franklin, Northfield, Tilton, Holderness and Boscawen. Officials in those towns said they are closely monitoring what Dover officials decide to do. ..Source.. by WMUR.com
FL- Skynyrd drummer trial set
Here is a case with a set of facts that gives new meaning to the word "ODD." However, it is out of Florida so we can expect anything. Note the highlights, if anyone can figure how Florida can sustain a "Failure to Register" charge under these circumstances, I'm all ears!
8-6-2009 Florida:
Thomas Delmer Pyle faces hearing on Wednesday
Whether Thomas Delmer Pyle stays free or spends the next several years in prison may hinge on whether a judge and jury decide he had to register as a sex offender in Florida, even if he lived in another state.
The former Lynyrd Skynyrd drummer, who performed as Artimus Pyle, has been charged with failing to properly register as a sex offender and committing unlawful acts in relation to a driver's license.
He was arrested Nov. 19, 2007, and held for a day in the St. Johns County jail before he was released on $10,000 bond.
His attorneys, Craig Williams and Tom Cushman, argued Tuesday that Pyle had broken no law and the charges should be dismissed. St. Johns County Circuit Judge Wendy W. Berger denied the motion to dismiss and set Wednesday for a docket call, the last hearing before trial.
The trial is scheduled for Aug. 24 if an acceptable deal isn't worked out between the defense and prosecutors.
Pyle pleaded guilty in Duval County in 1993 to attempted capital sexual battery on a child younger than 12 and being a principal to lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 16 years old.
"He was very, very reluctant to do that," co-counsel Craig Williams said Tuesday. "But he decided he didn't want to have (the alleged victims) forced to testify."
He was sentenced to eight years probation and designated a sex offender.
After Pyle completed his probation requirements, he and his family moved from St. Johns County to Asheville, N.C., in October 2002, said co-counsel Tom Cushman.
Pyle notified the St. Johns County Sheriff's Office that he was changing addresses, Cushman said.
"When Pyle and his family relocated ... he was no longer required by law to register as a sex offender with the State of Florida," Cushman wrote in a motion to dismiss the new charge.
While living in Asheville, Pyle got a notice in 2007 to reinstate his Florida driver's license, which had been suspended in a dispute over child support payments, said Cushman.
"In fact, his obligation to pay child support in Jacksonville no longer existed because the children had become adults," according to Cushman's motion. "Pyle was eventually able to get that mistake corrected."
The error had actually been corrected, Cushman said, before the Duval County Clerk's Office mailed the license renewal notice to Pyle in North Carolina.
His client "truthfully answered the question regarding whether he had been designated a sex offender" when he filled out the paperwork for a new license in St. Augustine, said Cushman.
What Pyle didn't correct before returning to North Carolina was his former Crescent Beach address on his new driver's license.
The Department of Motor Vehicles notified the Sheriff's Office that a license had been reissued to a sex offender. A detective went to the Crescent Beach address and learned that Pyle didn't live there.
The officer left a business card; Pyle called him and said he was planning on coming back to Florida.
The defendant was arrested for failing to properly register when he returned to St. Johns County a month later.
Cushman argued Tuesday that Pyle didn't have to register until he actually changed homes.
"Pyle did not indicate in any of his conversations (with the detective) that he had already established a residence in Florida, but rather that at some unspecified time in the future he was planning on doing so," Cushman argued.
Assistant State Attorney Adam Warren said, to prove the main charge, all the state has to show Pyle is a sex offender who went to the DMV to renew his license and used an inaccurate address on the application.This is an absurd comment by the State's attorney! In fact, laws that lead to absurd results are unconstitutional!
The state statute does not limit the registration of sex offenders to Florida residents, he argued.
Cushman suggested that the state may be putting itself in the position of requiring all sex offenders nationwide to register in Florida. ..Source.. by RICHARD PRIOR
NH- Local officials mull sex offender ruling
Good explanation of the court's reasoning.
8-6-2009 New Hampshire:
As the lower court decision disallowing the city of Dover's sex offender residency restrictions reverberates around the Three Rivers area, officials in Franklin, Tilton and Northfield are undecided as to the future of their own similar restrictions.
Franklin City Manager Elizabeth Corrow said she has received a preliminary opinion from City Attorney Paul Fitzgerald and believes her city's ordinance was adopted differently and should still be enforced.
"The comment that struck me was we did provide areas of the city where there was affordable housing," Corrow said.
It was not long ago that Franklin faced a similar lawsuit when a convicted sex offender who was returned to prison for failing to register in both Tilton and Northfield said he was unable to get paroled because his intended place of residency violated Franklin's sex offender residency restrictions.
Corrow said Frank Singleton III no longer intends on moving to West Bow Street because his partner no longer lives there. His attorney, Barbara Keshen of the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union, had previously withdrawn as his lawyer because she said there were "irreconcilable differences with respect to strategy in the case."
"We've filed for a dismissal but haven't heard anything yet," Corrow said.
Keshen also represented Richard Jennings in the recent Dover decision and spoke publicly against residency restrictions during the public hearing the town of Northfield held in June 2007 before that community passed a similar ordinance.
She said similar ordinances and laws in other states and municipalities do not work, citing the state of Iowa passing a statewide residency restriction law that is now being opposed by its county attorneys.
"The myth of the lurking stranger is powerful and scares us all, but it really is a myth," she said.
She also spoke that night to the possible legal challenges the ordinance could face, including the four challenges she posed in the successful Jennings suit — it is beyond the scope of a city or town's authority; it is preempted by state laws governing convicted sex offenders; it violates the defendant's due process rights under the State and Federal Constitutions and it violates the defendant's equal protection rights.
In Dover's case, Special Justice Mark F. Weaver said the ordinance violates the defendant's equal protection rights, which is why he dismissed the charges against Jennings filed by the city of Dover after he violated the ordinance.
Selectman Stephen Bluhm was the chair of the Northfield selectmen when the board passed the ordinance unanimously.
"I'm disappointed," he said, referring to the Dover decision.
As to what his town will do, he said he could not comment because the selectmen had not met since learning of the ruling and Police Chief Stephen Adams is on vacation.
"I would imagine it will be discussed on Tuesday when the board next meets," he said.
Tilton Police Chief Robert "Bobby" Cormier said pretty much the same thing.
"I personally haven't read the decision, but will continue to enforce all the town's ordinances until directed otherwise," Cormier said.
Tilton Selectmen Chair Katherine Dawson said she didn't necessarily support the ordinance, but said the town passed it at Town Meeting so, as a selectmen, she is powerless to do anything unless Tilton's ordinance is directly challenged. Should that happen, she said, the board would meet and take it from there.
"I would be interested in reading it, though," Dawson said. ..Source.. by GAIL OBER
NH- Sex offender bans: Maybe smaller is better
8-6-2009 New Hampshire:
When dealing with sex offenders, the public needs laws, regulations and programs that work. It does no children any good to pass ordinances that make us all feel better but that don't actually protect kids.
Local ordinances that ban sex offenders from living in certain parts of the community sound great. We loved the idea when we first heard of it. But it turns out that such ordinances often fail to make our children any safer and might actually make them less safe. On top of that, courts are ruling that they are unconstitutional.
The latest instance of this comes from Dover. In 2005, the city banned sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school or day care center. The New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union challenged the law, and this week District Court Judge Mark Weaver found it unconstitutional and ineffective in protecting kids.
Weaver ruled that the law violated sex offender Richard Jennings' constitutional right to equal protection under the law. He also found no evidence that the law actually protected kids. Foster's Daily Democrat reported that police could show no significant decrease in prosecutions of sex crimes against children, and "in one case there was an increase."
Former Dover City Councilor Matt Mayberry proposed the ordinance nearly four years ago. As a real estate agent, he said he was shocked to see how many offenders lived close to local schools, Foster's reported. We are shocked by that, too. Unfortunately, restrictions such as this one don't seem to work. Police officers have told us that such sweeping bans encourage sex offenders not to register, thus making them harder to track, which puts children in greater danger.
Maybe much smaller buffer zones would be both constitutional and effective. A buffer of a block or two, instead of eight football fields, might improve safety while passing legal muster. Local officials shouldn't give up trying to find ways to keep kids safe. They just need to find methods that work and that fit their communities. ..Editorial.. Union Leader.com
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
CO- DOC May Have To Pay For Sex Offenders To Stay In Motels
8-5-2009 Colorado:
Closing Of Crossroads Shelter Leaves Law Enforcement Scrambling
DENVER -- The Department of Corrections and the Denver Police Department told 7NEWS they were scrambling to find alternative housing for roughly 100 registered sex offenders who currently stay at Crossroads, an overnight men's shelter run by the Salvation Army.
Last week, the Salvation Army announced they would be closing the shelter by mid-August. The city and law enforcement urged them to keep it open until Aug. 31.
Sex offenders told 7NEWS that housing isn't easy to come by because of the stigma associated with the crime. They said they can't find a job and can't find a place to live.
Law enforcement officers said they understand, which is why they believe Crossroads worked so well for these men.
In many cases, the DOC even paid the $35 a week required for a bed. DOC spokesman Tim Hand said the Dept. of Corrections had to find and provide a transitional housing situation for men who couldn't afford it and Crossroads made it easier for them to monitor the offenders in their system.
Now, the DOC will be forced to go to the families of sex offenders and ask them to take these men in. If that doesn't work they will be forced to put them in motels.
Hand said the Dept. of Corrections will have to look at their budget because the money comes out of their general fund and they were not prepared for Crossroads' closing.
In response to questions regarding tracking men under their watch, Hand said all 70 sex offenders registered at Crossroads had some form of electronic monitoring device.
Finding sex offenders a place to live did prompt 7NEWS to ask the city why the "Road Home" initiative didn't address the issue.
The Department of Human Services said it was reviewing the "crack in the system" and law enforcement and homeless providers were in talks to find all homeless a place to live. ..Source.. by Jane Slater, 7NEWS Reporter
UK- 'Vigilante arsonists' rock housing estate
8-5-2009 United Kingdom:
SUSPECTED vigilante arsonists put neighbours' lives at risk when they torched the empty home of a couple being investigated for historical child sex offences.
Firefighters were called to a mid-terrace two-bedroom house at Sawyers Court, Clevedon, just after 11pm on Sunday.
The couple who lived there and have been arrested on suspicion of child sex offences, had been moved by police after a series of escalating attacks on the house.
When fire crews arrived at the home, owned by Raglan Housing Association, it was well alight and people living in the neighbouring properties were evacuated. Some needed hospital treatment for smoke inhalation.
The couple, believed to be from London, had lived at the property for the last year and it is understood they moved to Clevedon from Long Ashton.
It is not known whether they are still living in the North Somerset area.
A police spokesman said: "I can confirm that a 62-year-old man and a 56-year-old woman have been arrested on suspicion of child sex offences. Both have been released on bail pending further inquiries.
"An investigation into the fire has been launched."
This is not the first attack on the house – over the last month, windows and doors have been smashed and the windows of a car parked on the drive kicked in.
On Sunday night, a group of people were seen scrambling over the back fence of the property.
Police were at the house, which had been taped off, throughout Monday.
David Robinson, 55, lives next door with his wife and two sons.
Both his wife and 13-year-old son had to be taken to hospital for treatment for smoke inhalation.
Mr Robinson was watching football on Sunday night when he heard a commotion outside.
The ex-serviceman, who is registered disabled, said: "We saw smoke coming into our house so got our pets and what valuables we could out of our house.
"My wife and son had to go to hospital for treatment for smoke inhalation and we got home at about 4am.
"Luckily we only suffered smoke damage and our property was not badly affected by the fire.
"If this had happened in the early hours when people were asleep the fire could have spread quickly and someone could have been killed."
Other people living in Sawyers Court said police had visited properties on the estate last month to tell them that the couple had been moved from the property.
Mum-of-one Samantha Halliday, 28, said: "I am really shocked this has happened as generally it's a very quiet neighbourhood."
Investigators from Avon Fire and Rescue and the police's scenes of crime unit were at the property yesterday morning carrying out a fingertip search of the house to assess how the blaze was started.
Fire crews from Clevedon and Nailsea were called to the blaze at just after 11pm and found the ground floor well alight.
Crews had to force their way into the property, breaking down the front door, and four firefighters took nearly an hour to extinguish the blaze.
Ian Hanstead, director of housing operations at Raglan Housing Association, said: "The house was empty at the time of the attack. Our immediate concern is for our residents who live in the adjoining properties and were taken to hospital as a consequence of the fire.
"We are liaising with the police and our residents while this matter is investigated."
A 47-year-old woman and two men, 34 and 45, have been arrested, questioned and subsequently released on police bail pending further investigations into the fire. ..Source.. by ThisIsSommerset.com
CT- DNA Clears Man of Rape, Murder 20 Years Later
8-5-2009 Connecticut:
A Wallingford man who spent the last 20 years in prison was freed Wednesday after DNA evidence proves he didn’t commit the crime he was convicted for.
Kenneth Ireland was convicted of rape and murder back in 1989. At the time, police believed he was the man who raped and killed Barbara Pelkey, a mother of four from Wallingford. In 1986, she was found dead at the former R.S. Moulding and Manufacturing Company where she worked nights.
Robert Staneslow was the jury foreman at Ireland's trial. He said convicting Ireland was a tough decision. The jury deliberated for days over circumstantial evidence.
"There's no one piece of evidence that says, you can say yes, definitely. But if you put all of them together I said there's too many coincidences," said Staneslow, when asked how the jury reached its verdict.
He said the verdict would have been different if the DNA evidence was available.
"If there had been DNA evidence in that time period, there never would have been a trial for him, he would have been immediately let go," said Staneslow.
But police could only use the technology they had two decades ago.
“The technology wasn’t available at the time of this case. We had facts and circumstances back in 1986 to go on, the technology of 1986 vintage to go on. That’s what we used at the time,” said Lt. Marc Mikulski of the Wallingford Police Department.
When Wallingford Police heard it may have been the wrong man behind bars, they worked with the Connecticut Innocence Project and the State’s Attorney’s Office to take another look at the evidence. When the DNA evidence came back, it showed Ireland could not have been the person who committed the crime.
“We never want to put an innocent person in jail or an innocent person convicted for a crime they didn’t commit,” said Lt. Mikulski.
Ireland will be given a new trial on August 19, 2009. The prosecution is expected to drop the charges.
Now, Wallingford Police are left with a 23-year-old case to solve.
“We are going to reopen this cold case and use the 20 years plus advancement in technology and forensic technology to put fresh eyes on this case and bring it to a successful conclusion,” said Lt. Mikulski.
Police did contact Pelkey’s family. The new developments did open new wounds, but they are confident police will find the person who murdered their mother.
Ireland is back home with his family. A spokeswoman for the Connecticut Innocence Project says he already has a job lined up.
The Connecticut Innocence project also helped to free James Calvin Tillman in 2006, and Miguel Roman in April after they were imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. ..Source.. by AMANDA RAUS and LEANNE GENDREAU
