5-7-2010 Kansas:
Last night, city commissioners unanimously voted to decline a Cereal Malt Beverage license for Jason Lembright, owner of Lemmy’s Pizzeria and registered sex offender. The commissioners also unanimously voted to accept the proposed plan for the Community Development Block Grant.
The commissioners decided that former K-State football player Lembright does not meet every requirement to qualify for a CMD license. In addition to meeting the objective qualifications to obtain a CMD license, a citizen must be deemed “of good character and reputation in the community which he or she resides.”
Lembright was convicted of sexual battery against a 21-year-old female in Manhattan. His 10-year sex offender registration began in 2007. He was sentenced to 12 months in prison and 25 hours of community service, which he served.
When completing his CMD license application, Lembright informed the city of his status on the sex offender registration list.
“I let everyone I hire — especially females — know I am on the [sex offender registration] list,” Lembright said. “I’m not trying to hide anything. I can’t change the past, but I am putting forth my best efforts to run an honest and family-friendly business.”
Before the commissioners voted, Lembright said he has raised over $1,000 for schools in Manhattan, given leftover food from Lemmy’s Pizzeria to a homeless shelter and held fundraisers for the K-State marching band.
However, commissioner Jayme Morris-Hardeman said, “It is difficult for me to find anyone on this list of good character.”
The other commissioners said they agree with Morris-Hardeman.
“I will continue running the restaurant,” Lembright said. “I get more joy out of seeing people happy when they leave my restaurant than by making money.”
Mayor Bruce Snead said this had set a precedent and hoped the commission had been fair. ..Source.. Natalie Birzer
Friday, May 7, 2010
Lemmy’s Pizzeria owner denied Cereal Malt Beverage license
California parole agency breaks up sex-offender encampment in Anaheim
Interesting how quickly Parole Agents solved the problem, when it caused them to park way away from the Parole office and walk to get to work!5-7-2010 California:
On Wednesday, officials with the Parole Department relocated 30 to 40 paroled offenders who had been living in cars and RVs outside its office on Coronado Street, police say.
The beat-up station wagons and peeling RVs had been turning up outside the Coronado Street parole office in Anaheim for months, parked through the night. But in recent weeks it seemed they filled the whole block.
In Orange County, where more than a third of the paroled sex offenders are homeless, police estimated that 30 or 40 had taken to camping on the streets in this industrial stretch.
The situation appeared to stem from Jessica's Law, the 2006 statute that forbids sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools, parks or other places where children gather, severely limiting lodging options in densely populated cities.
"These people have difficulty finding residence, so they make do," said Anaheim police Lt. Julian Harvey.
The sex offenders are required to meet regularly with their parole officers, and those without a power source use the office to charge up the electronic ankle bracelets that monitor their whereabouts.
After media inquiries and business complaints, however, the state Parole Department cleared the block Wednesday night, moving the sex offenders to another location. Anaheim police Sgt. Tim Schmidt said the parole agency did not inform the Anaheim police where the offenders had been relocated.
"We had no clue they were doing that," Schmidt said Thursday. "Somebody made a quick, abrupt decision that we didn't know anything about."
The Parole Department did not return calls seeking comment.
On Wednesday afternoon, hours before the streets were cleared, a convicted 41-year-old child molester was sitting near the parole office in his vehicle, his belongings filling the back seat. He said he lost his lodging nearby after a Boys & Girls Club moved in down the block, putting him in violation of Jessica's Law. After four years in prison, he said he has been living in his vehicle for months and that nobody has hassled him.
The California Department of Corrections, which runs the Parole Department, "has been very good to us," he said. "They know we can't go anywhere." He said the sex offenders who camped there did not associate with each other because the law forbade it. He said he felt a measure of protection living near the parole office.
"All of us are safer than in the streets," he said. Still, he did not want to be identified for fear of retaliation. He said he had heard a rumor that there might be a drive-by shooting targeting the campers.
According to the Parole Department, California has about 8,580 registered sex offenders on parole, about 2,000 of whom are classified as transient. Of Orange County's 302 registered sex offenders on parole, 119 are transient, and in Los Angeles County, the homeless represent 421 of 1,896 offenders.
"The bottom line is, they're going to be in the city some place," Kenneth Ford, the Parole Department's chief deputy regional administrator, said in an interview earlier this week. "We're trying to make them be compliant with the law. You're not going to find a lot of compliant housing for them."
Ford said the Parole Department had reached an understanding with the Anaheim Police Department that there were advantages to having the parolees at a specific location.
"If they were going to be transient, they wanted them to be transient in an area where they know they are," Ford said. "My understanding now is the area is not acceptable to the chief of police."
The Police Department insists it never had such an understanding with the parole agency. "We do not have any formal or informal agreement," Schmidt said. He added that although camping on a city street violates an Anaheim ordinance, police had refrained from citing the sex offenders in hope that a solution could be reached with the Parole Department.
Jerry Grinstead, who co-owns an emergency-vehicle business near the parole office, has watched warily as the overnight campers proliferated in recent weeks.
When a television news report identified the transients as sex offenders last week, however, his worries grew, especially because his granddaughter and daughter-in-law sometimes visit his office. On Monday, he said, he met with Anaheim police Chief John Welter and Mayor Pro-Tem Harry Sidhu to express his concerns.
Though the sex offenders have been dispersed, the company's co-owner, Travis Grinstead, said that he has seen some of them camped on the surrounding blocks in their vehicles.
The sex offenders are a shunned and hated fraction of the traffic at the parole office. On Wednesday afternoon, milling around the street in front of the office, a group of thickly tattooed ex-convicts were taking a break from mandatory drug rehabilitation class. They said they did not know where the sex offenders were, but it was best for them to keep out of sight.
"This is probably the safest block they could be on," said Richard Velasquez, 33, of Anaheim. But he added: "Don't get me wrong. If I find out there's one, I'm punching him in the face." ..Source.. Christopher Goffard, Los Angeles Times
Thursday, May 6, 2010
States Vary on dealing with youth sex offenders
5-6-2010 National:
ATLANTA — When Ricky Blackman was 16, he pleaded guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl, and an Iowa judge ordered him to register as a sex offender.
But if Blackman had lived in at least a half-dozen other states, his name would never have appeared on a registry because states are deeply divided on how to deal with the nation's youngest sex offenders.
Juvenile justice advocates want rehabilitation instead of registration, yet public safety experts argue children must be protected from predators, even if they are minors.
The confusing array of rules for juvenile sex offenders persists despite a vast overhaul that was adopted four years ago to bring clarity and consistency to the nation's sex offender regristration laws.
"It's a real bind for the states," said Michele Deitch, an attorney who teaches criminal justice policy at the University of Texas. "Do you want to comply with what could be poor public policy or risk not complying with the federal law? And there's no easy answer."
Twenty-one states currently require juveniles convicted of a serious sex crime to register with law enforcement, according to an Associated Press review of state laws and interviews with state officials.
In 19 other states, only juveniles convicted as adults or who move from a state that requires registration are required to provide their information to authorities. In the remaining states, the laws vary. In Nevada, for instance, a juvenile sex offender can petition a judge to set aside registration requirements.
In 2006, President George W. Bush signed a law requiring states to adopt a series of sex offender measures, including the registration of all juveniles who commit serious sex crimes such as abuse or rape. The law was designed to create a national sex offender registry and toughen penalties for those who fail to register.
Ohio is so far the only state to meet the new federal standards, but states have until July to comply so they can build up their online registries and ensure the information can be incorporated into the national database.
Of the 21 states that require juvenile sex offenders to register, at least four states do not publish all of their details online, such as photographs and home addresses.
Critics said young offenders will be more likely to reoffend because of the humiliation of being labeled a sex offender.
"These kids can get better and here you are punishing them for life without offering any treatment. That to me is unethical," said Dr. Valerie Arnold, the interim chief of child and adolescent psychiatry at the University of Tennessee. "Even convicted murderers aren't put on a list like this."
It's unclear how many of the nation's estimated 686,000 sex offenders are juveniles. But a recent study by the University of New Hampshire Crimes against Children Research Center that found more than a third of those who sexually abuse children are juveniles.
"It's a difficult balance," said Ernie Allen of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. "We're in favor of the rehabilitative ideal and targeting treatment for the youngest offenders, but many of America's offenders are kids — and they are committing very serious sex offenses."
The stress of being listed on a public registry can be overwhelming for young sex offenders.
In Blackman's case, his family later moved to Oklahoma, where he was also required to register. After his name was posted, Blackman said he was kicked out of school and neighbors began harassing his family.
One neighbor followed him with a video camera and insisted the family move, and they eventually decided to resettle in a rural area to escape the scrutiny.
"I was really depressed and I was always stressed out," said Blackman, now 21. "It changed me. I lost a lot of my childhood and now I have a lot of catching up to do."
Even though his record was expunged, his name stayed on the list until his mother lobbied state lawmakers to change the law. Blackman has since been removed from the registry.
Yet he says he still suffers with the stigma — reluctant to go to the park, watch his little brother's basketball games or be alone with his cousin's infant — fearing his actions could be misconstrued.
"It's sad. He's 21 now and there's so much damage that's been done to him," said Blackman's mother, Mary Duval. "All he wants is his life back but he doesn't know if it's going to happen."
Those who want juvenile sex offenders on registries acknowledge the requirements are not ideal, but they say the benefits to public safety far outweigh the impact on a juvenile sex offender's psyche.
Supporters often refer to the case of Amie Zyla, who was sexually assaulted when she was 8 years old in Wisconsin by a 14-year-old family friend. She became a leading advocate of juvenile registration requirements when her perpetrator was sentenced to 25 years in prison after pleading guilty to later fondling two teen boys.
"The simple truth is that juvenile sex offenders turn into adult predators," she said at a 2005 Congressional hearing. "Kids all over the country need the same kind of protection as in Wisconsin."
Yet there is a wide disparity in how states treat juvenile offenders.
In Texas, where judges decide whether to put juveniles on the registry, lawmakers led a push several years ago to make it automatic. But the measure's sponsor, Texas state Rep. Jim McReynolds, said he abandoned the effort after concluding the new requirements would be too costly and may end up harming the juvenile offenders.
"The more I began to look at it, the more I saw it was pretty doggone tough on juveniles," said McReynolds, who chairs the House Corrections Committee. He now favors more treatment.
In Maryland, powerful lawmakers are aiming to require those 14 and older who commit rape and other serious sex crimes to register.
"Juveniles are treated as adults in other areas of the law," said Delegate Bill Frank of Baltimore County, one of the measure's sponsors. "And if a juvenile commits a first-degree rape, that juvenile should be required to register as a sexual offender." ..Source.. GREG BLUESTEIN
Ordinance would ban sex offenders from most affordable housing
Since logic and evidence are not tools that will keep political folks in office, they will ignore same in favor of "it sounds good" to garner public support. Of course public safety is not enhaced following political sounds good theory but they simply do not care.5-6-2010 Minnesota:
Three city councilors are proposing an ordinances that would prevent convicted Level III sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a church, playground or day care. But critics say the measure would push those offenders back toward a life of crime.
If you look closely, there’s a spot on the Aerial Lift Bridge where Level III sex offenders could live.
Otherwise, if an ordinance proposed by three Duluth city councilors passes on Monday, the number of areas sex offenders who are most likely to reoffend can live in Duluth would be severely limited. The ordinance would all but bar them from most low-income housing areas in the city.
That’s according to a map put together by the city of Duluth that shows where the offenders would be banned — which is within 2,000 feet of any church, playground or day care.
Not that the councilors who proposed the ordinance have any problem with that.
“For me, this is about the (Minnesota) Department of Corrections accurately placing these people in the community the way it was meant to be,” said 4th District Councilor Kerry Gauthier, the lead author of the ordinance.
“The idea is to make sure (Level III sex offenders) aren’t around children,” said At Large Councilor Dan Hartman, who is co-sponsoring the ordinance along with 3rd District Councilor Sharla Gardner. “I think this is an opportunity to make people feel safer in the community.”
But some experts disagree that would be the case. Studies suggest that limiting where sex offenders can live doesn’t reduce the rate of repeat offenses — but actually increases it, said William Donnay, the director of risk assessment and community notification for the Minnesota Department of Corrections.
A Department of Corrections study of all 224 sex offenders from 1990 to 2002 who returned to prison for another offense found that in not a single case would the reoffense been prevented by restricting where the offender could live.
Donnay says other studies show that making it harder for an inmate to find housing increases that person’s instability, leads to homelessness and increases chances of reoffending. An ordinance like the one proposed by the Duluth City Council, he said, provides a false sense of security for residents.
“People conclude because of the residency restrictions, there are never any sex offenders in my neighborhood,” he said. “It’s not where they’re sleeping at night, who they’re hanging out with, who they are associating with. It’s where are they spending their time during waking hours? That’s what we need to look at in terms of recidivism.”
Tom Roy, executive director of Arrowhead Regional Corrections, which supervises the offenders, said he also believes the restrictions might increase the likelihood of reoffending.
“We would support efforts that would tend to support sex offenders rather than destabilize their lives,” Roy said.
Gauthier rejects the notion that the ordinance could increase the chances a Level III offender would reoffend, calling that “conjecture” by the Department of Corrections.
He said areas of West Duluth and Duluth Heights might offer offenders affordable housing, and he notes that there would be exemptions for offenders who have already found housing and for offenders to live with family or in a facility owned by the corrections department.
That means Level III offenders could still live in a house in Lincoln Park the corrections department owns and uses as transitional shelter — and also happens to be a half-block away from Gauthier’s home.
Still, offenders would largely be banned from the areas and facilities they typically use for housing now, such as the Seaway Hotel and the CHUM shelter.
“Do you really want Level III predators to be staying at a shelter?” Gauthier said. “I think we need to find them more stability than that.”
Gardner said the ordinance isn’t about reducing recidivism but protecting the community, noting that nine sex offenders currently have been placed in Duluth, though not all of them lived here before their crimes.
“It’s too easy to place people in Duluth because there aren’t restrictions,” she said. “This is about the future; it won’t disturb what’s already in place. I don’t think it will do harm and will ultimately protect our community.” ..Source.. Brandon Stahl, Duluth News Tribune
Appeal denied for sex offender
How the Texas high court ever came to this conclusion is beyond me. Clearly this is a excessive punishment for an administrative offense: "In interpreting the Eighth Amendment, it will be regarded as a precept of justice that punishment for crime should be graduated and proportioned to the offense." Weems -v- US 217 U.S. 349 (1910). My guess is his lawyer simply failed to present an adequate defense under Weems. Sad sad sad...5-4-2010 Texas:
AUSTIN The highest criminal court in Texas on Wednesday denied an appeal for an Odessa man serving life in prison for failure to register as a sex offender. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Austin denied a writ of habeas corpus to 62-year-old Charles William Robertson.
An Ector County jury convicted Robertson in March 2007 and sentenced him to life in prison, the maximum penalty. District Attorney Bobby Bland at the time said Robertson’s sentence was “the most I’ve ever heard of for failure to comply with sex offender registration.” He added that the sentence underscored a tendency of local juries to be hard on sex offenders.
A few months after the trial, Robertson pleaded guilty to molesting an 11-year-old girl Odessa girl. The girl’s grandmother declined to comment Wednesday on the appeals court decision.
Robertson, who previously had been convicted of rape, had filed his final appeal in March. ..Source.. ODESSA AMERICAN
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Facebook vigilante who outed 6,000 paedophiles is 'attacked by shamed offenders' (and he's set to name 8,000 more)
This man claims he is not a vigilante, but notice, he is taking the law into his own hands, and even violating the rights of many. The court records are secretly accessed and not available to the public, so where does he get the right to do this?5-5-2010 United Kingdom:
Is similar vigilantism the next step here in the U.S.?
Paedophiles named and shamed on a vigilante website have attacked its creator in the street, it was claimed today.
Chris Wittwer, who put the names and photos of 6,000 convicted sex offenders on Facebook, says he has been attacked three times near his home in Exeter by people he has put on the site.
He also claims he has received threats to his life and is now constantly concerned for his safety after launching his internet campaign.
‘Three people have attacked me in the last few months directly as a result of names I have put on there,’ he said.
‘They are on the sex offenders register and live in Exeter.’
Mr Wittwer, 34, says he includes people who have been charged on the list but not yet convicted for an offence.
But he said that he did not want to wrongly put anyone on the list. He said he compiles the list, which includes photographs and where the offenders live, from press releases, court records and the sex offenders register.
He then cross-references the name of a sex criminal against the national sex accessing the sex offenders register and court records which are not available to members of the public.
He would not reveal how but said he had secret sources and has another 8,000 names to go on the site.
‘I get lots of names and find out which court they were at,’ he said.
He set-up the page two-and-a-half years ago and has attracted 18,000 followersfrom all over the country.
He spends three or four hours a day doing it and is currently setting up a dedicated website.
Mr Wittwer claimed the government does not do enough to inform people about sex offenders living in the community.
‘I don't condone any violence,’ he said. ‘I am not a vigilante.
‘People can see who is in their area and keep their children away from them. There is more justice served by what I am doing than any court or jail can ever do.
‘What I am doing is a serious deterrent for people who have done it, are thinking of doing it or re-offending. ..Source.. Daily Mail Reporter
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Federal Judge Bars 'Sexting' Prosecution of Pa. Girls
5-4-2010 Pennsylvania:
A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction barring northeastern Pennsylvania prosecutors from filing charges against several teenage girls in connection with racy cell phone photos.
U.S. District Judge James Munley issued the order Friday after Wyoming County District Attorney Jeff Mitchell said he had no plans to file charges against three girls who filed a federal lawsuit last year over the matter. The ruling follows a decision in March by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals barring prosecutors from pursuing felony charges in the case.
"It was a decision by agreement," said attorney Michael Donohue, who represents the Wyoming County district attorney's office in the case. "Mr. Mitchell has said he would not proceed with prosecution, so the case is moot."
The girls and their parents, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, said the photos were not pornographic and the girls did not send or receive them.
The judge has given the parties 30 days to resolve the issue of legal fees.
In October 2008, officials at Tunkhannock Area High School confiscated five cell phones and found that boys had been trading photos of scantily clad, seminude or nude teenage girls. The students with the cell phones ranged in age from 11 to 17. One image showed a 16-year-old girl just out of the shower and topless, with a towel wrapped around her waist.
Then-District Attorney George Skumanick met with about 20 students and their parents and offered them a deal in which the youths wouldn't be prosecuted if they took a class on sexual harassment, sexual violence and gender roles. Seventeen of the students accepted the offer, but three sued Skumanick. Munley in March 2009 temporarily barred the prosecution.
Pennsylvania's child pornography law makes it a felony to possess or disseminate photos of a minor engaged in sexual activity, "lewd exhibition of the genitals" or nudity that is meant to titillate. ..Source.. Law.com
U.S. Prosecutor crusades to falsely crucify a man for child porn
5-4-2010:
From Sex Hysteria Blog:
Carlos Alfredo Simon-Timmerman was arrested for possession of child pornography. The only problem was that it wasn’t child pornography and any cop or prosecutor with a double-digit IQ should have known that. Unfortunately, anti-sex crusaders have never been known for their intellectual prowess.
The child porn that Simon-Timmerman had in his possession was a video called “Little Lupe the Innocent; Don’t Be Fooled By Her Baby Face.” The movie stared noted film actress Lupe Fuentes.
Despite the fact that it would have been a simple matter to verify the age of the porn star, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenifer Yois Hernandez-Vega proceeded to prosecute Simon-Timmerman based solely on the fact that the star looks under age. Yep, that’s correct. Prosecutor Hernandez-Vega apparently thinks that a guess based on nothing more than appearance trumps the actual fact of her age.
Reading through the story, it’s patently clear that the prosecutor was not the slightest bit interested in justice or the innocence of her target. She was totally vested in a conviction despite any facts and enthusiastically embarked on a crusade to destroy the life of Carlos Alfredo Simon-Timmerman using her powers as an agent of the government.
For the remainder of this interesting post:
Sex offender public park ban bill goes to governor
Further proof that lawmakers refuse to look at the circumstances of the case they use to support a law. Notice, the man they cite has NEVER BEEN CONVICTED of any sex offense. Accordingly, how can lawmakers use such a case to support this law? Lawmakers make connections that are plain dumb and do not care who they hurt in the process. Also notice the date of the crime they cite: 1960 48 years ago!5-4-2010 Illinois:
Passed by state lawmakers, legislation that would ban convicted sex offenders from stepping foot in any public Illinois parks now awaits Gov. Pat Quinn's signature.
The legislation, sponsored by State Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Hinsdale, prevents all sexual predators and child sex offenders from being in or loitering within 500 feet of a public park.
Illinois currently prohibits sex offenders from being in or loitering within 500 feet of public recreational areas when children are present. The new legislation would keep make it a crime to be near or enter a park at any time.
"Sexual offenders don't need to be hanging around public parks where there are lots of kids and lots of people walking or running alone," Dillard said recently in a press release. "Unfortunately, we've seen some terrible tragedies in public parks. We need to keep these individuals out of areas where there is often limited oversight by law enforcement officers, as well as surroundings that offer seclusion."
In the release, Dillard referred to the March 14, 1960, attack and murder of three Riverside women in Starved Rock State Park, calling the crime a "sexual assault."
Chester Weger (Note: Is this man innocent? [2004 article]) , the man convicted of one of the murders and now serving a life prison sentence, has never been charged or brought to court on any sex offense.
If signed by the governor, the new law would make the violation a Class A misdemeanor and boost any subsequent violation to a Class 4 felony. ..Source.. The Times
Monday, May 3, 2010
Justice Denied To Registered Sex Offender
Justice delayed is justice denied!5-3-2010 Connecticut:
We ask a lot of clients when we ask them to trust that justice will be done in the courts. While we seek to improve public confidence in the courts, there is still plenty of reason to be suspect. Consider a case of mine. His case is docked under number S.C. 18178.
I write about it now with the client’s consent, but I do not use his name. I write about it because I cannot get the courts to act, and my client has grown weary of waiting for justice. I write out of a sense of despair.
The man pleaded under the Alford doctrine on the eve of trial to offenses arising from the complaint of a young child for whom he had baby sat. Such a plea reflects a compromise: The client does not acknowledge doing what he is charged with; he merely agreed to accept a plea because the terms are better than what he would get if a jury believed the state’s case.
My client received no jail sentence. He was told by his trial lawyer and the trial judge at sentencing that he would not have to register as a sex offender. The state said nothing as the lawyer and judge assured the client he would not have to register.
Here is what was said at the time the plea was entered. “It is our understanding and belief, I think as well as the state’s attorney, that none of these charges carry any sexual offender registration,” his lawyer said. “That is my understanding,” the judge echoed. By used-car lot standards, the client had struck a deal and knew what he was buying. An implied condition of this unholy contract was no registration.
But we all know that the exalted and rarefied standards of a used car lot far exceed what measure of justice we offer those accused of crimes. In the criminal court, the implied condition can be condensed to the following rule: Screw the defendant to the wall anyway you can. Errors at trial are harmless. Lawyers provide effective assistance of counsel even when asleep. Trials need only be fair, not perfect. The presumption of innocence is a three-dollar whore, and many courts continue to argue her cost is too high.
After sentencing, the client sought to go about the difficult task of rebuilding his life.
Imagine his surprise when well after the plea he was informed that he would have to register as a sex offender.
I got involved in his case after a handful of other lawyers had tried and failed to extricate the client from this lawless nightmare. Just barely I was able to keep him out of jail. He registered as an offender, and now lives with the unbearable strain of a crackpot neighbor’s monitoring his every move. She thinks she’s protecting the world. When my client asks for protection from her, the police ignore him.
The life of a sex offender is nasty and brutish, you see.
So I appealed the requirement that he be placed on the registry. I filed my brief in the state Appellate Court. For reasons unknown to me, the state Supreme Court moved the case to its docket. And I argued on behalf of my client. The argument took place in mid-October 2008, some 18 months ago.
I did not think the argument before the justices went well. “Why didn’t your client petition for habeas corpus relief?” one justice asked. “The remedy he seeks is the benefit of the bargain he struck. He does not want a new trial,” I answered.
From time to time my client asks me when the court will act. I tell him I do not know. There is nothing I can do. We have petitioned Oz. We must now wait.
But how long must this man wait for a decision? Forever?
I called the Supreme Court clerk’s officer the other day to make sure I hadn’t missed publication of the decision. The case is still undecided, I was told. I passed word along to my client. His response is privileged.
How long, Madam Chief Justice, must we wait for a decision in this simple case? Will it be another month, or another year? Justice delayed is justice denied, I’ve heard it said. Clarence Darrow once observed, there is no justice in or our of court. Had Darrow lived and practiced in our fair state, he might also have added: “There are no final decisions, either.” ..Source.. NORM PATTIS
Sex questions deleted from teen risk survey
5-3-2010 Wisconsin:
JANESVILLE — Janesville middle and high school students took a survey last week about risky behaviors such as drug use.
But they weren’t asked about sexual activity.
Janesville school officials decided those questions should not be asked.
“The questions were more graphic than what we have given the students before, and we thought parents needed more time to view the questions and decide to opt out if that’s what they wanted to do,” Superintendent Karen Schulte said.
The Youth Risk Behavior Survey is provided online by the state Department of Public Instruction. Districts can tailor the surveys to their needs.
Students in grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 took the survey. Parents were informed ahead of time and were given the opportunity to opt out.
The full survey asks questions about sex but also ethnicity, gender, weapons, fighting, bullying, suicide, tobacco and alcohol use, exercise, relations with family and teachers and whether the student wears a bicycle helmet.
Some say knowledge is power when it comes to combating teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.
Schulte doesn’t disagree.
She said the full survey might be used at some future time, but no decision has been made.
Rock County’s teen birth rate in 2008 was 39.5 per 1,000 teens age 15-19. That’s the ninth-highest rate among Wisconsin’s 72 counties, according to the state Office of Health Information.
Among surrounding counties, the teen birth rate was 18.8 in Dane County, 25.3 in Green County and 26.9 in Walworth County. The state average was 31.3
In 2009, nearly 1,950 teen girls gave birth in Rock County.
Rock County’s sexually transmitted infections rate for teens was fourth in the state in 2008 after Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha counties.
Statewide, the rate of teens contracting sexually transmitted infections is on the rise.
Janesville administered its own survey from 1990 to 2008. Questions about sex were not a part of that survey. Schulte said injecting new questions was too much, too soon.
“The additional questions, we thought, were much more invasive of personal privacy” than in the old survey, Schulte said.
Schulte said her concern was what parents might think when their children came home and reported they took a survey that asked about oral sex, for example.
“We just thought we might get pushback from the community, so we thought, ‘We have to have more time before we start asking these questions,’” she said.
The middle school version of the state survey asks five questions in its sex section. The high school version asks 10.
The middle school survey asks whether it’s important to the student to delay sexual intercourse; whether the student has ever had sex, and if so, when was the first time; the number of sexual partners the student has had and whether a condom was used the last time the student had sex.
The high school survey also asks how many people the student has had sex with in the past three months, whether the student drank or took drugs prior to the last time she or he had sex, what pregnancy-prevention method was used the last time they had sex, whether the student has had sex with males, females or both and whether the student has had oral sex.
Marge Hallenbeck, director of at-risk and multi-cultural programs, said survey data are used to show needs when applying for grants, they help the district’s alcohol/drugs committee spot trends, and they can be used to steer curriculum changes.
Hallenbeck said the state survey is more useful than the district’s old survey. Officials had to wait months for the local results to be processed, but the online survey results will be available almost immediately.
No decision has been made about what survey to use in the future, Schulte said.
Brian Weaver, school health programs consultant at the Department of Public Instruction, said that of the districts that use the survey, about half remove the sex questions from the middle school surveys.
Weaver said he advises districts that if they think the sex questions will be too controversial, they should remove them.
But if a district scraps the survey altogether, “then you don’t have any data available,” Weaver said.
Weaver said students are told that if they don’t want to answer a particular question, they don’t have to. ..Source.. By FRANK SCHULTZ
Feds recognize Delaware's work to go after child predators
Another state that will be violating rights of their registrants using the Adam Walsh Act, the Act of entrapment!5-3-2010 Delaware:
Wilmington, Del. — Delaware has become just the second state in the country to achieve compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act.
This recognition by the federal government reflects the significant steps Delaware has taken in recent years to strengthen the fight against criminals who prey on children, Attorney General Beau Biden said.
The State Department of Safety and Homeland Security, Delaware State Police, and members of the General Assembly worked with the Department of Justice to enact legislation that brought Delaware into compliance with the Adam Walsh Act, Biden said. The agencies has have an ongoing partnership to track offenders and investigate and prevent sex crimes.
“We will never stop fighting to get these criminals off the streets and away from our children,” Biden said.
The U.S. Department of Justice recently determined that Delaware has substantially implemented the provisions of the sex offender registration and notification provisions of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. The Act aligns sex offender registry standards across the states and asks states to place the burden of proof on convicted sex offenders.
Anyone know what they are talking about here? Please e-mail me: eAdvocate
Biden created the Delaware Department of Justice Child Predator Unit and established the Delaware Child Predator Task Force in partnership with the Delaware State police. He has fought for tougher sex offender registry laws and led the effort to enact greater penalties for child pornography offenses. As a result of these efforts, over $1.3 million in federal grant funding has already been secured to expand Delaware’s fight against child predators.
Under current federal rules, states that fail to substantially implement these provisions by July 26 stand to lose 10 percent of their annual federal Byrne Justice Assistance Grant funding.
Biden’s office is overseeing the prosecution of former Lewes, Del. pediatrician Dr. Earl Bradley, who is accused of raping or sexually abusing 103 children at his office. ..Source.. Community News
Sunday, May 2, 2010
What qualifies any state legislature to make medical / psychological terms mandating those in that industry to follow?
5-2-2010 National:
Interesting thought: In all court cases when a "Qualified Expert" testifies, the court through the lawyers, requires that the EXPERT be qualified on the subject they are testifying about.
Example: In civil commitment cases the defense usually calls a "expert witness" to testify about their client, and before the court allows that to happen, the expert must be pre-qualified. See IN RE COMMITMENT OF DAVID DODSON where Dr Anna Shursen was qualified through her credentials.
Accepting that as a legal norm raises this question: What qualifies a state legislature to create terms (ex: mental abnormality) that professionals (i.e., in the medical / psychological industry), and even courts must follow? Especially when these terms can result in someone's liberty being taken away.
Even the "Will of the People" is not qualified as they have had zero training in the field.
These questions have never been raised in a court of law.
eAdvocate
PS: Likewise, what qualifies a legislature to say, one crime is more dangerous than another, hence then set Tier levels for sex offenders?
Jessica's Law Makes Communities Safer?
Difference Makers - Robert Ekas: First Amendment Freedoms
Think carefully about this video (as to FREE SPEECH not flipping the bird) when it comes to denying RSOs their right to FREE SPEECH on social networks and similar Internet sites. While politicians say, its only providing Internet IDs to protect children, in reality such is used to deny RSOs rights granted by the Constitution: FREE SPEECH, children are but a pretext to kick RSOs off the Internet!
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Difference Makers - Robert Ekas | ||||
| ||||
Megan's Law doesn't work
5-2-2010 New Jersey:
For the past 15 years, the public has been left with a false sense of security. A federally funded study has determined that Megan's Law does not work.
Conducted by independent psychologists along with staff from the state Department of Corrections' Office of Policy and Planning, this comprehensive study looked at 21 years of sex offense rates. It confirms in New Jersey what other studies have found elsewhere. Megan's Law "has no demonstrable effect in reducing sexual reoffenses."
Megan's Law struck out on every important area related to protecting the community from sexual offenders. Not only is there no evidence that it reduces sexual reoffenses, Megan's Law:
Fails to positively impact sex offender rearrest rates,
Fails to change the type of reoffenses or first time offenses that occur, or
Fails to reduce the number of victims involved in sexual offenses.
As the state agency charged with representing those required to register under Megan's Law, the state public defender agrees completely with the study's findings and with its ultimate conclusion that "given the lack of demonstrable effect of Megan's Law on sexual offenses, the growing costs may not be justifiable."
What is equally remarkable is that other research cited by the New Jersey study, as well as our own experience, shows that Megan's Law can be "counterproductive" to public safety. Notification laws have been found to isolate offenders from normal relationships, undercut their opportunities for housing and employment and subject offenders to threats and assaults.
In some instances, the willingness and ability to obtain treatment can be negatively impacted by Megan's Law. As a result of these factors, the study's researchers determined the unintended consequences of Megan's Law may be to increase the risks of recidivism rather than to protect the community.
In the face of overwhelming evidence of the law's ineffectiveness, advocates for the law nevertheless seek to justify its continuance by claiming that its purpose was never to reduce reoffense rates, but was only "designed to provide parents and communities with information" concerning the whereabouts of a sexual offender living in their neighborhood. However, this practice is meaningless unless it brings about the positive result the Legislature clearly intended when the Megan's law was passed to reduce "the danger of recidivism posed by sex offenders."
The Legislature's perceived effectiveness of the law served as a cornerstone to its passage. The recent study's findings telling us the law does not reduce sexual reoffenses, and worse, may be counterproductive, require a change in course.
In 2007, New Jersey reportedly spent $3.9 million with, as the study found, no appreciable benefit to public safety. Given our current budgetary shortfall this money could have been, and now should be, put to much better use by investing it in efforts that will actually protect New Jersey's children.
We agree with several of the report's recommendations calling for sex offender therapy to be provided in state prisons (which does not now occur), affordable treatment for sex offenders living in the community, and effective parole and probationary supervision commensurate with a realistic individualized assessment of an offender's risk level.
Other interventions known to be effective should be emphasized. We know that making a successful transition from prison reduces sex offender reoffense rates. To accomplish this, as a report published just this year by the Counsel of State Governments emphasizes, resources would be better spent "to ensure that sex offenders re-entering communities have appropriate and sustainable housing options"
to assist them during their pivotal transition back into the community.
According to the counsel's report, efforts to further stability after incarceration by way of jobs and housing can reduce reoffense levels. This pragmatic approach is crucial to protecting our communities.
We owe the public much more than continuing to rely on a policy that has been proven as accomplishing little else but the creation of a false sense of security. ..Source.. MICHAEL BUNCHER • For the Courier-Post
Adam Walsh Act Substantial Compliance Means What To Lawmakers?
Return of predator evals sought
One has to wonder whether anyone confined was really a threat, or is this system nothing more than an end-run around constitutional protections. Any system that thinks it can predict what color socks someone will wear tomorrow, is suspect in this writer's eyes. i.e. There are those who have not been selected for civil commitment and have gone on to murder; how valid is the system?5-2-2010 Kansas:
Both AG candidates say convicted sex offenders could return to streets without 'essential' evaluations
The Kansas Department of Corrections is taking bipartisan heat for the unilateral decision to save $22,500 a month by bringing to a halt psychological evaluations essential to the process of indefinitely placing sexually violent predators in state custody.
The two leading candidates for attorney general — incumbent Democrat Steve Six and Republican Senate Majority Leader Derek Schmidt — denounced suspension of a KDOC contract in early April.
The state stopped paying for forensic analysts to perform evaluations on inmates guilty of sexually violent crimes who were nearing completion of prison sentences and under consideration for parole.
Without sophisticated psychological screening of the prisoners, state prosecutors would find it difficult to win civil commitment cases in district court requiring proof a prior offender was likely to engage in dangerous sexual behavior in the future and should be held for treatment.
More than 160 of these Kansas inmates have been involuntarily placed in a state facility at Larned. Typically, five new post-sentence commitment cases are filed each month in Kansas. Absent funding for assessments, those prisoners would go free.
Money the object
Schmidt said the state's $500 million revenue shortfall wouldn't deter legislators from finding $270,000 annually to resume the contract with Correct Care Solutions, a health care management company with an office in Topeka.
"Nobody here would have agreed to cut that funding," said Schmidt, an Independence Republican. "It's a disappointing decision."
Six said Kansas must maintain a system to keep dangerous sex offenders off the streets even after prison sentences expired.
"They need to be evaluated to see if they're a risk to the community," Six said. "The money and the cuts we're talking about are taking away our ability to do those assessments and to have psychologists look at these people so we know what kind of danger they are."
Bill Miskell, spokesman for the state corrections department, defended the budget-cutting decision by Secretary Roger Werholtz.
The agency was ordered to trim $3.8 million from the coming fiscal year's budget and Werholtz decided to spread a portion of that reduction into the current fiscal year by dropping the contract with Correct Care Solutions.
"They were performing evaluations that were not core functions," Miskell said.
Budget woes also forced the agency to shut down four prison facilities, curtail offender programs and shutter two boot camp facilities.
Fix will be found
Schmidt said financing for the sexual offender evaluations was in a budget bill expected to be debated this week by the Senate. Another proposal would earmark funding for the contract by adding $1 to a fee paid by people involved in municipal court traffic cases.
There is wide political support in the House and Senate to sustain the civil commitment program, which has been successfully defended before the U.S. Supreme Court.
"It's a high priority for everyone in this building," Schmidt said.
Six sent letters to legislative leaders asserting they had no choice but to reverse the corrections department's maneuver.
"Failure to act to restore funding for these psychologists will increase the likelihood of sexually violent predators re-entering society," he said.
About 20 states have civil commitment laws to continue incarceration of sexual predators after they served sentences ordered at the conclusion of criminal trials. Kansas was the first state to adopt the supplemental method of holding prisoners.
In 1997's Kansas vs. Hendricks, the nation's high court ruled 5-4 that the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act — which sets up procedures for the civil commitment of people who due to a "mental abnormality" or a "personality disorder" are likely to engage in "predatory acts of sexual violence" — didn't violate the due process, or fair proceedings, guarantee of the Constitution.
In 2002's Kansas vs. Crane, the Supreme Court ruled Kansas and other states must make some determination a sexual predator can't control his behavior when committing someone to an indefinite term. The justices affirmed the Kansas law was neither double jeopardy, or a second criminal punishment for the same crime, nor an "ex post facto" new punishment for a previous crime.
View from trenches
Christine Ladner, the assistant attorney general assigned to civil commitment cases, said there was irony in the Kansas corrections secretary's decision. Other states look to Kansas as a model for adjudicating sexually violent predator cases, she said.
Kansas law requires sexually violent criminals to be evaluated 90 days before released on parole to determine whether each has the potential to reoffend. Assessments by Correct Care Solutions were a key piece of evidence relied upon by a multidisciplinary team, led by Ladner, that decided each month which civil commitment cases would be filed throughout the state.
"Expert opinions are so critical because of the definition of what a sexually violent predator is," Ladner said.
She said terms "mental abnormality" and "personality disorder" must be weighed by psychological practitioners with fine-tuned skills suitable for testimony in court hearings.
"Typically," Ladner said, "what I see so often is a mental abnormality of pedophilia combined with a personality disorder, such as anti-social disorder. Those are diagnosis that need to be made by somebody."
She said derailment of the commitment system was unacceptable from her seat in the prosecutorial trenches.
"It really is a public safety issue," she said. ..Source.. Tim Carpenter
