Md. Senate Backs Marking Sex Offender Licenses

UPDATE: As to "adverse public information," such may be grounds for an ex post facto challenge. See U.S. Supreme court discussion at end of article:

Another preposterous nonsensical proposal by a lawmaker bent on vengeance. Since when do the police need a reminder to check why someone has a child in a car who may not be theirs, that should be standard police procedure, not something they only need to do if they stop a registered sex offender.

The idea itself is ridiculous because 95% of new sex crimes are committed by persons who are not on the registry, hence they would not have such markings on their licences. And, as to the markings being indiscreet, it wouldn't take long for the public to know where the dot or whatever else is used, then to further affect the lives of registered sex offenders.

Laws such as this are vindictive and costly to the state, and if they ever worked as proposed, it would be only after the second coming of the Lord. Voters should vote these down and the lawmakers out of office. Lawmakers need to stop the vengeance thinking and start with PREVENTION methods. eAdvocate

4-10-2010 Maryland:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) ― Maryland senators have passed legislation that would add special coding to sex offenders' driver's licenses, something lawmakers say will help officials keep tabs on them.

Senators passed legislation with the provision on Saturday. Sen. Richard Colburn, R-Dorchester, sponsored the amendment, which requires the marking to be done in a way that only law enforcement can understand. He says it would alert police to ask more questions if they stop a registered sex offender with a child.

Opponents say adding the markings is akin to a "scarlet letter" and will make it tougher for those on parole to rejoin society. They add it could drive more sex offenders underground as they try to avoid registration requirements.

The bill now goes to a House panel for approval. ..Source.. Maryland News

COMMENTARY:
Does this violate the ex post facto clause, most would say, no, but read on. When RSOs go in to register they provide information to the registry. Then the registry displays certain of that information on a public registry; all state action. However, driver's licenses and license plates are vastly different. How you ask? Well, who is carrying the state's message, the RSO, that is not like the state displaying information on the Internet. In the U.S. Supreme court, the case of Smith v. Doe (Sex offender registration), during Oral Argument the following discussion took place between Mr. Olson (then Solicitor General for the U.S.) and Justice Kennedy:

Justice Kennedy QUESTION: Could -- could the State require a special mark on your license plate?

MR. OLSON: No, I -- well, I don't know, Justice Kennedy, but I would say that would be considerably different than what's here because that would --

QUESTION: I don't think it's very different.

MR. OLSON: Pardon me?

QUESTION: I don't think it's very different.

MR. OLSON: I -- I respectfully submit that it's a great deal different. That mark on your license plate, or mark on your forehead would go wherever you would go. It would require you to carry the government's message rather than the government supplying the message.

QUESTION: Well, this statute requires you to make the government's message four times a year.

MR. OLSON: It only -- it doesn't require you to make the government's message four times a year. The government's message, I respectfully submit, is made when a citizen submits an inquiry to the State through the Internet listing. All -- it is required four times a year is to advise the government of a current location or current information so that the information on the registry is accurate and -- and up-to-date.

So, who is carrying the message? It is the RSO when it is on his driver's license or license plate. That distinction, following the sentencing where it was not part of the sentence, could very well be construed as further punishment. i.e., a ex post facto violation. Apparently, there is something in law about, who carries the message, and lawyers know about this. Now to find those lawyers to fight the issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme court. That may be easier said than done.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Is state wise to treat all sex offenders the same?

3-2-2010 Maryland:

I doubt it will be noted anywhere but here -- because the bill was withdrawn Monday -- but to give you an idea of the extent to which members of the Maryland General Assembly will go to protect "we, the public," please consider House Bill 656. It would have prohibited convicted sex offenders from going to Maryland schools even to vote on Election Day.

I found this while searching through the dozens of bills that have been filed in Annapolis in this election year, ostensibly to tighten loopholes in the state's sex offender laws.

HB 656's sponsors included the following delegates: Impallaria, Boteler, Costa, Dwyer, George, Kach, Krebs, McComas, McDonough, Miller, Schuh, Shewell, Sossi and Stocksdale. (I would use their first names, but I don't want to embarrass them.)

The bill, indexed under "sex offenses," would have required "an individual who is a felon to vote only by absentee ballot." It would have prohibited "a felon from voting at a polling place." And it would have "limited a provision of law allowing specified registered criminal offenders to enter onto school property for the purpose of voting only to registered offenders who are not felons."

That last reference -- "specified registered criminal offenders" -- is a reference to sexual offenders; they're the ones we keep on an Internet registry that would grow larger, covering offenses that occurred up to 25 years ago, under legislation in the General Assembly this winter.

HB 656 would have protected Maryland schoolchildren even when they aren't in school, Election Day. The bill got an unfavorable report after first reading and a hearing last month, and it was listed as withdrawn on Monday. So it's not happening. But still, it provides more evidence of the strikingly transparent effort to score points with voters by exploiting public fears about the men and women among us convicted of sexual offenses. There are already numerous laws on the books restricting them from all kinds of activities -- even their own children's school events -- and their names, photographs, addresses and offenses are listed on the state registry for the world to see. And still it's not enough for the pols in Annapolis, who use the issue to prove their tough-on-crime bonafides.

Within the last week, I've received numerous comments from readers about this, and I'm surprised -- and delighted -- to report that the majority seem to see through the politicizing of this criminal justice issue. They question the effectiveness of the sex offender registries, and that includes some readers who are in law enforcement. There's good reason for that -- the majority of offenses, for instance, are committed by first-time offenders, people not yet in the registry -- but in the current hysteria, that doesn't even seem to be a question in Annapolis.

Among those who've responded to my last two columns on this subject have been people convicted of sexual offenses, or their relatives -- a constituency almost never heard from, and for practical reasons; they're in the state's sex offender registry and they have no desire to draw any more attention to themselves.

Sunday, I received an e-mail from a 56-year-old offender I'll call Rick for the sake of this column.

He asked not to be identified, saying he was concerned about the effect of further publicity on his teenage children and the reaction of his neighbors in a Baltimore suburb. He told me about his offense -- sex with a minor in 2002, and a guilty plea on a third-degree sexual offense -- and I checked it out. That has been his only crime, Rick said, and the records support him.

He, like other offenders, has been watching the news out of Annapolis as legislative leaders try to, among other things, expand the Internet registry to include older crimes and those committed by juveniles. Rick thinks that, instead of expanding the registry, the state ought to narrow its focus and concentrate money and resources on the most serious cases that pose the greatest risks to the public.

"Why can't Maryland use the evaluation skills of professionals already in its employ and assign proper designation of recidivism danger to sex offenders?" Rick wrote in an e-mail.

"I completed all punishment and monitoring without incident. I haven't had as much as a parking ticket, but due to a terrible decision on my part I am still paying, and will continue to pay, in ways that go far beyond my original sentencing. I completed the ordered sex offender treatment program and avoid any situation where I can be perceived as putting someone in danger.

"I cannot go to the park with my teenage children. I can't join my local Y. I can't go to my children's school without getting written permission. I am on the registry for life, and now the politicos of our state are piling it on.

"We are not all monsters. Many are in loving relationships. Many have served their sentences, are honestly remorseful, have repented, and are trying to desperately move on with their lives and be productive citizens. All sex offenders are not serial offenders. They are not all predators."

But right now we don't seem to make much distinction and, if the registry expands, to comply with federal law, it seems reasonable to assume that money and resources will go into that effort rather than into performing the psychological triage to identify the real threats and make a real difference in public safety. ..Source.. Dan Rodricks' column appears online and in print on Thursdays and Sundays, with an additional online column Monday/Tuesday.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Wary of predators -- and politicians

2-28-2010 Maryland:

Since June 2005, I have had some kind of contact -- telephone conversation, face-to-face meeting, e-mail exchange, letter exchange -- with about 5,000 convicted criminals or their relatives, counselors and friends. (The number might be closer to 6,000, but I stopped keeping count a couple of years ago.)

Some of the contact has been substantive, providing material for this column on the challenges facing ex-offenders in the transition from prison to free society.

A lot of the contact has been perfunctory -- the ex-offenders give me their names and addresses, and I mail them a list of companies that might hire them or agencies that might help them. (Note to those who have contacted me in the last six weeks: We are updating the list and will get it to you as soon as possible.) In my years of trying to steer ex-offenders to re-entry programs or jobs, I have heard every kind of story, from the 20-something East Baltimore heroin dealer who wanted to "stop sellin' poison to my people" to the West Baltimore father who wanted to get his son off the street and into an apprenticeship program.

The men and women who called here had been convicted of all kinds of crimes: armed robbery, aggravated assault, forging checks, possession with intent to distribute heroin -- and mostly the latter. Tired of prison, they wanted to find work not prohibited by law. It's hard to say how many were earnest, but most certainly seemed to be when they first contacted me.

And I was willing to help them, to the extent that I could.

But I haven't been so willing to help sex offenders.

About a year into writing columns on this subject, I started getting calls for help from middle-aged men who had been convicted of various degrees of sexual crimes -- possession of child pornography, assault, child molestation -- and I had a bad reaction. You might call it the creeps.

I didn't want to help them, but more importantly, I didn't think I could. While some Maryland companies have given jobs to recovering alcoholics, drug addicts, former drug dealers and car thieves, it didn't seem likely they would hire someone on the state sex offender registry.

Plus, those companies, all admirable for their willingness to give second chances, didn't deserve sex offenders at their door. So I wasn't about to refer any of them. My initial interest in all this was in getting drug dealers off the streets of Baltimore, not in helping middle-aged rapists and perverts find jobs.

I just didn't want to be associated with second chances for sexual predators.

I'm sure that would be the reaction of most people, even those of you who have expressed general sympathy for ex-offenders seeking employment. Most readers who've given an opinion about this agree that the United States needs more corrections in corrections, stronger re-entry planning and more opportunity for adults once released from our prisons.

But I doubt the majority feel that way about sexual offenders.

It's understandable. The nature of their crimes, especially those involving children, causes an acutely visceral reaction. Plus, public opinion has been stoked by grandstanding politicians for years. So we have online registries and community notification policies, in the name of public safety. We have federal laws on sexual offenders, too.

But beware, fellow citizens. This winter in Annapolis, we have dozens of new bills -- the count the other day was 75 and growing -- to toughen the many sexual offender laws that already exist. It's an election year, coming on the heels of the highly publicized kidnapping and murder of an 11-year-old girl, and filing a bill on sexual offenders is a tough-on-crime guarantee. The cry is, literally, "Do something!" And that, apparently, could mean anything: expand the online offender registry to include juveniles and anyone who committed crimes back in the 1980s and even the 1970s, eliminate good behavior credits for sex offenders in prison, and require lifetime monitoring of some offenders.

As I've admitted: I am neither sympathetic toward nor inclined to help sexual offenders. But we appear to be piling on, so that those who successfully change their thinking and their behavior might never get up and get going again. When so many politicians, including the governor, exploit an issue such as this, that's when I really get the creeps. ..Editorial.. by Dan Rodricks

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Stricter laws asked for sex crimes

With all the debate reported in this article, there is one subject never discussed by lawmakers, it is this, can laws get so strict that, when offenders break them -having full knowledge of the consequences due to the media- that the offender kills victim so that they cannot testify against them? Have sex offender laws now reached that point? Is the Foxwell death an example of this?

2-24-2010 Maryland:

Delegates hear calls for more monitoring; O'Malley would list juvenile offenders

Almost every aspect of Maryland's sex offender laws is receiving scrutiny this year as state lawmakers respond to the December killing of 11-year-old Sarah Foxwell on the Eastern Shore at the hands, authorities believe, of a registered child sex offender.

At this point there is no proof that a former sex offender committed this crime or was in any way involved. While it may come to pass there is no reason to jump to conclusions and heap further restrictions on other former sex offenders, who played no part in this crime. Sane minds are needed and it doesn't look like they are in Maryland today!

On Tuesday, a panel of delegates reviewed 30 proposals, including a contentious plan backed by Gov. Martin O'Malley that would add juveniles to the state sex offender registry.

Opponents said such a change would unfairly stigmatize young people who are often abuse victims themselves. The same measure would require more information of homeless registrants, something lawmakers have previously rejected.

House Speaker Michael E. Busch made a rare visit to the House Judiciary Committee, a signal that the push to toughen sex offender laws has support from the highest levels of the General Assembly.

"Despite all of our efforts, we have flaws in the system," said Busch, an Anne Arundel County Democrat, telling lawmakers that as the father of an 11-year-old girl, he was particularly moved by the death of Sarah Foxwell. Laws that protect children, he said, are "the ultimate issue of why we're here in office."

Public defenders and others cautioned against writing laws as an emotional response to the Eastern Shore killing, but lawmakers said Maryland residents are demanding action. "What we have witnessed today is the voice of the residents of this state saying, 'Do something,' " said Del. Benjamin F. Kramer, a Montgomery County Democrat.

Some lawmakers have seized on sex offender laws as a potential election year rallying point, saying the state, under the Democratic governor, has failed to crack down on predators. Many Republicans wore white ribbons Tuesday in honor of child victims. They held a news conference, also attended by Democratic Sen. Norman Stone of Baltimore County, to highlight their proposals.

Del. Michael D. Smigiel Sr., a Cecil County Republican, stormed out of the Judiciary Committee hearing at one point, saying Maryland leaders have failed to enforce laws already on the books.

Later, Del. Anthony J. O'Donnell, the House Republican leader, said he was "really glad to see the administration finally bring" tougher sex offender measures to lawmakers.

Legislators are reviewing everything from the length of prison sentences for sex offenders to what information Maryland should share with other states. During a hearing that spanned nearly seven hours, the House committee reviewed just a fraction of the 75-plus sex offense bills that have been filed this year.

O'Malley has identified strengthening sex offender laws as a priority, but did not provide testimony on the legislation he is backing. The governor was in Virginia for a meeting of a panel of governors that advises the president.

The proposals heard Tuesday would, among other things:

•Require lifetime supervision of violent and repeat sex offenders.

•Eliminate or restrict "good time" credits that enable sex offenders to leave prison before completing their sentence.

•Provide more notice to residents when a sex offender has moved to the neighborhood, and require offenders to list more than one address if they have homes in several places.

•Revise and expand the state sex offender registry to include juveniles and offenders who committed crimes decades ago. Such changes are designed to bring the state into compliance with the 2006 federal Adam Walsh Act, which could help Maryland avoid federal public safety funding cuts.


'No reason to rush'
Opponents of the proposals - including public defenders, homeless-rights and juvenile offender advocates and families of people convicted of sex crimes - implored legislators to carefully weigh the proposals instead of voting reactively in favor of them.

"There is no reason to rush into any of this," said Laurel Albin, director of legislative affairs for the state Office of the Public Defender. "It is serious business."

That's a concern also raised by some lawmakers on the committee. Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons, a Montgomery County Democrat, said he didn't want to pass sex offender laws "on the fly."

"In my view, it's not as preferable as having forged through a more thoughtful and deliberative process."

Last month, Simmons complained that get-tough laws passed four years ago had not been used by the O'Malley administration and judges. He questioned why a sex offender advisory board that had been created in 2006 to study the state's laws and make recommendations to legislators hadn't met a single time.

O'Malley has since reactivated that board, appointing former Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr. as its chairman. The governor wants lawmakers to revamp the board to include more experts on sexual predators.


More monitoring
Curran, who is O'Malley's father-in-law, also appeared at Tuesday's hearing, telling lawmakers that he has long advocated for the state to confine sexual predators beyond their prison sentences through a civil process that institutionalizes them.

He said the state must find ways to monitor predators for a longer time, whether in an institution or in the community. He called O'Malley's lifetime supervision plan "a good step."

Some who testified against the sex offender proposals warned that the state should not fall into the trap of passing laws to adhere to the Adam Walsh Act, which they called a troubled mandate with which only Ohio is in compliance.

"Stop, take a breath and ask for an extension," said Nicole Pittman, a juvenile justice policy analyst in Philadelphia who said she is an expert in the federal act. She said Maryland's proposals have too many "glitches."

But Kristen Mahoney, director of the Governor's Office of Crime Control and Prevention, said the overall intention of the Walsh Act is sound. It's an effort to make all of the states' sex offender registries similar as a "national way to communicate about sex offenders."

The danger of states not adopting the provisions of the act, she said, is that some become "havens" for predators who research which states have the weakest monitoring laws and least-informative public registries. ..Source.. Julie Bykowicz

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

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

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

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

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...