1-30-2010 California:
The Menifee Union School District is forming a committee to review whether dictionaries containing the definitions for sexual terms should be permanently banned from the district's classrooms, a district official said Friday.
The 9,000-student K-8 district this week pulled all copies of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary after an Oak Meadows Elementary School parent complained about a child stumbling across definitions for "oral sex."
The decision was made without consultation with the district's school board and has raised concerns among First Amendment experts and some parents.
Other parents and Menifee residents, though, have praised the district's decision, saying a collegiate-level dictionary is inappropriate for younger children.
A memo from the district's assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction this week called the Merriam-Webster dictionary a respected resource but noted district officials found that "a number of referenced words are age-inappropriate."
District spokeswoman Betti Cadmus said Friday that principals, teachers and parents will be on the committee along with district representatives.
The committee will "determine the extent to which the challenged material supports curriculum, the educational appropriateness of the material and its suitability to the age level of the students," according to school district policy.
Cadmus wouldn't estimate how long the committee might take to review the dictionaries.
The collegiate dictionaries were purchased several years ago to allow advanced readers in the fourth and fifth grades to look up words that they didn't know, Cadmus said.
Other less extensive and more elementary dictionaries remain available to students, she said.
The committee will decide what to do with the Merriam-Webster dictionaries if the ban becomes permanent. The district paid $24 for each dictionary, which are currently stored away from students. They might be sold or exchanged for other dictionaries, Cadmus said.
The district received three calls to the superintendent's office about the dictionaries Friday, Cadmus said.
Free-speech advocates
Free-speech and anti-censorship experts called the ban an overreaction.
"If a public school were to remove every book because it contains one word deemed objectionable to some parent, then there would be no books at all in our public libraries," said Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, of which The Press-Enterprise is a member. "I think common sense seems to be lacking in this school."
Whether banning a dictionary would actually violate free-speech laws is a complicated legal question, Scheer said. But the decision to remove the reference books "certainly offends free-speech principles and values that all public schools should hold dear," he said.
Joan Bertin, executive director of the New York-based National Coalition Against Censorship, whose members include the American Library Association, said dictionary bans have happened in the past, although none has been reported since the mid-1990s.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, there were efforts to ban the American Heritage dictionary at schools in Alaska, Indiana, Missouri and California, she said. The Merriam-Webster's dictionary came under scrutiny in New Mexico in the mid-1990s.
"It's rare but not unheard of," Bertin said.
The Menifee ban is particularly troubling, because it is based on one parent's complaint, Bertin said.
The school's committee should review the book before making a decision to take it off the shelves, she said.
"Normally people only use a dictionary to look up a word they have heard or read, which means they have been exposed to the word and are trying to understand," Bertin said.
"This is an example of parents overreacting because of their own personal perspective on what the word reveals and what it means," she said. "They don't want their kids to know this happens."
California Department of Education spokeswoman Tina Jung said parents need to get involved and talk to their children about what they consider appropriate and inappropriate.
"It's quite possible that no one could have foreseen that kids would look up words that pique their curiosity," Jung said.
Parent reaction
Raul Avila, who has four children who attend school in the district, two of them at Oak Meadows, said Friday that he had not heard about the dictionary dustup.
"What is the world turning into? The dictionary? Are you serious?" he said. "I think it's an extreme reaction for them to do that."
Avila said it's nearly impossible to prevent children from stumbling upon words and phrases that might be inappropriate for their ages.
"All you've got to do is turn on the TV," he said
Brenda Maple is a former fifth-grade teacher at Oak Meadows and has two young children who attend school in the district. She, too, had not heard about the removal of the dictionaries.
"I think that's overboard," she said.
Pulling the dictionaries from the shelves won't prevent the students from finding potentially objectionable words, she said. They could just as easily look them up during their computer lab sessions in school.
Using the dictionary is a good thing, she said. "That's a skill that you're teaching these fifth-graders -- research. That's a big part of fifth grade," she said.
After all, Maple said, "Who didn't look up bad words when they were kids?"
But Glenn and Barbara Lassiter, whose 10-year-old granddaughter is a student at Oak Meadows, said they think the school district is handling the situation appropriately.
Glenn Lassiter said the district could surely find dictionaries that are designed with younger readers in mind that don't contain explicit references.
Parents and school officials should do all they can to shield young children from explicit terms, Barbara Lassiter said.
"I don't think the school should sit down and just go through everything. That would be an impossible task," she said.
But when something like this comes up that a parent finds objectionable, district officials should consider whether it needs to be removed from the classroom, she said.
"They're doing exactly the right thing," she said. ..Source.. DUANE W. GANG, DAYNA STRAEHLEY and SARAH BURGE
The Press-Enterprise
January 31, 2010
Menifee school panel will review banned dictionary
Sex offender registry fails to show crime details
Now the public wants -crime novels- to read in their quiet moments. I would object to this vehemently because somewhere the victim will be reliving the crime and her neighbors will know all these dirty little secrets, which will not help victims.1-31-2010 Connecticut:
Changes to the state’s sexual offender registry have made it easier for residents to locate the 5,076 registered offenders living, working or attending school in the state.
And while a click of a mouse can expose offenders by neighborhood, residents and legislators still wonder if the lack of more detailed information about an offense has lumped pedophiles in with someone who, for example, touched another person inappropriately.
Last year, Dianne Slopak, of Norwich, raised concerns about her granddaughter walking to the Wequonnoc Elementary School in Taftville, where 12 people listed on the sex offender registry live.
She said the number of offenders living in Taftville, and the 90 total registered in Norwich as of Jan. 5, seems to be “disproportionate,” and by itself a cause for concern. But she admits it is hard to decipher from the Web site if it’s the next door neighbor or someone a mile up the road she should be more worried about.
“I have three grandchildren in the Norwich school system. Two are girls,” she said. “I worry about all three.”
Provisions to include more detailed information on the state’s registry are in limbo as the state Legislature, facing a budget crisis, figures out a way to implement the mandates set forth in the 2006 Adam Walsh Child Protection Act. Among its many requirements, the act mandates that states set up uniform registry rules. It would create a three-tier classification system for sex offenders based on the offense committed and a national database to keep better track of the movement of offenders.
Web site upgrades
The latest updates to Connecticut’s sex offender registry, made in October, include a new mapping feature that allows a user to pinpoint offenders in their neighborhood and also allows users to sign up for e-mail notifications. The site had more than 11 million hits in 2009 and since the changes were implemented in October, 1,965 people have signed up for e-mail alerts.
The Norwich school system is one of those on the e-mail list and receives notification whenever someone moves in or out of the area of one of the city’s schools. Interim Superintendent Abby
Dolliver said she recently discussed with a school policy committee guidelines for offenders who have children enrolled in the district and what kind of access to the schools they should have.
“We’re tackling what kind of guidelines we want to have in place — respecting the fact they are parents,” she said.
Privacy versus safety
It’s a balancing act between their right to privacy and the overwhelming concern over the safety of students, Dolliver said.
State police Sgt. Joseph Biela, head of the sex offender unit, said phase two of the registry upgrades will include improved search function. But it will not yet include a summary of an offense.
For the past several years, prosecutors have been reading into the court record at sentencing a summary of a crime that includes whether it was consensual sex, force was used, whether it involved a male or female or how old the victim was. The information has not made it to the registry.
“The database is ready for those changes,” Biela said.
Law unworkable
State Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the Adam Walsh Act is viewed nationally as unworkable, is unfunded and clashes in some cases with existing state laws.
Even the measures the state has agreed on cannot be implemented without more money and the resources to do it.
“As a public policy matter, it would be a great thing to have,” Lawlor said of adding more information to the Web site.
“These are the basic things people want to know,” he said. “Right now it’s hard to sort out. A lot of these guys are not pedophiles. But people trying to find out more information can’t easily.
“If you’re going to put somebody online, give people something to work with. Focus on the high-risk offenders, the people who may be dangerous.”
Focus on risk
In the absence of a full description of the crime, the state has placed a link to state statute, which provides a general description of the crime.
“The name of the crime is not always indicative of what they did,” Lawlor said.
Senior Assistant State’s Attorney Theresa Anne Ferryman, who handles sexual abuse cases involving children in New London County, agrees that in working to secure a conviction, changes to the criminal charge are common.
“We all know there are people on the registry where the public’s concerns doesn’t always fit the crime,” she said. “And then there are cases that are weak enough that we end up with charges that don’t reflect the gravity of the offense.”
Ferryman said offenders realize the gravity of being placed on the registry, which in many cases is dictated by statute.
“They’re willing to go to jail. They’re willing to plead guilty. They don’t want to register,” Ferryman said. “Nobody wants to register. It’s the stigma.” ..Source.. GREG SMITH, Norwich Bulletin
January 30, 2010
Teens charged in 'sexting' case
1-30-2010 Washington:
LACEY, Wash. - Thurston County Prosecutors charged three teenagers Friday with Class C felonies for allegedly texting a naked picture of an underage girl.
Earlier this week authorities confiscated nine cell phones with the "sexted" picture on it. Lacey police say it all started when a 14-year-old girl took an explicit photo of herself and sent it to her 14-year-old boyfriend. When the relationship ended badly, that is when police say the now ex-boyfriend started to forward the picture to others.
Prosecutors say the pictures can be considered child pornography. If convicted of the felonies, the students would be required to register as sex offenders. Wayne Graham is a juvenile deputy prosecuting attorney and warns teens they need to "think before they hit send on their phone. Once they hit send they are no longer in control who views a very private or intimate photo."
The North Thurston School district is using this case as a educational opportunity. When news of the "sexting" scandal broke, middle school teachers held a lecture to warn kids about the dangers of sending graphic photos out into cyberspace. School spokesperson Courtney Schrieve says,"I don't think young people today think about when they press send. It's going global. It's out there forever."
The school is planning to hand out flyers to students and parents to warn them about the "sexting" trend. Thursday, school officials called every middle school family to tell them about the "sexting" case.
Grandparent Trish Arehart got the call and says she had not heard of "sexting." She immediately "went through everything " in her grandson's phone. She also warned the 13-year-old about sending bad pictures out.
"I told him this can get you into trouble. I said girls that send you pictures like that are not girls you want to be with," she said. ..Source.. KYLE MOORE / KING 5 News
Teens face felony 'sexting' charges
Court: Sex offender registration on the line
Three Chinook Middle School students were formally charged Friday in juvenile court with felonies stemming from a "sexting" incident in which they allegedly sent nude photos of a 14-year-old girl via their cell phones.
Copies of the photo have spread from phone to phone among a large number of North Thurston middle school students, according to Lacey police. The mother of the alleged victim said Friday that the photo has found its way to Olympia High School.
“It’s everywhere,” said the girl’s mother, identified here only by her first name, Toni, to protect the identity of her daughter.
The students accused of sending the photo are identified as a 14-year-old boy and two 13-year-old girls.
Each is charged with a single count of dealing in depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. The charge is a class C felony, carrying a maximum penalty of 30 days in juvenile detention. Anyone convicted of the offense is required to register as a sex offender.
Toni said she and her daughter do not think that the three juveniles facing charges deserve to have to register as sex offenders or to have felony records follow them into adulthood.
“That isn’t going to solve anything,” she said. “But we both agree that there need to be consequences – stiff consequences.”
Toni said her daughter exhibited poor judgment in taking the nude photo of herself and sending it to her then-boyfriend, but she “didn’t do anything to deserve this.”
The boyfriend sent the photo to one of the girls charged in the case after he had broken up with the alleged victim. That girl sent it to the other girl who has been charged, and she sent it to other students, according to police.
Thurston County Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Rick Peters agreed Friday that the case is “a situation where the technology is ahead of the legislation.” He said he thinks the Legislature should come up with a law that better fits the wrongdoing committed by juveniles who maliciously spread nude photos of their peers.
Peters said he thinks a crime was committed. However, he said Thursday that he doesn’t think any consenting teen couple who send nude photos of themselves to each other should automatically be arrested, because it “doesn’t really fit the elements of the crime.” But when nude photos of someone are sent and resent multiple times, maliciously and without the photo subject’s consent, it rises to the level of the crime of “dealing” in depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, he said.
Toni noted Friday how quickly the copies of the photos of her daughter spread from student to student.
According to information e-mailed to The Olympian from North Thurston Public Schools spokeswoman Courtney Schrieve: “The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported last month that a survey of 1,280 teens and young adults found that 20 percent of the teens said they had sent or posted nude or semi-nude photos or videos of themselves. That number was slightly higher for teenage girls – 22 percent – vs. boys – 18 percent.”
Schrieve said Friday that the school district is working to educate students and parents about sexting. Middle school teachers at Chinook and Komachin discussed the issue with students in their first-period classes Wednesday, she said. Chinook Principal Kirsten Rae sent a letter home to parents stating that sexting is a serious crime.
The school district also has placed automated notification calls to all of its middle school parents, explaining what sexting is and that it is a crime, Schrieve said.
Schrieve described the incident as a wake-up call. She added that the district might plan an educational forum or publish educational materials about sexting. ..Source.. by JEREMY PAWLOSKI, Staff writer
Runner Defends Jessica's Law As Supreme Court Rules To Hear Sex Offender's Case
1-30-2010 California:
Author of landmark sex offender law says ‘challenge to sex predator law is without merit'
Sen. George Runner (R-Antelope Valley) released the following statements in response to the California Supreme Court's ruling yesterday to hear a challenge to Jessica's Law. 2006's landmark sex offender law, was passed by 70 percent of California voters:
"The best interests of convicted child rapists and other sexual predators cannot be elevated above the rights of their victims and the legitimate responsibility of the state to protect our children."
Responding to a case brought to the Supreme Court by Richard McKee, convicted of molesting two girls ages 11 and eight, Runner said:
"McKee, like most sexually violent predators, had been committed to a mental facility for treatment following a trial in which 12 jurors unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt found that McKee had a diagnosed mental illness which made it likely that he would re-offend and sexually molest children if given the chance.
"McKee claims that his indefinite civil commitment to a mental hospital violates his federal constitutional rights, but has offered no cases to support his argument. Most significantly, McKee has not claimed he has been cured or that his mental "abnormality no longer causes him to be a threat to others" as required by state law. McKee, who has been diagnosed as having pedophilia and a schizoaffective disorder, simply claims that the state has to reenact very expensive jury trials every two years to prove that he is still a violent sexual predator even if he has refused treatment (as most sexual predators do) or has shown no signs of progress.
"Child rapists like McKee already have more than ample procedural rights under the law. California (unlike some states) requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt before a person may be declared a "violent sexual predator" and civilly committed to a mental hospital. In addition, the California Department of Mental Health must petition the court to release persons whose condition has "so changed that the person no longer meets the definition of sexually violent predator." Moreover, McKee himself can petition the court each year if he believes his condition has changed.
"Instead of trying to prove he is no longer a threat because his condition has improved, McKee has a history of refusing medication and denying that he molested children. There is simply no rational reason to assume that a diagnosed pedophile like McKee will be cured by watching TV in a mental institution."
Runner also commented on a second challenge to Jessica's Law regarding prohibiting sexual offenders from living near schools. This case relates to a very narrow group of sex offenders who had served their sentences before voters approved Jessica's Law and was not, according to Runner, likely to impact future application of the law. ..Source..
ERROR ????: High court may review Pa. county's predator law
It appears that this news report is in error. The question is one that ONLY the Pennsylvania Supreme court can answer, and as of this moment it has not answered it.1-30-2010 Pennsylvania:
In another news report, they got it right, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is asking the Pennsylvania Supreme court to render a decision on the OPEN State question: Does state law pre-empt local ordinances under the state constitution?
After the Pennsylvania Supreme court answers that question, then the 3rd circuit can finish the appeal of the federal questions rendered by the federal district court..
Note-1: The Pennsylvania Supreme court would not be reviewing the federal district court opinion. Effectively, the 3rd circuit has certified a question to the State Supreme court, a state question that needs to be answered before continuing federally.
Note-2: In Kentucky their AG asked the US Supreme court to review a decision of the Kentucky Suprme court, but only AFTER the Kentucky Supreme court rendered a decision, NOT BEFORE! See this discussion -on court procedure-, the example they cite as to Florida law on a totally different issue. In addition, Pennsylvania Supreme court order -and- Certified Questions Procedure.
PITTSBURGH (AP) ― A federal court appeals court has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a western Pennsylvania county ordinance that limits where registered sex offenders may live.
Should be the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wants the high court to determine whether Pennsylvania's Megan's Law — which requires some sexual predators to register with police — pre-empts the county ordinance.
A federal judge in Pittsburgh last year struck down the Allegheny County ordinance, saying the statewide law invalidates it.
The ordinance aims to ban sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, licensed child care facilities, community centers and public parks. The American Civil Liberties Union says sex offenders would have virtually no place to live in the county under the ordinance. ..Source.. LDNews
January 29, 2010
State Supreme Court Decision Expected Monday On Homeless Sex Offenders
1-29-2010 California:
Homeless sex offenders in San Francisco will find out whether they'll be able to finally move indoors on Monday. The state Supreme Court will issue its decision about the constitutionality of the Jessica's Law restrictions banning sex offenders from living 2,000 feet from a school or park -- which, in San Francisco, have forced nearly all paroled sex offenders into homelessness.
SF Weekly ran a cover story about the conundrum last month: Sex offenders paroled to the city after voters passed Jessica's Law in November 2006 must live in enforced homelessness because there are virtually no areas in the dense city that are compliant with the restrictions.
San Francisco attorney Ernest Galvan filed suit against the law on behalf of four sex offenders, arguing the unconstitutionality of forcing people onto the streets. He charged that the foot restrictions were a violation of the ex post facto statute that a person can't be retroactively punished by law that wasn't on the books when he or she committed the crime.
All of Galvan's defendants committed their crimes before the passage of Jessica's Law, and were paroled for other non-sex-related crimes. But their sex offender status came back to haunt them: Since the people were released after voters approved Jessica's Law, they must abide by its foot restrictions on where they can live. Currently only the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is enforcing the law's foot restrictions for parolees. The San Francisco Police Department does not enforce it on registered sex offenders who have been released from parole.
Monday's likely decision will be the second in less than a week on challenges to Jessica's Law. In a separate ruling Thursday, the court questioned the constitutionality of the law's provision permitting the state to commit prisoners deemed sexually violent predators to a state mental hospital for an indefinite stay after their release from prison.
Prior to the enactment of Jessica's Law, sexually violent predators could only be confined to the hospital for two two-year terms following their prison sentence -- and only if the state could prove in court the convicts are still a danger to society. Now the person must stay in the hospital until it can be proven he or she no longer meets the definition of a sexually violent predator. The state supreme court remanded that case back to a San Diego Superior Court judge. ..Source.. Lauren Smiley
Legislature Debates Changing Sex Offender Registry
1-29-2010 Maine:
Supreme Court Ruling Necessitates Changes
AUGUSTA, Maine -- Lawmakers met in Augusta Thursday to discuss changing the state's sex offender registry to satisfy the concerns of the Maine supreme court.
The court said it is unconstitutional to impose new laws that are retroactive for people convicted of sex crimes in the 1980s and 1990s.
The ruling means the state cannot require sex offenders to register for the rest of their lives when they were previously told they would have to register for only 10 years.
Maine changed the law in 1999 to require all sex offenders to register for life.
Lawmakers also discussed the possibility of changing the registry to better differentiate between minor and serious offenses.
A deadline was set for the end of March to make the necessary changes. ..Source.. WMTW.com
Constitutionality of 'Jessica's Law' questioned
1-29-2010 California:
Treating sex predators differently from other violent offenders may violate equal protection guarantees, the California Supreme Court says.
The California Supreme Court ruled 5 to 2 Thursday that a 2006 ballot initiative that permitted the state to lock up sexually violent predators indefinitely may violate constitutional guarantees of equal protection.
The ruling, written by Justice Carlos R. Moreno, did not strike down the measure, Proposition 83, also known as "Jessica's Law."
Instead, the court said a fact-finding hearing must be held to determine whether valid reasons exist for treating sex predators differently from others subject to civil confinement, such as mentally disordered offenders.
Proposition 83 increased penalties for repeat sex offenders, prohibited them from living near schools and parks, and changed the law to permit their indefinite confinement to mental institutions, instead of two years with the possibility of extensions.
Richard McKee, a convicted child molester, challenged his confinement on several constitutional grounds, but the court found that only his equal protection argument had merit.
The majority said the state must provide "some justification" for creating greater obstacles for sex predators to win their freedom than for severely mentally disordered offenders who commit crimes but serve their terms in mental institutions.
Sexual predators must be shown to "bear a substantially greater risk to society, and that therefore imposing on them a greater burden before they can be released from commitment is needed to protect society," Moreno wrote.
The majority said the state can provide its justifications in a hearing before a trial judge.
Justice Ming W. Chin, joined by Justice Marvin R. Baxter, dissented.
"Whether sexually violent predators present a distinct danger warranting unique remedies is for society to determine, not a trial judge," Chin wrote. ..Source.. Maura Dolan
Plan to change registry altered
1-29-2010 South Dakota:
AG proposal means sex offenders must petition to move to lower tier
A state Senate committee Thursday accepted an amendment proposed by the attorney general on the much-debated sex offender registry bill.
The amendment now will become the base for Senate Bill 12, which would create a three-tiered system to classify sex offenders and give those convicted of lesser crimes an opportunity to get their names removed from the list.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to move forward with Attorney General Marty Jackley's amendment, which among other changes does not automatically assign offenders to a specific tier, but makes it the offender's responsibility to petition the court to be assigned to a lower tier.
"So the burden is really on the sex offender," Jackley said.
More amendments are expected, which is why committee chairman Sen. Gene Abdallah delayed the final committee vote on the bill for a week.
"I'm really, really happy how it went today. I think all parties are in agreement," Abdallah said.
"What I'm seeing in this proposed amendment is relatively pleasing, at least from our perspective," testified Cheri Scharffenberg, legislative coordinator for the South Dakota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Abdallah led a legislative study committee made up of House and Senate members who met several times before the session, producing eight bills that seek to change the state's sex offender laws. But it is the bill that contains the tiered setup that has gained the most attention.
Under the tier system, those convicted of rape or other severe crimes would be placed on Tier III of the registry for life. Those on Tier II would have to be on the list for at least 25 years before they could petition for removal. People convicted of less severe crimes, such as statutory rape, could end up on Tier I for at least 10 years.
Jackley's amendment puts misdemeanor indecent exposure, which the study committee had proposed removing from the registry, back on it.
Abdallah didn't state whether that's a provision he wants deleted.
"That's something we will be discussing," he said.
The amendment also moved offenders who intentionally expose someone to HIV from Tier II to Tier III.
There still are details that need to be ironed out, such as whether the bill would be retroactive.
It's been more than a decade since half of the offenders on the registry were convicted of their crimes, according to an Argus Leader analysis of December sex offender registry data.
About 130 of those offenders were convicted more than 25 years ago, and for a handful, it's been half a century.
But the registry was created in 1994, so the committee must decide whether the minimum number of years on the list in Tiers I and II start when offenders were convicted, when they were released from jail or when the registry was started.
The Judiciary Committee also unanimously passed four bills regarding sex offender registry laws, including allowing offenders to live in homeless shelters and halfway houses that are within 500 feet of schools or parks. The other three reduce the grace period for certain sex offenders to register from five to three days; apply out-of-state registry laws to those offenders not convicted in South Dakota; and add convictions of conspiracy or solicitation of sex crimes as registerable offenses.
Legislators and Jackley have been working for several weeks to come to an agreement.
Two weeks ago, Jackley's objections to the summer study committee's tier proposal caught members off-guard.
Jackley was pleased with Thursday's developments "I remain positive that between the summer study and the leadership shown in the Senate Judiciary Committee that everyone is working hard to improve the sex offender registry," he said.
The four remaining bills regarding sex offender registry laws will be addressed by the Senate Judiciary Committee next Thursday. ..Source.. Megan Luther
January 28, 2010
Middle school students charged in 'sexting' case
A Juliet Juliet case? Or, is it a crime at all? The prosecutor (County Prosecutor Brian Gensel) should be charged with "Failure to use discretion" and "Political-itis" obviously he wants to make a name for himself -its election time-, at the expense of these young folks! Please remember, traditionally a criminal matter must have a "victim" and an "offender" can you define who is who?1-28-2010 Indiana:
Police said Valparaiso boy, girl sent nude pictures to each other
Middle school students charged in 'sexting' case
Police said Valparaiso boy, girl sent nude pictures to each other
Two Ben Franklin Middle School students who Valparaiso police said were caught using their cell phones to exchange nude pictures of each other -- a practice called sexual texting or "sexting" -- are facing criminal charges.
A 13-year-old Valparaiso girl and a 12-year-old Valparaiso boy were referred to juvenile probation on charges of possession of child pornography and child exploitation. In adult court, the charges would carry a maximum penalty of 11 years in prison, but prosecutors expect the case to be handled in the juvenile system.
"Something needs to be done, but we think dealing with them through the juvenile court system is appropriate, so as not to saddle them with (consequences) from the adult system," Porter County Prosecutor Brian Gensel said.
In the adult system, convicted offenders face not only prison time but also having to register as a sex offender.
The case against the Valparaiso students came to light when the girl's phone went off during class Jan. 21 and the teacher confiscated it. The teacher told police the girl asked to delete something from the phone before it was turned over to the administration, but that request was denied.
The teacher said the girl began crying, saying she would get in trouble because the boy had sent her a dirty picture.
An investigation revealed the boy sent the girl an explicit photo of himself Jan. 17 and asked her to use her cellular phone to send back a similar picture of herself, which she did, police said. Police further found out the girl showed the picture of the boy to one of her friends.
Deputy Prosecutor Cheryl Polarek said young people don't understand the ramifications of texting nude pictures or posting certain material on social networking sites like Facebook. She said a nude picture could end up being shared with half the school and could get in the hands of people who seek out child pornography.
Even though it is illegal to send or possess nude pictures of someone younger than 18, a national survey found 20 percent of teens have texted or posted online nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves.
Gensel, who belongs to the National District Attorneys Association, said the association's trade publication featured a column on sexting that highlighted Montgomery County, Ohio, Prosecutor Mathias Heck Jr.'s implementation of a "diversion program" for sexting cases.
Young people who enter the diversion program undergo education on appropriate sexual boundaries and related topics, complete community service and relinquish their cell phone for a period of time. If the program is successfully completed, the charges are dismissed or never filed.
Gensel agrees with Heck that there needs to be some "tempering" of prosecution so some foolish, consenting behavior doesn't have long-term ramifications on young people's lives. Gensel favors a system in which young people receive an explanation about how serious of a matter sexual texting is, and that there will be serious consequences if they continue doing it.
Valparaiso police Sgt. Michael Grennes said this case shows the need for parents to educate their children about what they can and can't do with their cellular phones or on their computers. He also recommends parents to follow through by monitoring their children's phone and computer use. He also said parents might want to consider whether their child really needs to own a phone. ..Source.. Ken Kosky
Governor Martin O'Malley Introduces Legislation to Protect Marylanders from Sexual Predators
Again we see a lawmakers wanting to heap restrictions on FORMER OFFENDERS for the crimes of new offenders, most of which will never be subjected to these new restrictions. Nothing in these suggestions will PREVENT any new sex offense, which for the most part are committed by folks never before convicted of a sex offense.1-28-2010 Maryland:
Governor convenes Sexual Offender Advisory Board to reform 2006 law
ANNAPOLIS, MD (January 27, 2010) –Governor Martin O’Malley announced today a series of legislative initiatives targeted at protecting Maryland families from sexual predators and strict enforcement of sex offender laws, including lifetime supervision for certain sex offenses. The Governor also announced legislation to reconstitute the Sexual Offender Advisory Board, and has asked former Maryland Attorney General Joseph Curran to serve as Chair. The Board will initially serve to advocate for legislation to strengthen the Board and redefine its purpose.
“There should be absolutely no mercy shown to anyone who harms a child in our State, and our legislation serves to impose the strictest standards of supervision to ensure that Maryland’s children are protected,” said Governor O’Malley. “There is a lot we do better than we used to as a state with regard to public safety, and there is still a lot of work to be done. I want to thank Joe Curran for agreeing to extend his public service in this capacity, and look forward to working with the General Assembly to strengthen our efforts even more.”
The Sexual Offender Advisory Board was established in 2006 and charged with, among other things, training sexual offender management teams in the Division of Parole and Probation, certifying sexual offender treatment providers, and making policy recommendations. However, there was no requirement that the members of this Board have any of the specialized skills necessary for certifying programs, conducting training, or even making policy recommendations. For that reason, and others, the O’Malley-Brown Administration has introduced legislation for the past three years to reenact this Board so that it is properly constituted and charged. The Governor introduced legislation today to ensure the Board is properly constituted and charged.
“I have been a long-time supporter of lifetime supervision for our state's most violent sexual predators. The proposed Board will ensure that experts with specialized experience working with both victims and offenders are addressing these extremely serious cases,” said former Maryland Attorney General Joe Curran. “I look forward to serving as the Board’s chair and want to get to work immediately. I plan to meet with the staff tomorrow evening and to convene a Board meeting next week.”
Curran served as Attorney General for Maryland from 1986 to 2007. He was Lieutenant Governor from 1983 to 1986, and before that served in the State Senate and the House of Delegates for nearly a quarter of a century. As Attorney General, Mr. Curran initiated statewide reform in the areas of consumer protection, criminal investigations, Medicaid fraud prosecution, securities regulation, antitrust enforcement, protection of children and teens, parents, seniors, protection of victims of domestic violence and sexual predators. He also worked to strengthen criminal laws against gun violence, prescription drug abuse, and was an opponent of slots and casino gambling. Curran is a graduate of the University of Baltimore and the University of Baltimore School of Law.
The Governor announced today a comprehensive set of legislative initiatives aimed at protecting Maryland families:
Sexual Offenders – Lifetime Supervision
The bill requires that courts sentence certain serious sex offenders (convicted of first degree rape/attempt; second degree rape/attempt; first degree sexual offense/attempt; certain second and third degree sexual offenses; certain sexual abuse of a minor) and sexual offenders with multiple offenses to mandatory lifetime supervision. This lifetime supervision must be consecutive to any sentence or probationary term imposed for the underlying offense. The sentencing court must order a presentence investigation prior to imposing the conditions of this lifetime supervision, which may include GPS monitoring. The bill also provides for criminal penalties for violations and provides that any sentence imposed for a violation of lifetime supervision is not subject to dimunition credits.
The bill further provides that, following the original sentence and an additional three years of lifetime supervision, a person may petition the sentencing court for discharge from this supervision. In order to file a petition, a person must have a recommendation from their supervising agent and a risk assessment conducted by a sexual offender treatment provider. A sentencing court may not discharge a person from lifetime supervision unless there is a finding that the person no longer poses an unacceptable risk to community safety.
Sexual Offender Advisory Board
This bill reconstitutes the Sexual Offender Advisory Board to be compromised of persons with specialized knowledge of sex offenders so that the Board can effectively make policy recommendations on how to best manage sex offenders and protect the public. The bill also alters the charge of the Board, directing the Board to: review the laws and practices in Maryland, including our registration requirements; work with the Judiciary to develop risk-assessment criteria for the lifetime supervision offenders; make recommendations for the treatment and management of sex offenders; develop standards for a statewide certification process for sexual offender treatment providers; and make recommendations regarding the training of sexual offender management teams.
Criminal Procedure - Sex Offenders - Notification and Registration
This proposal would bring the State into compliance with the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) (also known as the Adam Walsh Act), which creates minimum standards for sex offender registration. States have been given until July 2010 to come into “substantial” compliance or risk the loss of Byrne grant funds. The most significant changes include: making the registration requirements retroactive; re-classifying the sex offense categories; and requiring juvenile offenders to register publicly if convicted in adult court or if adjudicated delinquent for serious sexual offenses and at least 14 years of age.
Sexual Offender Registration – Indecent Exposure and Possession of Child Pornography
This bill would allow a judge to order a person convicted of (1) possession of child pornography; or (2) indecent exposure in the presence of a minor to register as a sexual offender. Currently, these crimes are not included on the Maryland registry and judges have no authority to order an offender to register for these offenses.
Registration of Sexual Offenders – Continuing Course of Conduct
This bill adds the crime of Continuing Course of Conduct with Child to the category of offenses for which a sexual offender, under certain circumstances, must register for life. The elements of the crime of “Continuing Course of Conduct” are: the commission of one or more of the following crimes at least three times over the course of 90 days to a child under the age of 14: first degree Rape; second degree Rape; first degree Sex Offense; second degree Sex Offense; third degree Sex Offense. Under current law, a conviction for any of the offenses, against a child under the age of 15, requires lifetime registration as a Child Sexual Offender. However, a conviction for Continuing Course of Conduct (three of these acts) gives a judge the discretion to order registration, but only 10 years as an Offender. This bill would remedy the inconsistency in the law and require similar registration guidelines for individuals who commit equally violent sex offenses.
Criminal Background Investigations – Employees of Facilities and Other Individuals that Care for or Supervise Children
This bill expands the categories of individuals who will be required to have a State and Federal background check. It requires background checks for employees of private entities running recreation centers as well as for employees of home health or residential service agencies licensed to provide home or community based health services for minors. ..Source.. Press Release
Naming of teenage rapist 'violates UN law'
Europe is covered by a different Human Rights Declaration than folks in the U.S.1-28-2010 United Kingdom:
A judge's decision to name a 13-year-old rapist violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), according to a leading children's rights campaigner.
Balal Khan, now 14, of Cobridge, Stoke-on-Trent, was sentenced to three years in a young offenders' institution after admitting raping a 20-year-old woman when he was 13. He also admitted a further charge of robbery.
During the case at Stoke Crown court Judge Paul Glenn allowed the naming of Khan, to act as a deterrent to others.
However, Katy Swaine, legal director at the Children's Rights Alliance for England, said that naming Khan contravened UNCRC guidelines that say children's privacy should be respected at all stages of criminal proceedings.
She said: "This was clearly a very serious attack. However, he is still a child and this means that he is required under UK and international law to be treated differently from an adult.
"This principle is based on children's vulnerability to outside influence, early developmental stage and capacity for rehabilitation. He has admitted what he has done, which is the first step towards rehabilitation. Custody is a grave sentence for a child and must only be used for the shortest possible period of time."
During his victim's ordeal the court heard that Khan took a phone call from her boyfriend in which he bragged about the attack. The judge said that Khan would have been given an eight-year sentence if he had been an adult. ..Source.. Joe Lepper
The untouchable Mean Girls
1-28-2010 Massachusetts:
Like a lot of kids her age, Phoebe Prince was a swan, always beautiful and sometimes awkward.
Last fall, she moved from Ireland into western Massachusetts, a new town, a new high school, a new country, a new culture. She was 15, when all that matters is being liked and wearing the right clothes and just fitting in.
She was a freshman and she had a brief fling with a senior, a football player, and for this she became the target of the Mean Girls, who decided then and there that Phoebe didn’t know her place and that Phoebe would pay.
Kids can be mean, but the Mean Girls took it to another level, according to students and parents. They followed Phoebe around, calling her a slut. When they wanted to be more specific, they called her an Irish slut.
The name-calling, the stalking, the intimidation was relentless.
Ten days ago, Phoebe was walking home from school when one of the Mean Girls drove by in a car. An insult and an energy drink can came flying out the car window in Phoebe’s direction.
Phoebe kept walking, past the abuse, past the can, past the white picket fence, into her house. Then she walked into a closet and hanged herself. Her 12-year-old sister found her.
You would think this would give the bullies who hounded Phoebe some pause. Instead, they went on Facebook and mocked her in death.
They told State Police detectives they did nothing wrong, had nothing to do with Phoebe killing herself.
And then they went right back to school and started badmouthing Phoebe.
They had a dance, a cotillion, at the Log Cabin in Holyoke two days after Phoebe’s sister found her in the closet, and some who were there say one of the Mean Girls bragged about how she played dumb with the detectives who questioned her.
Last week, one of the Springfield TV stations sent a crew to South Hadley High to talk to the kids.
One girl was interviewed on camera, and she said what was common knowledge: that bullies were stalking the corridors of South Hadley High.
As soon as the TV crew was out of sight, one of the Mean Girls came up and slammed the girl who had been interviewed against a locker and punched her in the head.
The Mean Girls are pretty, and popular, and play sports.
So far, they appear to be untouchable, too.
South Hadley is a nice, comfortable middle-class suburb that hugs the Connecticut River nearby and a certain attitude.
“Things like this aren’t supposed to happen in South Hadley,’’ said Darby O’Brien, a high school parent, wondering why the bullies who tormented Phoebe are still in school. “And so instead of confronting the evil among us, the reality that there are bullies roaming the corridors at South Hadley High, people are blaming the victim, looking for excuses why a 15-year-old girl would do this. People are in denial.’’
School officials say there are three investigations going on. They say these things take time.
That doesn’t explain why the Mean Girls who tortured Phoebe remain in school, defiant, unscathed.
“What kind of message does this send to the good kids?’’ O’Brien asked. “How many kids haven’t come forward to tell what they know because they see the bullies walking around untouched?’’
They were supposed to hold a big meeting on Tuesday to talk about all this, but now that’s off for a couple of weeks.
O’Brien is thinking about going to that meeting and suggesting that they have the kids who bullied Phoebe look at the autopsy photos.
“Let them see what a kid who hung herself looks like,’’ he said.
Last week, Phoebe was supposed to visit Ireland, where she grew up, and she was excited because she was going to see her father for the first time in months.
She did end up going back to Ireland after all, and when her father saw her she was in a casket.
Phoebe’s family decided to bury her in County Clare. They wanted an ocean between her and the people who hounded her to the grave. ..Source.. Kevin Cullen
3rd Wisconsin woman cops plea for role in glue attack on ex-lover's penis
1-28-2010 Wisconsin:
Wendy Sewell has accepted a plea deal in a Wisconsin court over her role in helping to lure Donessa Davis to a motel room in Stockbridge, Wisc., and then gluing his penis to his abdomen.
The 44-year-old woman is one of three charged in the episode. She pleaded no contest to a charge of disorderly conduct -- a misdemeanor - on Friday. The two other women in the case , Michelle Belliveau and Therese Ziemann, reached similar deals last month. They will be all sentenced next month, WBAY-TV reported.
As we wrote in August, when the three women found out they were all being cheated on by Davis -- a married man -- they conspired to lure him to the motel room with the promise of a massage. Instead, they bound him up in a case of sticky revenge.
In an unusual version of female bonding, the three women discovered his philandering ways from Davis's wife. ..Source.. Hart Van Denburg
Pornographic text sparks tribal war
1-28-2010 New Guinea:
Two people are dead after a pornographic text message sparked tribal violence in Papua New Guinea's southern highlands.
The violence flared on Saturday when a young man from the Tapo clan in Tari sent a pornographic text message to a woman in the Pipi clan.
The girl was offended and showed the image to her brother, who gathered his clansmen and attacked the Tapos with home-made guns, bush knives and bows and arrows.
One man was killed in the clash and Superintendent Jimmy Onopia says another man was pulled from a bus and killed with an axe yesterday.
"Two people have died, several have been wounded, several houses have been burnt down," he said.
Superintendent Onopia says the situation is now calm and police are helping to negotiate a peaceful resolution. ..Source.. Papua New Guinea correspondent Liam Fox
Close the camp
1-28-2010 Florida:
OUR OPINION: Revamped rules will end squalor under causeway
The convicted sex offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway now have a better chance of finding decent living quarters, thanks to the Miami-Dade County Commission. Commissioners unanimously repealed 24 different laws enacted by cities in favor of a single countywide ordinance.
The vote comes many long months after embarrassing national news coverage about the shantytown under the causeway and the squalid living conditions under the bridge that leads to South Florida's most glamorous city. Why it took so long to deal with this dangerous situation is a puzzle, but at last commissioners showed pragmatic leadership.
The ultimate solution to put an end to the current hodgepodge of city and county laws, however, is for the state Legislature to establish a uniform standard for where sex offenders can live.
The camp was created after dozens of cities in Miami-Dade passed sex offender laws that prohibited them from living close to not just schools, but -- depending on the city -- also day care centers, playgrounds, parks, bus stops and other places where children congregate. The protection zone was cast so wide that it made it virtually impossible for many offenders to find places where they could legally live. The state Department of Corrections abetted the situation by releasing offenders and placing them under the bridge.
Granted, convicted sexual offenders are unlikely candidates for sympathy, but Florida's law is so broad that all types of offenders have been lumped together to be treated like dangerous pedophiles. If offenders have served their time and are keeping out of trouble they should not be dumped under a bridge.
The new county ordinance prohibits offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school and applies the state's 1,000-foot protection zone around other places where children gather. Commissioners also created child-safety zones banning sex offenders from loitering within 300 feet of where children congregate. Safety zones are a more effective and realistic tool for protecting children from molesters. As it is, many of the people under the bridge also work, so the loitering provision is a plus.
About 35-50 offenders are living under the bridge, down from 100-plus when the camp was in the national spotlight. Ron Book, head of the Miami-Dade Homeless Trust, has used his position on the Trust and his influence as a powerful lobbyist to marshal resources to find many offenders legal residences in recent months.
The irony is that it was Mr. Book who urged lawmakers to write tough sexual-predator laws after learning that his daughter, Lauren, had been sexually molested. They went on a campaign for tougher state and local laws. But the well-intentioned effort backfired, leaving Mr. Book, as head of the Trust, in the hot seat.
The County Commission has greatly improved local offenders' chances of finding decent housing, and public safety demands closing the disgraceful causeway camp. Now state lawmakers must adopt a statewide standard that is both protective of children and practical enough that offenders can have a roof over their heads that's not a bridge. ..Source..
Ordinance limiting where sex offenders can live heads to supreme court
1-28-2010 Pennsylvania:
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to determine if a local ordinance restricting where sex offenders can live is pre-empted by state law.
Allegheny County officials filed an appeal with the Third Circuit following a decision in March in which U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster found that a local law prohibiting convicted sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a child care or recreational facility, community center, public park or school was illegal.
The judge found that the county regulation was so oppressive that it eliminated almost all of Allegheny County.
Further, Judge Lancaster found that the ordinance, which would force offenders to live in outlying areas with less access to job opportunities, undermined state law and the goals of the probation and parole systems.
In its opinion, the Third Circuit found that it is an issue that has state-wide importance, even though the case concerns only Allegheny County.
"[Municipalities] may adopt similar ordinances, particularly if the county prevails in this case," the judges wrote in a unanimous decision. "More particularly, counties may feel pressured to respond to an influx -- real or perceived -- of sex offenders from Allegheny County by enacting ordinances of their own."
The appeals court noted that its decision on the pre-emption issue would not be binding on parties other than those involved in the case, meaning that other municipalities could enact similar ordinances -- leading to additional appeals.
Though the Third Circuit did not decide the case, it said that it saw "obvious tension between state parole procedure and the Allegheny County ordinance," because state law does not allow the parole board to be limited in approving where an offender can live based on local ordinances.
This is the first such case to go before the appeals court.
As the case winds its way through the legal system, the ordinance is not being enforced. ..Source.. Paula Reed Ward, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Conn. tries to stop inmates seeking dirt on guards
1-28-2010 Connecticut:
HARTFORD, Conn. — Connecticut could join at least a dozen other states by restricting prison inmates from using FOI laws to get personal information to harass or threaten their guards — and, in some cases, prosecutors or other inmates.
Inmates here and around the country have swamped systems with information requests — for guards' personnel and arrest records, files affecting the inmates' own legal cases, and details as mundane as meal ingredients. Though no Connecticut prison officers have been harmed or harassed, because no personnel records have been released, prison officials say they are fighting because they view such requests as a threat to the safety and security of staff and others at the prisons.
From his cell in a Suffield prison, where he's serving out an 86-year sentence for sexual assault, Richard Stevenson is trying to learn more about his guards. He's battled Connecticut's Department of Correction for the past year, seeking off-duty arrest records of more than 100 guards.
Stevenson, 45, contends he wants the information for a court appeal. A Freedom of Information Commission officer initially OK'd his request — but prison officials want it blocked. They claim it will endanger the officers by giving an inmate juicy information he could use against a guard to his advantage.
"When an inmate is requesting information, it's not for anybody's good, especially when they're lifers, for vicious assaults or whatever," said Jon Pepe, president of AFSCME Local 391, one of several union locals representing prison officers in Connecticut. "These are not good people."
Washington, Arkansas, Michigan, Virginia, New Jersey, Texas, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Kansas, Alabama, Georgia and Arizona have various laws on the books, some dating to the mid-1990s, that limit or block inmate access to state open-record laws, according to prison union officials.
Apparently none of the laws was prompted by violence against guards; most — like Georgia's, Michigan's and Texas' — refer to potential harassment and the cost and burden of compliance.
In Washington, a law enacted last year after threats against several prosecutors by an inmate, Allan Parmelee, who is serving 17 years for firebombing his lawyers' cars. Parmelee had made hundreds of requests for photos, surveillance video or personnel files on judges, prosecutors, prison guards and others he's encountered in his legal case.
The personnel records requested by prisoners in Connecticut have not reached the inmates because of the prison department's legal challenges. However, prison officials point to a recent disturbance after one inmate learned from a local police report he requested under the open-records law that another inmate had been an informant.
Connecticut's full FOI commission recently ruled to release records Stevenson wants, but with the guards' names redacted. The state DOC has not yet decided whether to comply.
This case and several others, which pit the prisons department against the FOI commission, are fueling a renewed push to change state law and curb rising inmate FOI requests for personnel records.
Prison officials say they worry that inmates could threaten and compromise an officer by telling other inmates about a potentially embarrassing arrest — and that sensitive personal information about staff, such as home addresses and names of family members, could get into the wrong hands.
Although there are exemptions in Connecticut's FOI Act to withhold public employees' personnel and health records, they're not airtight. It must be proven that the information would highly offend a reasonable person, and that there's no public interest in it.
Colleen Murphy, executive director of the state's FOI commission, said the panel opposes an across-the-board ban on releasing such records to inmates. There are situations, she said, where the information could benefit the inmate and possibly the state as a whole.
Prisoners "are uniquely situated to see if there is any wrongdoing going on in the other side of the fence," Murphy said.
Prison officials claim inmate FOIs are jamming the system, but the FOI commission — which aims to treat inmates as other citizens — disagrees. It says it has seen an increase in its workload, of which inmates' requests are only about 20% and manageable. A significant portion of the requests are for information about inmates' guards, officials say.
Paul Wright, editor of the Seattle-based Prison Legal News, said Connecticut's proposed limits were part of "a national clampdown" to isolate prisoners from the outside world.
He questioned whether guard protection was the real issue, in that an inmate, or someone acting for him, can already glean information like arrest records from the Internet and newspapers. Wright suggested that prison officials were really trying to block information that would disclose poor prison conditions.
"This isn't occurring in a vacuum. It's kind of a full-court press," he said. "They don't want to give up the information. They know if they give up the information, it basically gives insight into how poorly run their institutions are."
Wright knows firsthand the information that an inmate can uncover using open-records laws. While serving 17 years of a 25-year term in Washington State for killing a cocaine dealer he was trying to rob, Wright requested documents on all of the doctors working for the state's prison system. He learned that some didn't have medical licenses and many had been disciplined for medical neglect.
"For the most part, the pattern here wasn't, 'This is Marcus Welby and we have some issues,' " said Wright, referring to a 1970s TV doctor show starring Robert Young. "These are crappy doctors."
In Florida, where FOI laws are among the nation's strongest, inmates are allowed equal access to public records under the state's constitution. "To limit any access to any party or designated group — I don't think it would fly here in Florida," said JoAnn Carrin, director of the Office of Open Government.
Kansas Corrections spokesman Bill Miskell said his agency had considered banning inmates' access to information about staff — but questions whether it's workable. "If the inmate can't get it," he said, "the inmate will have somebody on the outside write in and say, 'Please send me the information about this staff member or that staff member.' " ..Source.. First Amendment Center
Proposed NH restrictions on child killers and sex offenders draw opposition in Concord
When will lawmakers recognize the waste that results from a registry, and that registries cannot prevent the ill they are seeking it to do. Knowing where someone sleeps for a few hours of a day, will never PREVENT future crimes. There are cars, trains and buses and the registrant can walk if they have a mind to do further harm.1-28-2010 New Hampshire:
CONCORD — Responding to a convicted child killer moving into their district, two area lawmakers testified in favor of a bill that would restrict where child murderers and sex offenders could live and mandate they register for life with the state Department of Public Safety.
Sen. Deborah Reynolds, D-Plymouth, and Rep. Francine Wendelboe, R- New Hampton co-sponsored House Bill 1647-FN and were both on hand to support is passage at a hearing before the Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety Tuesday afternoon.
"This is not about demagoguery," said Reynolds who read into the record the fears of one of her constituents that lives within walking distance of child killer Raymond Guay in New Hampton.
She recalled how the woman said her "family no longer has a sense of security" and how a "police photo of Guay is on her refrigerator" so she can make sure her 12-year-old knows what he looks like.
Wendelboe recounted the circuitous route Guay took before he landed in New Hampton, engendering public outcry at each stop until New Hampton's legal counsel told the Board of Selectmen not to release the information lest the town become the target of a lawsuit.
"They kept this secret from the community," Wendelboe said, getting to the heart of the issue that, in her and Reynolds' opinion, convicted child murderers, should they be paroled, must register with state public safety agencies.
Both legislators also spoke to the provision that generated the most controversy — restricting paroled child murderers and convicted sex offenders from living within 25 miles of one of the victims.
Although representatives from the U. S. Department of Parole and Probation, the agency responsible for placing and supervising Guay, said they didn't know it at the time, two of Guay's victim's aunts live about two miles from his New Hampton residence.
Speaking against HB1647-FN was Richard Jennings, the convicted sex offender who recently challenged and defeated Dover's residency restrictions about where convicted sex offenders can live.
Jennings, who was convicted of three counts of having sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was in his early 30s, said he is now married. He recalled for the committee the alleged harassment of him by the Dover police including how he was prevented from staying with his family on Christmas Eve, forcing him to sleep in his van.
"I made a bad decision," Jennings said. But he added a 25-mile residency restriction for murderers and sex offenders moves the solution in the wrong direction.
"Every sex offender is different. Every case is different," Jennings said.
He said residency restrictions in Dover forced the neighborhood to suffer not because of him, but because of the restrictions, recounting one day there were police cars and helicopters in his neighborhood.
Also objecting to the bill, especially the residency restrictions, was Clair Ebel of the N.H. Civil Liberties Union, the organization that represented Jennings.
"If 2,500 feet was struck down ... 25 miles is a laughing matter," Ebel said.
Ebel said it would be impossible to identify all the relatives of victims making the law as written unenforceable with no possibility of prosecution.
Following the hearing, Wendelboe said it was not the intent of the bill to include sex offenders as well as murderers in the 25-mile-radius clause and agreed that portion needed to be rewritten.
Many of those testifying said HB 1647-FN should be used as a vehicle for an interim study to discuss issues of recidivism and truth-in-sentencing laws.
No decision as to the future of HB 1647-FN has yet been made. ..Source.. Gail Ober
January 27, 2010
Whats Happening with Sex Offenders - in the Courts?
1-27-2010 National:
Our big day is here, our NEW blog is now available to folks. The blog has one main purpose, and that is to answer this question: "Whats happening with Sex Offenders - in the Courts." This blog is to replace a section of our old website which was lost when Yahoo closed Geocities, hence that site is now history.
Before explaining more about the blog, please remember it is new and I am still putting the final touches on it, including loading of cases (actual decisions) that I have been storing. Any thoughts of how to make it better -for all folks- is welcomed and appreciated.
This blog is based on Federal Circuit Court jurisdictions, so you will first see the circuits displayed, followed by each individual state. Also notice that the Federal Circuit has a few off-shore jurisdictions which we are not usually familiar with (Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam). They are included to post whatever decision that may come down with.
Now, if you choose a state from that main index page, you will see whats happened or happening in that state. At the top of that state page will be links to all the other states that are in the same Federal Circuit that the state you chose. Folks familiar with legal research will know the value of this.
Once you are done viewing a state just click on the blog title to get back to the main index page. Yes, it will take a bit of time to learn the ins and outs of this blog.
Now, to follow "Issues" there is a "Subject Index" which if you select an issue it will go to all the states that, have or had, this issue in their courts. In addition, if a state has a Case-in-Progress, you can selct that as a issue to find them (Nebraska is an example today). A Case-in-Progress is different than a case that is being appealed, in that, a Case-in-Progress has no real decision just yet.
Also, there is a "Subject Index" for "States w/cases in the US Supreme Court" thats one I like because you can find out where the cases originated and what issues the high court will be considering.
There are many other subtle points too numerous to mention here, so please enjoy yourself. Pile on your questions, ultimately they will make this blog better.
PS: In each state there are "State Resources" for folks, hopefully places where they can get some answers or legal help. As to legal help, any lawyer that wishes to be listed can contact me (See RED BAR) to have his/her listing posted in the appropriate state.
For now, have a great day and a better tomorrow. Suggestions or cases you think should be listed, all are appreciated.
eAdvocate
O'Malley activates sex offender advisory board
1-27-2010 Maryland:
Governor plans to reconstitute panel that never met
Gov. Martin O'Malley has activated the state's dormant Sexual Offender Advisory Board - a decision that comes after state lawmakers learned this month that the board they created four years ago never met and failed to produce a required report on the state's sex offender policies.
The Democratic governor is expected to announce today that reconstitution of the board is among six proposals on sex offenders he will push for this year. He'll also seek lifetime supervision of violent and repeat sex offenders, changes to the state sex offender registry that will bring it into federal compliance, and criminal background checks for employees at all facilities that care for or supervise children.
The board's primary function, said O'Malley spokesman Shaun Adamec, will be to "help redefine its own purpose." O'Malley's plan is to add members with specific expertise in sex offender treatment and broaden the authority of the board.
Former Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr. will serve as chairman. Other members have not yet been selected, Adamec said, though the law requires that several Cabinet members take part. The first meeting is to be next week.
Curran, who is the governor's father-in-law, said he has long advocated sex offender reforms, including civil commitments for predators, something he said he still favors. Curran said he believes the board "can make a real difference."
"We'll see what the issues are, what the problems are and what solutions we can all agree upon," Curran said. He plans to spend the next several days studying sex offender laws and proposed reforms.
Some lawmakers who approved creation of the board as part of emergency sex offender legislation in 2006 say the O'Malley administration needs to explain why it hasn't been meeting over the years.
The governor's aides say lawmakers should have been aware the board was not meeting because O'Malley proposed changing its members last year and in 2008 as part of a failed effort to require that homeless sex offenders be added to the state registry.
The House Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing one week from today to "ascertain what exactly happened," said Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons, a Montgomery County Democrat on the committee.
He said the idea behind the board was that it conduct a "sober, careful review" of state policy so that lawmakers did not propose reactionary reforms when a tragedy occurred.
Sex offense has catapulted back into the spotlight with the December killing of an 11-year-old girl on the Eastern Shore. A registered sex offender is a suspect in the crime. ..Source.. Julie Bykowicz
After Three Months, Only 35 Subscriptions for Newsday's Web Site
1-27-2010 New York:
In late October, Newsday, the Long Island daily that the Dolans bought for $650 million, put its web site, newsday.com, behind a pay wall. The paper was one of the first non-business newspapers to take the plunge by putting up a pay wall, so in media circles it has been followed with interest. Could its fate be a sign of what others, including The New York Times, might expect?
So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com?
The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class.
That astoundingly low figure was revealed in a newsroom-wide meeting last week by publisher Terry Jimenez when a reporter asked how many people had signed up for the site. Mr. Jimenez didn't know the number off the top of his head, so he asked a deputy sitting near him. He replied 35.
Michael Amon, a social services reporter, asked for clarification.
"I heard you say 35 people," he said, from Newsday's auditorium in Melville. "Is that number correct?"
Mr. Jimenez nodded.
Hellville, indeed.
The web site redesign and relaunch cost the Dolans $4 million, according to Mr. Jimenez. With those 35 people, they've grossed about $9,000.
In that time, without question, web traffic has begun to plummet, and, certainly, advertising will follow as well.
Of course, there are a few caveats. Anyone who has a newspaper subscription is allowed free access; anyone who has Optimum Cable, which is owned by the Dolans and Cablevision, also gets it free. Newsday representatives claim that 75 percent of Long Island either has a subscription or Optimum Cable.
"We're the freebie newsletter that comes with your HBO," sniffed one Newsday reporter.
Mr. Jimenez was in no mood to apologize. "That's 35 more than I would have thought it would have been," said Mr. Jimenez to the assembled staff, according to five interviews with Newsday staffers.
"Given the number of households in our market that have access to Newsday's Web site as a result of other subscriptions, it is no surprise that a relatively modest number have chosen the pay option," said a Cablevision spokeswoman.
Nevertheless, traffic has fallen. In December, the web site had 1.5 million unique visits, a drop from 2.2 million in October, according to Nielsen Media Online.
In the short time that the Dolans have owned Newsday, it's been a circus. When they were closing the deal to buy the paper in May 2008, they had their personal spokesman scream at an editor who assigned a reporter to visit the Dolans, seeking comment; there was a moment back in January of last year, when Newsday editor John Mancini walked out of the newsroom because of a dispute over how the paper was handling the Knicks; in the summer, the paper refused to run ads by Verizon, a rival; Tim Knight, the paper's publisher, and John Mancini, the editor, eventually both left.
The paper, which traditionally has been a powerful money maker, lost $7 million in the first three quarters of last year, according to Mr. Jimenez at last week's meeting.
In October, the web site relaunched and was redesigned. One of the principals behind the redesign is Mr. Mancini's replacement, editor Debby Krenek.
To say the least, the project has not been a newsroom favorite. "The view of the newsroom is the web site sucks," said one staffer.
"It's an abomination," said another.
And now the paper is in the middle of a labor dispute in which it wants to extract a 10 percent pay cut from all employees. The cut was turned down by a lopsided vote of 473 to 10, this past Sunday.
Things are bleak in old Hellville, the pet nickname some reporters have established for life on Long Island.
"In the meeting with Terry, half the questions weren't about labor issues, but about why isn't this feature in the paper anymore?" said one reporter. "People are still mad about losing our national correspondents, our foreign bureaus and the prestige of working for a great newspaper. The last thing we had was a living wage, being one of the few papers where you're paid well. And to have that last thing yanked from you? It's made people so mad." ..Source.. John Koblin
