http://www.legallykidnapped.net/Child Protective Services Whistleblower, Carlos Morales, exposes the dangerous tactics and overt corruption that he witnessed as a CPS investigator.
Unfunded mandates: State tasks counties, but offers little or no compensation
Over the years, the Florida Legislature has required county sheriffs to more closely monitor sexual offenders and predators.
But here’s the problem: the state creates the law, yet places the responsibility on county law enforcement.
“These offenders will report to the local Sheriff, and the local Sheriff shall...†Sheriff Susan Benton quoted the law. “But at no time did the sheriffs receive any funding.â€
- See more at: http://highlandstoday.com/hi/local-news/unfunded-mandates-state-tasks-counties-but-offers-little-or-no-compensation-20140817/#sthash.0ueP1tPp.dpuf
Over the years, the Florida Legislature has required county sheriffs to more closely monitor sexual offenders and predators.
But here’s the problem: the state creates the law, yet places the responsibility on county law enforcement.
“These offenders will report to the local Sheriff, and the local Sheriff shall...†Sheriff Susan Benton quoted the law. “But at no time did the sheriffs receive any funding.â€
- See more at: http://highlandstoday.com/hi/local-news/unfunded-mandates-state-tasks-counties-but-offers-little-or-no-compensation-20140817/#sthash.0ueP1tPp.dpuf
SEBRING undefined Over the years, the Florida Legislature has required county sheriffs to more closely monitor sexual offenders and predators.
But here’s the problem: the state creates the law, yet places the responsibility on county law enforcement.
“These offenders will report to the local Sheriff, and the local Sheriff shall...†Sheriff Susan Benton quoted the law. “But at no time did the sheriffs receive any funding.â€
- See more at: http://highlandstoday.com/hi/local-news/unfunded-mandates-state-tasks-counties-but-offers-little-or-no-compensation-20140817/#sthash.0ueP1tPp.dpuf
Over the years, the Florida Legislature has required county sheriffs to more closely monitor sexual offenders and predators.
The Woody Allen sex scandal of 2013 triggered a national conversation on who to believe, with people lining up on each side as if they knew what really happened. Based on recent research on how people navigate the often tricky waters of sexual negotiation, Dr. Carol Tavris shows that it is entirely possible in some sexual assault cases neither side is lying, but instead both sides feel justified in their positions. This talk was considered one of the best ever given at The Amazing Meeting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SpVVsOUsLo
Michigan's Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative
Michigan's Prisoner Re-entry Initiative has been heralded as one of Michigan's crowning achievements in the state's justice system. The Michigan Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative (MPRI) promotes public safety by increasing the success rates of prisoners transitioning from prison to the community. http://www.miccd.org/2013/11/transforming-prisoner-reentry/
Mom arrested after letting 7-year-old son go to park alone
PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. - A mom faces a charge of child neglect after she allowed her son to go to a nearby park alone. She says he's old enough but Port St. Lucie Police disagree. Now she's fighting back. "I'm totally dumbfounded by this whole situation," says Nicole Gainey. It began last Saturday afternoon when Gainey gave her son Dominic permission to walk from their house to Sportsman's Park. "Honestly didn't think I was doing anything wrong," says Gainey, "I was letting him go play. It's a half mile from their Port St. Lucie home. Dominic says it only takes him about 10 to 15 minutes to get there. During the walk, the 7-year-old passed a public pool. Someone there asked him where his mom was. http://www.nbc-2.com/story/26137822/mom-arrested-for-letting-7-year-old-son-go-to-park-alone#.U9hFJ7HjTfd
Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act: Jurisdictions Face Challenges to Implementing the Act, and Stakeholders Report Positive and Negative Effects
What GAO Found
The Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART Office) within the Department of Justice (DOJ) has determined that 19 of the 37 jurisdictions that have submitted packages for review have substantially implemented the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). Although the SMART Office has determined that 17 of the jurisdictions that submitted packages have not yet substantially implemented SORNA, the office concluded that 15 of these 17 jurisdictions have implemented at least half of the SORNA requirements; the office has not yet made a determination for 1 jurisdiction that submitted a package. A majority of nonimplemented jurisdictions reported that generating the political will to incorporate the necessary changes to their state laws and related policies or reconciling legal conflicts are among the greatest challenges to implementation. For example, officials from 27 nonimplemented jurisdictions reported reconciling conflicts between SORNA and state laws--such as which offenses should require registration--as a challenge to implementing SORNA. Officials from 5 of 18 jurisdictions that responded to a survey question asking how DOJ could help address these challenges reported that the SMART Office could provide greater flexibilities; however, SMART Office officials said they have offered as many flexibilities as possible and further changes would take legislative action. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-211
ABA Journal - Sex offender living in hotel room may challenge towns residency restriction
Sex offender law passes after CBS 58 Investigation
CBS 58's Investigative Reporter Sarah Barwacz brought the issue to lawmakers back in May after finding child predators living next to schools, daycare centers, and parks. It was legal for child predators to live next to schools and parks because there was no law against it. Some council members we spoke with felt Milwaukee had become overrun with offenders. After several months of working with lawmakers Tuesday we got a law passed. http://www.cbs58.com/news/local-news/Bottom-Line-Update-Sex-offender-law-passes-after-CBS-58-Investigation-268213522.html
New Teen Custody Rules Would Widen Feds' Oversight of Juvenile Justice
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is preparing to impose new requirements on states for confining juveniles suspected of crimes. The rules could require state and local officials to spend significantly more money at a time when federal aid for juvenile justice is declining. http://www.thecrimereport.org/news/inside-criminal-justice/2014-07-new-jj-rules
ABA - A REPORT ON THE PRO BONO WORK OF AMERICA’S LAWYERS
Chafee signs law restricting employment of sex offenders
PROVIDENCE, R.I. undefined Carnivals, arcades, movie theaters, public libraries, beaches and pools are among the facilities banned from hiring registered sex offenders as employees under a new law signed by Governor Chafee on Wednesday. The bill groups those facilities and a number of others into a category called “child-safe zones.†Any entity falling into that category cannot hire any individual who is a registered sex offender or should have registered as a sex offender. The law applies to offenders from any state whose victims were minors. Chafee signed the legislation, but urged the General Assembly to consider future revisions to the law he described as vague and overly broad. http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20140710-chafee-signs-law-restricting-employment-of-sex-offenders.ece
In 'sexting' case Manassas City police want to photograph teen in sexually explicit manner, lawyers say
UPDATE, 7 p.m.: The Manassas City police have released a statement tonight defending their actions. It is here. ORIGINAL POST: A Manassas City teenager accused of "sexting" a video to his girlfriend is now facing a search warrant in which Manassas City police and Prince William County prosecutors want to take a photo of his erect penis, possibly forcing the teen to become erect by taking him to a hospital and giving him an injection, the teen's lawyers said. A Prince William County judge allowed the 17-year-old to leave the area without the warrant being served or the pictures being taken - yet. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/local/wp/2014/07/09/in-sexting-case-manassas-city-police-want-to-photograph-teen-in-sexually-explicit-manner-lawyers-say/?tid=sm_fb
I was pleased to see a recent Sentinel editorial declaring the Internet sex offender roster punitive. My nonprofit group Citizens for Criminal Justice Reform filed an amicus brief in December supporting John Doe, a former sex offender challenging the New Hampshire sex offender shaming list as an unconstitutional ex-post-facto punishment. (NOTE: WAR participated in the Amicus Brief)
Illinois legislators love to pass laws to punish sex offenders. But those laws always increase restrictions. No legislator wants to decrease restrictions on sex offenders, because that would not look good on a mailer by an opponent in the next election.
NACDL – Collateral Damage: America’s Failure to Forgive or Forget in the War on Crime – A Roadmap to Restore Rights and Status After Arrest or Conviction.
Since 2012, NACDL’s Task Force on Restoration of Rights and Status After Conviction has embarked on a study of relief mechanisms available to those with a conviction on their record on the local, state and federal level. At an event on May 29 at the Open Society Foundations in Washington, DC, NACDL released a major new report – Collateral Damage: America’s Failure to Forgive or Forget in the War on Crime – A Roadmap to Restore Rights and Status After Arrest or Conviction. The report is a comprehensive exploration of the stigma and policies relegating tens of millions of people in America to second-class status because of an arrest or conviction. In addition, the report lays out ten recommendations to ensure that the values of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are within reach of all, regardless of past mistakes.
http://www.nacdl.org/restoration/roadmapreport/
SJC finds lifetime parole for sex offenders unconstitutional
The state’s highest court today ruled that lifetime parole for sex offenders violates the Constitution because it gives the state Parole Board powers of the judiciary to hand down jail terms — a decision, the court acknowledged, that will allow hundreds of predators to file to vacate their parole sentences. Justice Ralph D. Gants — who was confirmed by the Governor’s Council today as chief of the Supreme Judicial Court — wrote the majority opinion for the 6-1 ruling, which noted only judges have the power to sentence offenders, not the Parole Board, which is part of the executive branch.
Sex offender registration laws and policies appear to have been based on popular misconceptions regarding sex offenders. That is, law and policy were based on the premise that ALL sex offenders are a danger to society, a danger to children, strangers to their victims, and likely to reoffend (Levenson & D’Amora, 2007).
However, this is not the case.
In some states where laws have been applied retroactively, persons who have been charged with indecent exposure (such as urinating in public) have been required to register as a sex offender (Freeman-Longo, 2001). Additionally, several teenagers have been found guilty of the recent trend of “sexting†and must now register as sex offenders. The problem is, not all sexual offenders have committed sexual crimes against children, yet the majority of the laws are focused on protecting children from sex offenders.
The Need for Better Risk Assessment Strategies Most policy initiatives have not incorporated risk assessment strategies into their programs. Instead, they are applied broadly to all sex offenders. This flaw has been acknowledged and risk assessment has been included in more recent studies (Parent, Guay, & Knight, 2011). Additionally, the percentage of recidivism rates of sex offenders have been relatively low, as only a small percentage of convicted sex offenders have returned to prison because of committing additional sex crimes (Bonnar-Kidd, 2010; Galeste, Fradella, & Vogel, 2012).
In a three-year follow-up study of sex offenders in 15 states, the rate of recidivism was about 5.3% (Galeste et al., 2012). This has been compared to recidivism rates over a three-year study of other crimes; offenders who committed burglary recidivated 74%, larceny 75%, and theft 70% (Galeste et al., 2012).
Increased Restrictions Foster Unanticipated Issues Despite these findings, restrictions for sex offenders have expanded even further since the implementation of the first sex registration and notification laws. Many states have now enacted housing restriction statutes and zoning ordinances (Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009). These statutes have prohibited sex offenders from living in areas that are within a specific proximity of children (Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009). State laws have specified that sex offenders are forbidden to live in areas where children congregate, such as schools, daycare centers, parks, and school bus stops (Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009). This has prevented sex offenders from living in many areas.
Some states have imposed such severe restrictions that it has left a large number of sex offenders homeless (Bonnar-Kidd, 2010). For example, Proposition 83 is a law passed in California that prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park (Bonnar-Kidd, 2010). The reason for the passing of Proposition 83 was because California was reported to have the greatest population of repeat sex offenders (RSOs) and subsequently, this proposition would allow for improved tracking and apprehension of them (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 2010). Subsequently, approximately 2,700 sex offenders were forced to move, and many ended up homeless (Bonnar-Kidd, 2010).
Enhanced Legislation Increases Number of Offenders, But is it Fair and Accurate? The result of increased legislation has had an impact on the number of sex offenders in the national and state registries. The number of sex offenders living in the United States has increased greatly over the past few years. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children survey of sex offenders for 2012 showed that there were approximately 747,408 RSOs living in the U.S. Those numbers increased from the 2011 survey, which indicated an estimated 739,853 living in the U.S. (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, News and Events, 2012).
The numbers have continued to rise each year, but an even more disturbing issue is the number of unaccounted sex offenders (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, News and Events, 2012). In 2007, there were approximately 100,000 RSOs who were unaccounted for or noncompliant in terms of registering and as of January 2012, there were more than 31,000 noncompliant or fugitive sex offenders (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, News and Events, 2012).
While these numbers may be a cause for concern, what is more concerning is the number of offenders who should probably not even be on the registry to begin with. Another consideration is the lives that may have been unjustly affected in a negative way as a result of this policy. Lastly, the mandate is costly and man-hour intensive, so researchers are calling for an examination of more evidence-based practices with regard to the treatment of sex offenders.
About the Author:Michelle L. Beshearsearned her baccalaureate degrees in social psychology and criminal justice and graduate degrees in human resource development and criminology from Indiana State University. Beshears served in the U.S. Army for 11 years. She obtained the rank of Staff Sergeant prior to attending Officer Candidate School at Fort Benning, Georgia where she earned her commission. As a commissioned officer Beshears has led numerous criminal investigations and worked with several external agencies as well. As a civilian she has worked with the local sheriff’s department, state drug task force and FBI. Michelle is currently pursuing her Doctorate degree in Criminal Justice. Beshears resides with her husband Michael, their son Hunter, and daughter Malia near Norfork and Bull Shoals Lakes, in Clarkridge, Arkansas. Michelle is currently an assistant professor of criminal justice atAmerican Military University&American Public Universityand is full-time faculty in the School of Public Service & Health. You can contact her at michelle.beshears(at)mycampus.apus.edu.
References
Bonnar-Kidd, K., (2010). Sexual offender laws and prevention of sexual violence recidivism. American Journal of Public Health, 100(3), 412-419. doi:10.2105/ AJPH.2008.153254
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (2010). Jessica’s Law. Retrieved from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/parole/sex_offender_facts/ jessicas_law.html
Freeman-Longo, R. E. (2001). Revisiting Megan’s Law and sex offender registration: Prevention or problem. Retrieved from http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/ appa/pubs/RML.pdf
Galeste, M. A., Fradella, H. F., & Vogel, B. (2012). Sex offender myths in print media: Separating fact from fiction in U.S. newspapers. Western Criminology Review, 13(2), 4-24. Retieved from http://wcr.sonoma.edu/
Levenson, J. S., & D’Amora, D.A. (2007). Social policies to prevent sexual violence: The emperor’s new clothes? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18,168-199. doi:10.1177/ 0887403406295309
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2012). News and events: Number of registered sex offenders in the US nears three-quarters of a million. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=4615
Parent, G., Guay, J., & Knight, R. A. (2011). An assessment of long-term risk of recidivism by adult sex offenders: One size doesn’t fit all. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(2), 188-209. doi:10.1177/0093854810388238
Schiavone, S. K., & Jeglic, E. L. (2009). Public perception of sex offender social policies and the impact on sex offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53(6), 679-695. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0306624X08323454
Being accused of a crime you haven't committed can be devastating. Unfortunately, several wrongly convicted individuals are just now seeing the light at the end of the tunnel after years behind bars. Falsified claims are a serious threat and this issue is quickly becoming recognized by mainstream media. In particular, false allegations involving child sexual abuse or child abuse can wreak havoc to family relations and cause lingering stress. Recently thousands of untested DNA rape and sexual abuse kits were sent to a third party crime lab for testing after decades collecting dust in Harris County evidence rooms. Fortunately, a few cases have already been turned over after DNA evidence proved their innocence.
A false allegation of child sexual abuse rarely originates with the child. Many studies show that false allegations originate with an adult filing accusations on behalf of the child, and a large majority often occur in the context of divorce or child custody battles. A lot of these allegations are perpetrated for a number of reasons; revenge, rejection, cover ups, etc. False reports that occur in custody disputes involve one adult coercively questioning a child, believing that abuse has occurred if if the child maintains they were not abused.
Take the case of Daryl Kelly Sr., for example. Accused in 1997 on charges of child sexual abuse by his daughter, he was charged with multiple counts of rape solely on the word of his accuser despite no physical evidence. Fifteen years later, his daughter admitted that she had been coerced by her mother to lie against her father. Too young to understand her actions, she was forced to claim that her father raped her under the threat of punishment from her mother. Daryl Kelly Sr, a Navy veteran with a reputation of being honest and hardworking, refused a plea deal and denied the allegations, was sentenced to 20 to 40 years. The false accusation sent him to prison where he still remains. Now, his daughter is fighting to get him released, but every appeal has been denied.
A similar case of false allegation came up last year, when Cassandra Kelly admitted that she had falsely accused her father of child sexual abuse because she was upset about her parents' divorce. Her father was sent to prison in 2001 and was finally exonerated earlier this year. Cassandra Kelly decided to reveal the truth that sent her father to jail because her guilt prompted her.
Another such case is Sheldon Mosley, a 29-year-old man accused of sexually molesting his 4-year-old daughter. Mosley was at the time battling with his mother-in-law for custody rights over the girl. Physical examination of the girl did not substantiate the sexual assault claims, all tests were negative. However, the girl responded positively to all suggestive questions and a counselor assigned to her believed that Mosley had sexually assaulted the girl. Mosley was sentenced to 60 years in prison. Mosley's lawyer was later found to have been inadequate but the judge ruled that this had no bearing on the outcome of the case. Finally, after years of appeals and petitions, the then 21-year-old victim recanted her statement that she had been molested. She admitted that her grandmother had coerced her into accusing her father with promises of rewards and trips.
These cases represent a few examples of false conviction with very little to no corroborating evidence. There may be untold numbers of innocent people who are currently imprisoned due to false allegations. Numerous cases have been overturned due to latent DNA testing.
After a conviction, an individual can file an appeal post-conviction. A post-conviction writ of habeas corpus is a wrongly convicted person's chance to dispute the finding of their trial because of improper evidence handling, legal misconduct, and new evidence the court has not yet seen.
Just earlier this year in Houston, Texas, a backlog of previously untested DNA evidence have identified offenders in at least a third of the cases. The backlog includes 6,600 sexual assault kits that have been residing in a back room in the the Houston Police Department that have been handed over to two respected forensic laboratories. The new DNA testing helped in solving numerous cases and vindicating victims, and may one day exonerate others.
According to the National Registry of Exonerations there are many factors that contribute to false imprisonment. These factors include mistaken witness identification, perjury or false accusation, false confession, false forensic evidence and official misconduct. The chart below includes data for 305 wrongful convictions, which represents a small fraction of all wrongful convictions. The pie-graph focuses on wrongful convictions that were exonerated because of false accusations. Unfortunately, child sex abuse wrongful conviction due to false accusation stands at the top.
Once convicted of child sexual abuse, it can many times take years to get exonerated even if the victim recants. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, the vast majority of false convictions never result in exoneration.
Therefore, the most important thing one can do if they are falsely accused of sexual crime, especially against a child, is to seek experienced legal counsel. The fallout of a false conviction can take years, even decades to reverse, and only with latent DNA testing or recantation.
"The root of the problem is public hysteria," said Vicki Henry, president of Women Against Registry, Inc. (WAR). "Children are being socially maimed, bullied, and shunned because lawmakers have chosen to ignore reality."
A national organization of mothers, wives, sisters, and extended family members who have a loved one on the sex offender registry have united to speak out about the harmful effects that laws meant to protect children are having on an estimated 500,000 children nationwide, with an estimated 30,000 in the state of Michigan.
"We demand that all children be protected by our laws," Henry elaborated. "We want happy-healthy family relationships for everyone."And according to Henry, laws written since the inception of the Wetterling Act and Adam Walsh Act actually increase the risk of child abuse.
"People want a quick-fix, an easy solution to a complex problem. That's how the registry started, with all of the best intentions in the world," Henry summarized; emphasizing that “mounting evidence provided by top national scholars concludes that the true impact of these laws impedes the personal rehabilitation and family/community restoration of those convicted of an offense.â€
“Worse yetâ€, Henry explains, “These laws do real harm to thousands of innocent children and put them at greater risk for societal failure.â€
"Our lawmakers should be addressing the means that would protect all of our children," said Kimberly DuBina, director of WAR, citing a long list of vigilante crimes directed towards registrants and their families." Victims are vandalized, they and their children are threatened, terrorized with nasty graffiti, shunned and banned from public places and even murdered, all because we are mishandling the problem." DuBina adds, “registrant family addresses being on a pubic registry makes the children prey for vigilantes and this is simply unacceptable!â€
Women Against Registry, Inc, advocates for laws which are focused on protecting all children with a proactive focus on prevention, education and familial reunification. For more information, contact Vicki Henry, President, Women Against Registry, 636-208-5949 or visit https:/www.womenagainstregistry.org/
###
Extortion Websites Fined 3.4 Million Dollars
Sex offender websites' victims awarded $3.4M
Robert Anglen, The Arizona Republic7:56 p.m. EDT May 16, 2014
PHOENIX -- Victims targeted for harassment on sex-offender websites pleaded with a Maricopa County jury to financially punish the owner and take away his ability to continue operating.
On Wednesday, the jury listened.
In a unanimous verdict, jurors hit Phoenix-area businessman Charles "Chuck" Rodrick with a $3.4 million judgment on behalf of three people profiled on websites such as Offendex.com, SORArchives and SexOffenderrecord.com.
Rodrick is accused of running an Internet extortion racket that used public records maintained by law enforcement to demand money from sex offenders, harassing those who complained.
The jury awarded victims almost $500,000 in actual damages and $2.9 million in punitive damages, agreeing Rodrick defamed them, invaded their privacy, put them in a false light and abused the court system by filing lawsuits against them as a form of retaliation.
The decision came after the court last week declared Rodrick the defendant in defamation lawsuits he filed more than a year ago against those who publicly decried the websites, including his ex-wife, her boyfriend, a convicted sex offender from Washington and the offender's mother.
Superior Court Judge Douglas Gerlach also allowed several of the victims' counterclaims against Rodrick to go forward, reversing the roles of the defendants and making them plaintiffs. The move effectively put Rodrick in the position of defending himself in his own case.
Rodrick, 52, of Cave Creek appeared unperturbed by the separate verdicts. The court clerk had barely finished reading the judgments when Rodrick leaned sideways in his chair and called out to the opposing parties with a promise to appeal.
"Well, gentleman. You know the drill," he said in a loud, mirthful voice.
Rodrick, who for more than a year has refused to discuss his websites, declined comment after court Wednesday.
His victims said they were elated by the decision.
"I am super glad justice has been served," Phoenix resident David Ellis said following the trial. "I did ask (the jury) to make their verdict significant enough to keep him from ever climbing out of his hole, and they did."
Ellis said he was targeted after he began dating Rodrick's ex-wife while the couple were going through an acrimonious divorce. Court records show Rodrick posted information on several websites suggesting Ellis, a decorated combat veteran with no criminal record, was a child molester.
"It's kind of a shame. I fought for people's civil rights," Ellis said. "Then this guy, he used the First Amendment to attack me."
Rodrick's ex-wife, Lois Flynn of Chandler, said she felt vindicated. Rodrick's websites accused her of having an adulterous relationship, being an alcoholic and working with child molesters who sought to discredit the websites.
Flynn said the Internet postings damaged her reputation and affected her relationships at church, where she once worked with kids.
Rodrick's sites mined data compiled by law-enforcement agencies across the country and used it to collect money from sex offenders. Operators did not always take down profiles after payments were made, and they launched online harassment campaigns against those who balked at financial demands or filed complaints.
The websites listed individuals as sex offenders who no longer were required to register or whose names had been removed from sex-offender databases. The sites included names and personal information of people who had never been arrested or convicted of a sex crime.
Rodrick, who represented himself in court, painted himself as a victim.
"It's not easy to be a defendant when you were the plaintiff," he said in a rambling closing argument Wednesday in which he denied ownership of the websites, argued about the amount of money they generated and complained about various court rulings.
Excellent statistics and information in this webinar.
An Overview of Sex Offender Reentry: Building a Foundation for Professionals
The challenges associated with reentry after incarceration are intensified for individuals who have been convicted of sex offenses. Research reveals that upon return to the community, sex offenders are more likely to be rearrested for a non-sex crime than a new sex crime, and that supervision violation rates are high. The field struggles with developing effective comprehensive reentry strategies that respond to the myriad general and specialized needs of sex offenders. This webinar is the first in a series designed for professionals working to prepare individuals convicted of a sexual offense to return to the community. The webinar presents criminal justice professionals and practitioners with an overview of statistics and understandings about the sex offender population, the barriers and challenges to reentry faced by this population, and a framework for professionals responsible for assisting sex offenders with transitioning back into the community.
Women Against Registry Pushes Back on Laws Detrimental to Children
Two point five million family members depend on Women Against Registry, a national organization to advocate for them. These families are under a constant barrage of attacks because they are related to or friends with one of the 769,402 men, women and children convicted of a sexual offense. We have begun “Pushing Back†on laws and restrictions which are annihilating the family units.
Evidence provided by some of our nation’s top scholars suggests,†Sex offender registration and notification (SORN) laws can impede community reintegration efforts of RSOs and potentially contribute to recidivism,†states research by Jill Levenson, Ph.D., and Richard Tewksbury, Ph.D..
“Sex offender laws are based on numerous misperceptions about sex offenders and sex offender risk factors, public fear, and the pressure for policy makers to “do something†about this social problem.†This is from a recent study that attempts to reconcile the facts of sex offender science against the views of lawmakers. (The Sponsors of Sex Offender Bills Speak Up – Policy Makers’ Perception of Sex Offenders, Sex Crimes and Sex Offender Legislation, Michelle Meloy, Jessica Boatwright & Kristin Curtis On behalf of: International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology).
Women Against Registry is asking Connecticut lawmakers to refrain from passing legislation filed this year and to rely on empirical evidence for future legislation. We ask that alternatives such as pre-trial diversion programs be considered for first time offenses. "Legislators cite the news media and the views of their constituents -- not researched evidence -- as their primary sources of information about sex offenses and offenders," said Amy Borror spokeswoman for the Ohio Public Defender's Office.
As the end of Child Abuse Awareness month draws near we want to encourage everyone to support this each year. W.A.R. has marched with other organizations to emphasize how necessitous this program is to protect children. Vicki Henry, President of Women Against Registry says, “We advocate for the safety and protection of all children and the Victim’s Rights Groups have done an awesome job of advocating for the child victims we also advocate for the children of those who have been adjudicated, debt paid and living law-abiding lives†she goes on to say “They are shunned, beaten up, not allowed to attend Christian schools, not allowed to have their registrant parent attend award ceremonies and many other events on a growing list that inhibits healthy parent-child relationships!â€
We are asking the Connecticut senators and representatives to take a hard look at each and every proposed piece of legislation that comes before them regarding a sexual crime law or restriction and evaluate it based on empirical evidence, long term effects on all the families and manageability. The scientific research will tell the story. Also, research indicates, the three basic factors to impact successful re-entry are; safe and affordable housing, adequate employment and support from family members and the community.
We are “Pushing Back†against laws that were written out of fear and the unfortunate loss of a few well publicized national cases. “Clearly, registered citizens and their families would fare better among communities if allowed to live happy, healthy and law abiding lives without fear of harassment and public scrutiny,†said Kimberly DuBina board member.
W.A.R. does not endorse this document. Any comments or questions should be directed to Dennis Sobin. Please consult with an attorney for specific legal advice before acting on any information contained in this document. Any action taken is the sole responsibility of the individual.
How robbing a pot dealer puts you on the sex offender list
Once again, a news channel tried to put scare tactics out to the public. This time, W.A.R. was there with a rebuttal! Our comments were published at the end of this article.
W.A.R. has vowed to "Push Back" and WE are not going to back down!
If you have news articles or trailers on a show that will be airing in your community, please let us know by forwarding us a link. We will respond! It's time WE take a stand!
W.A.R. wants to congratulate Tim on his hard work and efforts in the state of Vermont! Tim has worked hard at legislative issues this year. Because of his hard work, Tim has managed to get some good news! Here is his summation:
The S.80 story, by Tim Burgess:
In the 2013 biennium freshman Senator John Rodgers from the Essex/Orleans district and his Senate seat mate introduced S.80. The stated purpose of this bill according to the legislative website is to"This bill proposes to require community notification when a registered sex offender, whose information must be posted on the Internet, establishes residence in Vermont, registers an address change, or is released from confinement or supervision." As a registrant, and advocate in Vermont I think that bills like these are not only discriminatory in nature, but have the potential to encourage vigilantism.
I followed the Senate action taken on the bill and saw that it was assigned to the Senate Judiciary committee. The bill was taken up a number of times for discussion in committee. I sat in on most, if not all of the testimony. I sat down with Senator Rodgers, and explained how this bill would be detrimental to registered citizens in our State. I spoke with the chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, and discussed that I thought that the bill could pose a risk to registrants in Vermont. Senator Sears, assured me that the bill would not move for the 2013 session due to a hang up with the Auditor of Accounts office. I then spoke to them to find out that based on an audit from 2009, there were a "significant" amount of issues with the Vermont registry, and that until those problems were resolved the legislature could not move forward. I spoke to the director of the Vermont ACLU, Alan Gilbert, who opposed the legislation and testified to that fact. In 2013, the legislation didn't move.
2014 Session brought the subject around again. Again, I inquired from Senator Sears (Chair of Senate Judiciary), as to the possibility of movement. Senator Sears indicated that it was not a priority, as the Auditors office had not made enough progress on the matter. I followed up with the Auditors office and was informed that it would be June of 2014, before they had the required information. I then emailed Senator Starr, senior senator from the district, who informed me that the bill would most likely fail to make the crossover deadline, and would most likely "be dead".
This says that you can't force a kid into a treatment facility and force him to talk about his other offenses and take polygraphs and then use that information against him. Here, the boy revealed that he had molested two (2) other children, but it was admitted during the course of treatment that he had to comply with. The prosecutor used that information as the basis to file additional charges and the court said, "not so fast."
This is the argument I have been using for years about adult sex offender treatment. People have been charged with talking about their other victims to try to get help and ended up getting charged with new crimes. They have also been violated on probation/parole for admitting to having relapses. Instead of being able to get help for, say, buying or view porn or driving by a school with temptations, they were instead violated.
Kids have special protection under the juvenile mental health act, but adults don't. So, that makes treatment very ineffective when one has to constantly think if what they say may land them with more charges.
One Step Forward people! One step at a time!
Together, WE can make a difference!
W.A.R. takes to the Air Waves!
"It Could Be You", a talk-radio program on Little Rock, Arkansas, station KABF 88.3 FM ("The Voice of the People") airs Wednesdays 2:00--3:00 PM Central Time. "It Could Be You" is a forum through which social justice organizations, criminal justice reform organizations, community activists, and persons and organizations providing help to those in need can discuss their work, their goals, and how the public can contact them, offer their assistance, or more effectively reach out to the underserved in the community, the state, or across the nation. This program welcomes guests who work to increase knowledge of and/or advocate reforms in fields including but not limited to social services, ensuring public safety, homelessness, ex-felons' re-entry into society, and the problems and controversies surrounding sex offender laws and issues. Guests and topics that currently or will in any way touch on situations, problems, and the need for social justice and reforms within the KABF listening area are especially welcome.
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014, "It Could Be You" welcomes Vicki Henry and Kimberly DuBina, who are vital driving forces for Women Against the Registry (WAR). Arkansas Time After Time (ATAT) executive director and Arkansas WAR "go-to person" Carla Swanson will join program host John S. in-studio to discuss what WAR is all about, the work WAR does, and how WAR raises public awareness about the seriously flawed laws concerning sex offenders and the impacts such laws have on registrant families.
Anyone outside the KABF broadcast area can access "It Could Be You" by visiting www.kabf.org and clicking on the live streaming link.
Editorial was published and aired two nights on News Channel 14
Taking a Stand: Women Against Registry responds to our 14 News investigation
Posted: Feb 21, 2014 4:22 PMUpdated: Feb 21, 2014 4:54 PM
In this week's Taking a Stand, Vicki Henry with Women Against Registry has a response to our 14 News investigation of sex offenders and school bus stops.
The Women Against Registry is based out of Washington, D.C., but she e-mailed her response to us; Vicki wrote the following:
If we think about registered sex offenders at all, most of us fear them as monsters who have committed terrible sexual crimes against innocent children and are people who need to be carefully watched when released to make sure our children aren't hurt again.
Nobody wants to protect children more than the members of Women Against Registry. Women Against Registry, or WAR, is the voice of millions of innocent women and children who are wrongly and unfairly punished because we have a family member who has completed their debt to society but now must face a life of unemployment, homelessness, and despair. As registered sex offenders they are targeted for harassment and abuse, can't get a job, and many cases, can't even rejoin their own homes. Too many of our husbands, fathers and sons are getting caught up in this registration hysteria even if the offense they committed was minor and years ago.
As the president of WAR, Vicki Henry, says, "In the vast majority of registration cases we're talking about dumb childish mistakes-offenses like public urination, teen age consensual sex, sexting, lewd behavior, taking pictures of your own children in the bath tub, and clicking on the wrong link on a website. Less than two percent of violent sexual offenses are committed by perfect strangers. It is time to stop acting hysterically in the name of protecting children; it's time stop public registration of sex offenders and to start treating this serious problem rationally."
In this week's Taking a Stand, Vicki Henry with Women Against Registry has a response to our 14 News investigation of sex offenders and school bus stops.
The Women Against Registry is based out of Washington, D.C., but she e-mailed her response to us; Vicki wrote the following:
If we think about registered sex offenders at all, most of us fear them as monsters who have committed terrible sexual crimes against innocent children and are people who need to be carefully watched when released to make sure our children aren't hurt again.
Nobody wants to protect children more than the members of Women Against Registry. Women Against Registry, or WAR, is the voice of millions of innocent women and children who are wrongly and unfairly punished because we have a family member who has completed their debt to society but now must face a life of unemployment, homelessness, and despair. As registered sex offenders they are targeted for harassment and abuse, can't get a job, and many cases, can't even rejoin their own homes. Too many of our husbands, fathers and sons are getting caught up in this registration hysteria even if the offense they committed was minor and years ago.
As the president of WAR, Vicki Henry, says, "In the vast majority of registration cases we're talking about dumb childish mistakes-offenses like public urination, teen age consensual sex, sexting, lewd behavior, taking pictures of your own children in the bath tub, and clicking on the wrong link on a website. Less than two percent of violent sexual offenses are committed by perfect strangers. It is time to stop acting hysterically in the name of protecting children; it's time stop public registration of sex offenders and to start treating this serious problem rationally."
Below is the editorial that will be read on the air either tonight or tomorrow night.
Editorial:
In response to the February 17, 2014 article, “Stopping Near Sex Offenders.â€
If we think about registered sex offenders at all,most of us fear them as monsters who have committed terrible sexual crimes against innocent children andare people who need to be carefully watched when released to make sure our children aren’t hurt again.
Nobody wants to protect children more than the members of Women Against Registry. Women Against Registry, or WAR, is the voice of millions of innocent women and children who are wrongly and unfairly punished because we have a family member who has completed their debt to society but now must face a life of unemployment, homelessness, and despair. As registered sex offenders they are targeted for harassment and abuse, can’t get a job, and many cases, can’t even rejoin their own homes. Too many of our husbands, fathers and sons are getting caught up in this registration hysteria even if the offense they committed was minor andyears ago.
As the president of WAR, Vicki Henry, says, “In the vast majority of registration cases we’re talking about dumb childish mistakesundefinedoffenses like public urination, teen age consensual sex, sexting, lewd behavior, taking pictures of your own children in the bath tub, and clicking on the wrong link on a website. Less than two percent of violent sexual offenses are committed by perfect strangers. It is time to stop acting hysterically in the name of protecting children; it’s time stop public registration of sex offendersand to start treating this serious problem rationally.â€
Sex Offender Registry Misguided
Sex-offender registry misguided thinking
By Guy Hamilton-Smith
February 10, 2014
2014-02-10T05:52:53Z
By Guy Hamilton-Smith
Guy Hamilton-Smith has appealed the ruling denying him access to the bar exam.
I am a sex offender.
I know well the tremendous power of those words. In 2007, I pled guilty to possession of child pornography.
Nothing here is meant to defend what I did or to minimize the gravity of my actions. I had a major problem with pornography, and I was far too deep in denial and too scared to reach out to anyone.
Help eventually came when my girlfriend discovered child porn on my computer and went to the police. I was then and remain grateful to her for taking that step.
As I went through the legal process after my arrest, I developed a keen interest in the law, and a sincere desire to advocate on the behalf of those who are hated, who are lost, and who are forgotten. With luck, I managed to win acceptance to law school despite my conviction. I worked harder than I'd ever worked in my life, because I knew I'd have a lot to do to overcome my past. I did well in school, graduated, secured a job at a law firm after disclosing my past, and applied to take the bar exam.
Women Against Registry is a national organization comprised of mothers, wives, girlfriends and other family members of those convicted of a sexual offense. We have begun “Pushing Back†on laws and restrictions which are annihilating and prohibiting healthy family units. Vicki Henry, President of Women Against Registry says, “Let me clearly state that we are as concerned as the rest of society about protecting not only children but any human being from sexual abuse. She goes on to say that the truth needs to come out!†State legislatures can pass 100 new bills targeted at known sex offenders and think that is all that is required to keep society safe but that is misleading. There are currently 769,000 registrants and more are being added at record-breaking rates which only make the jobs of law enforcement impossible. The recidivism rate is at 5% but the reality is the remaining 95% of sexual offenses occurs within the family, their friends or those having access to the children which will never be reported.
Evidence provided by some of our nation’s top scholars suggests,†Sex offender registration and notification (SORN) laws can impede community reintegration efforts of RSOs and potentially contribute to recidivism.†(Jill Levenson, Ph.D., and Richard Tewksbury, Ph.D., titled Collateral Damage: Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders) “Sex offender laws are based on numerous misperceptions about sex offenders and sex offender risk factors, public fear, and the pressure for policy makers to “do something†about this social problem. Also, from a recent study that attempts to reconcile the facts of sex offender science against the views of lawmakers.†(Michelle Meloy, Jessica Boatwright & Kristin Curtis (The Sponsors of Sex Offender Bills Speak Up: Policy Makers' Perceptions of Sex Offenders, Sex Crimes, and Sex Offender Legislation, page 445. Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology)
Women Against Registry is asking the Tennessee lawmakers to refrain from passing legislation filed this year (i.e., community notification, registering for life and 3-strike legislation on indecent exposure) and resolve to depend on empirical evidence for future legislation. We ask that alternatives such as pre-trial dispositions be considered for first time offenses. "Legislators cite the news media and the views of their constituents -- not research evidence -- as their primary sources of information about sex offenses and offenders," said Amy Borror spokeswoman for the Ohio Public Defender's Office. (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2013/apr/22/ohio-public-defenders-office/ohio-public-defenders-office-says-sex-offender-reg/)
Further, we ask that all legislation be based on the Tennessee Constitution, Article 1, Section 11, “That laws made for the punishment of acts committed previous to the existence of such laws, and by them only declared criminal, are contrary to the principles of a free government; wherefore noex post facto law shall be made.†Legislators also need to take advice from other states that have experienced the legal repercussions due to further compliancy of SORNA regulations. For example; The courts state of Ohio were inundated with hundreds of lawsuits due to their ex post facto application of sex offender registration laws, thus accruing tens of millions of dollars in state generated legal costs.
We are calling on our trusted leaders to become familiar with the current scientific research before moving forward with legislation. We are “Pushing Back†against laws that were written out of fear and the unfortunate loss of a few well publicized national cases. Clearly, the familial victim–offender relationship is a more difficult situation to rectify through legislative means. Is this why it is missing from the public discourse?
A member shared a story regarding a church camping trip where she and her husband of 10 years were one of several chaperone couples. A few months later a 14 year old girl accused her husband of child molestation. Her now registered husband has maintained his innocence and has passed 4 polygraph tests. During the time he was incarcerated, the victim’s mother asked the now-registrant’s wife for financial help in which she declined. Out of spite, the mother called the mortgage company and advised them he was incarcerated for a sexual offense. Even though the wife continued to make the payments at the advice of her attorney, the mortgage company rejected them saying,†he was a detriment and they could not continue the loan.†The wife had to move out of their home while he was incarcerated. All of the equity they had accrued over the ten years on the mortgage was lost.
Women Against Registry asks that all families be considered in future legislation and that empirical evidence is the guiding force.
-30-
Dr. Phil: Child Molester or Innocent Soldier Accused?
Friday
Child Molester or Innocent Soldier Accused?
In 2012, Amanda accused her ex-husband, George, a U.S. Army veteran, of molesting her then 7-year-old daughter, and he was recently sentenced to life in prison for the crime. George’s parents, Harold and Cindy, believe their son was wrongfully convicted, and they want to set the record straight in an effort to have him released. Emotions run high when the parents confront Amanda on Dr. Phil’s stage and accuse her of coercing her daughter into making false allegations against George. How does Amanda respond? Dr. Phil sorts through the details of the case in search of answers. How does George respond to the allegations? Tune in, and weigh in: Has a child molester been taken off the streets, or is an innocent man paying for a crime he didn’t commit?
Audit Criticizes CO Sex Offender Treatment Programs
Audit criticizes Colorado's program for monitoring sex offenders
Colorado is overtreating many low-risk sex offenders in the mistaken belief that they cannot be cured, an independent consultant has found.
As a result, the state's Sex Offender Management Board is wasting significant amounts of public money on supervision in the community, according to a report from Central Coast Clinical and Forensic Psychology Services.
The report, released earlier this month, also concluded that Colorado's system for classifying some offenders as sexually violent predators is hopelessly flawed and in urgent need of replacement. That means Colorado could be classifying the wrong people as sexually violent predators.
Sex offender can continue to post photos, judge says
By Justin Moyer,
A D.C. Superior Court judge ruled Tuesday that a convicted sex offender can distribute and post photos of court employees online to protest the city’s sex offender registry.
Dennis Sobin, a former pornographer who served more than a decade in prison for a sexual performance using a minor, posted the photos of employees from D.C.’s Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) on idiotsregistry.info saying that sex-offender registries are unfair. A court employee filed for a civil protection order, accused him of stalking and asked the court to have Sobin to remove her photo.
But Judge Todd E. Edelman said that Sobin’s actions were protected by the First Amendment.
“Mr. Sobin’s conduct could be criticized,†said Edelman. “I think it’s unlikely to be effective. I think that criticizing lower-level court employees is puzzling. But that’s not my place to say.â€
The unusual case garnered the attention of the ACLU, which filed a brief on Sobin’s behalf. Tuesday’s hearing also drew interest from other sex offenders and anti-registry activists.
“I’m very happy the judge understood and abided by the U.S. Constitution that gives citizens the right to protest, even in a personal sort of way,†Sobin said.
Sobin, 70, thought the decision could inspire similar protests elsewhere.
“The judge’s opinion will be used as ammunition around the country,†he said.
Stephanie Gray, the CSOSA employee who sought the protection order, and her attorneys declined comment.
Vicki L. Henry, president of Women Against Registry, welcomed the decision, saying people are not aware how much sex offender registries damage families.
“There’s no empirical evidence supporting these registries,†said Henry, whose son is a sex offender, outside the courtroom. “We need to promote prevention.â€
Derek W. Logue, a sex offender from Ohio who was there to support Sobin, said that registries prevent criminals from moving forward.
“I’m 37,†Logue said. “They’re still judging me on what I did when I was 22.†s-judge-says/2014/01/28/4687f63a-8861-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html
W.A.R. is Going to Washington D.C.!!!!
You read the header correctly! W.A.R. is going to Washington D.C.!
In light of the recent upcoming hearing of Dennis Sobin and his Idiot registry, W.A.R. thought it imperative to present and show support. Although we do NOT agree with any form of public registries, we DO agree with Mr. Sobin's right to teach his audience (the public and lawmakers) that registries are punitive and do cause harm to those who are on them. Additionally, Dennis Sobin is being represented by the ACLU. W.A.R. has been told numerous times that we must connect and affiliate with the ACLU on civil rights issues....this IS our connection!
W.A.R. board member, Vicki Henri and several D.C. members will be in attendance at the Washington DC Superior Courthouse with our banners and information on Tuesday, January 28th, 2014. (The scheduled time for the actual hearing is at 2:30 pm.)
As always, W.A.R. can not make these events and be present without your monetary donations. In order to have representatives from the Admin team attend the D.C. hearing and other upcoming venues, we have to rely on your generous contributions to help pay for flight and travel expenses. Please help us help you! Every penny helps! To make a donation, please visit the W.A.R. website and click on the "donate" button.
If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact us!
As Always, Thank you in advance for your support!
Vicki and Kim
Sex Offender Fights Registry by Registering his Register
Sex offender fights registry by registering his registerers
If nothing else, Dennis Sobin is not your typical ex-con.
At first glance, he looks like the model returning citizen: After serving more than a decade in prison, Sobin, 70, returned to the District, started a gallery for prison art and ran for mayor.
But Sobin is also sex offender. A former pornographer who’s appeared on “The Sally Jesse Raphael Show†and “Geraldo,†Sobin was convicted of sexual performance using a minor in 1992 in Florida.
Sobin thinks it’s unfair. So, for his latest act, Sobin has decided to protest his treatment by creating his own online data base and registering the people who monitor him at the sex offender registry.
Now, in an unusual case that will be heard on Jan. 24, a D.C. Superior Court judge will decide whether a court employee can file a civil protection order to prevent Sobin from posting her photo on his anti-registry registry, www.idiotsregistry.info , and distributing Gray’s photograph on fliers.
“Here at www.IdiotsRegistry.info you will find the names of politicians and public figures who have encouraged the creation of, or have refused to denounce, government registration websites that target citizens for harassment,†Sobin’s site reads. “In the tradition of Nazi registration of Jews and Gypsies and the Salem lists of alleged witches, modern government registries are unfair and un-American.â€
Stephanie Gray, who works for CSOSA, is asking the court to force Sobin to remove her picture from the site.
Sobin, who was under Gray’s supervision until she got another position at the agency, did not mince words when criticizing Gray.
“Face of Evil: ‘Registry Specialist’ Stephanie Gray shoots icy stare,†Sobin posted under a photo of Gray. “Gray requested and received a transfer due to the guilt she felt in her loathsome job.â€
Sobin said his action was inspired by Supreme Court rulings which hold that sex offender registries are not punitive and do not constitute double jeopardy.
“If it’s not punishment to be on a list, we thought we’d put the people who do the registering on a list,†he said.
Gray took another view.
“He writes derogatory information about me,†Gray wrote in her request for a protection order. “I have been move[d] from the Sex Offender Registry and he continues to trash the bldg. where I am with pictures he has taken of me without me knowing.â€
Should Sobin prevail,“It would send a message to all sex offenders in the District of Columbia,†according to a petition filed by Gray’s attorneys which accused Sobin of stalking. “Convicted criminals required to report to CSOSA could harass them with impunity under the guise of protected political speech.†Gray, through her attorneys, declined comment, as did CSOSA.
Sobin has found an ally: the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed an amicus brief on his behalf.
“We think there are some significant First Amendment issues,†said Art Spitzer, legal director of ACLU’s D.C. office, who pointed out that Gray is not alleging physical harm. “Domestic violence laws are supposed to protect people from crimes, but not hurt feelings. . . . People are allowed to embarrass each other and make each other feel bad when making a political point.â€
Though Sobin’s legal strategy is new, sex offender registries have been around for a long time.
Though California became the first state to establish a sex offender registry in 1947, many states followed suit after Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old living in New Jersey, was murdered by her neighbor, a serial sex offender, in 1994. D.C. created its registry in 1999.
Experts in the field said Sobin’s approach was unusual.
Katie Gotch, a spokesperson for the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, estimated that there are 700,000 sex offenders on registries in America, but wasn’t aware of any who had mounted protests like Sobin’s.
“That’s actually very novel,†said Gotch. “I have not heard of that and I’m not surprised he’s getting sued.â€
Should Sobin win, Gray’s civil protection request will be denied, but D.C.’s sex offender registry will not be affected.
But, Sobin said, he’ll have struck a blow for free speech and shown the flawed logic behind the registry undefined even if there’s collateral damage.
“Ms. Gray happens to be a very sensitive, compassionate individual who is on the registration list,†Sobin said. “It’s a war. . . . They’re involved in this registration thing and unless they move themselves out, we’re going to oppose them.â€
I was at the State house on 1/15/2014, and met with the Lieutenant Governor Phil Scott and Commissioner of Corrections Andrew Pallito. Both meetings went very well.
Lieutenant Governor - I laid out the reason that I was at the State house, and that as the State POC, I would be monitoring legislation that impacted registrants or their families. I explained that while our name included "Against the Registry" that in fact we were opposed to a public registry. The Lt. Gov was open and welcoming and expressed only one genuine concern, and that was if we have to register as lobbyists. Other then then that, He listened to the message and took the information that I gave him. He was interested in the support line, and told me that he would have his assistant follow up with me to get out more information. The meeting was maybe 20 minutes all told.
Commissioner - laid out the reason that I was at the State house, and that as the State POC, I would be monitoring legislation that impacted registrants or their families. I explained that while our name included "Against the Registry" that in fact we were opposed to a public registry. I have sent him an email, at his request, with the brochures. The Commissioner was open to our message, and said that he wanted to read more about what the group was about, and he would be in touch. the meeting was between 10 and 15 minutes.
2014 Women Against Registry’s Operation Push Back
As Director of Women Against Registry, I am contacting your agency on behalf of over two million women, family members and those affected by the public sex offender registry. We have grown tired of the continued penalties registrants and their FAMILY members increasingly face. We have begun “Pushing Back†on legislation driven by sensationalized media representations. For too long we have heard heart-breaking stories from families being destroyed, registrant families being turned away at Disney Parks, turned away when visiting a foreign country on Christmas vacation, children passed over for higher education opportunities, family homes/property damaged, members asked to leave their church, and many other scenarios which continue as punishment for a loved one’s sexual offense but has progressed to the annihilation of family units. We ask that you take a few minutes to become informed of the ever increasing problems surrounding individuals convicted of a sex offense as we have provided evidenced-based resources for your convenience.
One New York family’s story…
My son, who at the age of 17 had a consensual sexual relationship with his 14 year old girlfriend, is now on the registry for life as a “violent offender and most likely to reoffend!†As the mother of a now registrant I experience heartbreak at watching my son deteriorate from a once ambitious, happy young man into a lonely and very depressed recluse. He often expresses thoughts of suicide and we have to encourage him to keep moving forward even though we know if the laws aren’t changed, his real hopes for a happy life is always going to be limited. I cry a lot of tears while at the same time my mind and soul are enraged at what is being done to him. I cried and anguished over the very explicit questions he was asked during offender counseling. I am infuriated at how this system is so out of control and destroys everything in its path. We lost a daughter-in-law and contact with our two grand-daughters because she could not deal with the things the family was subjected to on a constant basis. That was very devastating. Our family has been through his being beaten, harassed and ridiculed….all for what? I ask, all for what?
EVIDENCE-BASED RESEARCH:
Women Against Registry often cites a research study by Jill Levenson, Ph.D., and Richard Tewksbury, Ph.D., Professor entitled Collateral Damage:Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders. “Researchers have identified ways in which sex offender registration and notification (SORN) laws can impede community reintegration efforts of RSOs and potentially contribute to recidivism. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of SORN laws on the family members of registered sex offenders.†Noted in the report; out of 446 interviewed 87% of families suffered hardships due to the registrant finding and sustaining employment. Out of 437 interviewed 44% have been threatened or harassed; out of 441 interviewed 30% have suffered bodily harm or property damages due to Meagan’s Law Notification.
From a recent study by: Michelle Meloy & Jessica Boatwright & Kristin Curtis (The Sponsors of Sex Offender Bills Speak Up: Policy Makers' Perceptions of Sex Offenders, Sex Crimes, and Sex Offender Legislation page 445. Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology)
Sex offenders are among today’s most hated and feared criminals. The contemporary response to this has resulted in specialized laws, referred to as “sex offender legislation.†Although legislation targeting sex offenders is not new to the United States, or elsewhere, the policy makers involved in today’s “third wave†of sex offender laws (Terry, 2005) are the focus of this current investigation. This wave of U.S. sex offender laws is based on numerous misperceptions about sex offenders and sex offender risk factors, public fear, and the pressure for policy makers to “do something†about this social problem. Thus, this research attempts to reconcile the facts of sex offender science against the views of lawmakers. Is there a total disconnect between empiricism and policy maker perceptions?
61 legislatorswhere interviewed, at least one from each state, 65% admitted to “policy being written due to high profile cases†some not even within the jurisdiction of their own state. Most of the legislation was written from a few high profile cases. 44% of the policy makers interviewed saw overly broad sex offender laws as a problem. Influential elected officials have a host of ideas and perceptions about this type of crime and offender, but these views are often not based on science. Research such as this could help transform “shoot-from-the-hip†policy making into “informed policy making†by integrating scientific outcomes into legal responses.
Patty Wetterling, Mother of Jacob Wetterling in which a law was named after, has said as recently as March 2013, “...that the registry is doing more harm than good.†http://www.citypages.com/2013-03-20/news/patty-wetterling-questions-sex-offender-laws.
Cost to New York vs. Credible Research
Per the NCMEC, there are 751,538 men, women and children on national registries with 36,603 of those registered in New York. When you consider the registerable offenses, the law enforcement and office staff expenses associated with monitoring and tracking, as well as the length of time the state of New York has committed, one has to wonder what empirical evidence supports this valiant effort. There is none! However, there is credible research advising low recidivism rates. According to a study by the U.S. Department of Justice, 5.3% of American sex offenders are rearrested for a new sex crime within three years with only 3.5% being convicted. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003).
Other things impacting costs are Probation & Parole as well as incarceration and went on to say the U.S. is 5% of the world’s population AND 25% of the world’s incarcerated.
"Sometimes federal mandates and state laws get passed without a real sense of what the lingering costs are," says Suzanne Brown-McBride, deputy director of the Council of State Governments Justice Center.
Recommendations that will Accomplish the Desired End Result - Prevention of Sexual Abuse:
·Design or create policy with the primary goal of prevention of sexual abuse violence thus reducing the sexual deviancy rates. (A Reasoned Approach: Reshaping Sex Offender Policy to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse By Joan Tabachnick and Alisa Klein) of The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers.
·Implement pre and post-trial diversion programs into the judicial process for sexual offenses much like those available for drug and other offenses hence cutting down on prosecutors forcing plea deals based on little evidence and laws sparing victims from testifying.
With the publications of numerous studies and empirical research, Women Against Registry is calling for New York legislators to stop enacting additional laws as they are doing more harm than good. We are calling on our trusted leaders to become familiar with the current scientific research before writing legislation. We are “Pushing Back†against laws that were written out of fear and the unfortunate loss of a few well publicized national cases which are called “Apostrophe Laws.†For example the projected cost of Chelsey’s Law in California was presented as: “State officials have warned that the cost of implementingChelsea's Law will be high as the lengthier sentences play out. An analysis by the state corrections department found the law would cost $1 million in 2015 but $54 million by 2030. Per The California Legislative Analyst's Office, says “costs will run much higher, at least a few tens of millions of dollars annually within the next decade and hundreds of millions annually in decades to come.†http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127220896Chelsea’s Law propelled the legislator’s career yet remains unfunded. Policy makers and the public need to be educated on the science of sexual deviancy and offending. For instance, one seldom-disputed fact is that most sex crimesundefinedespecially against childrenundefined occur between individuals who know one another, reside together, is an acquaintance or have access to the children. Yet policy makers and the public tend to view strangers as posing the greatest risk of sexual violence. Clearly, the familial victim–offender relationship is a more difficult situation to rectify through legislative means. Is this why it is missing from the public discourse?
###
Unreliable Evidence Cost Man 25 Years and Chicago $6.3 Million
According to the Chicago Sun-Times (here), the City of Chicago has agreed to pay $6.3 million to Larry Gillard to settle a federal lawsuit alleging that the Chicago police crime lab distorted evidence, which contributed to his wrongful conviction of a 1981 rape. Gillard served 25 years in prison before DNA proved his innocence.
Two pieces of unreliable evidence conspired to convict Gillard. A Chicago Police Crime Laboratory analyst testified that Gillard was among 4.4 percent of African Americans who could have committed the crime. The crime lab was later shut down when it was discovered in an audit that it did not comply with standards. The suit alleged that the lab misrepresented the results in Gillard’s case.
The rape victim also provided compelling evidence when she identified Gillard in a photo lineup. However, in a landmark FBI study of 8,000 cases in which victims had identified a stranger rapist, DNA proved that in about 25% of the cases the victims’ identifications were incorrect.
The Exoneration Project of the University of Chicago Law accepted and worked on Gillard’s case. DNA testing not only proved he was not the rapist but also identified the actual perpetrator.
According to the case report on The National Registry of Exonerations (here):
“Gillard’s conviction was dismissed and he was released on May 26, 2009.
On August 27, 2009, Judge Paul Biebel, Jr., presiding judge of the Criminal Division of the Cook County Circuit Court, granted Gillard a certificate of innocence, qualifying him for $170,000 in compensation for his wrongful conviction.â€
Gillard’s attorney, Jon Loevy of Loevy & Loevy, said that if the police crime lab had reported the results of their testing accurately, Gillard “never would have been convicted.â€
It was this alleged misrepresentation of the forensic evidence that enabled the lawsuit and the recovery.
This tragic stumbling of justice demonstrates the impact of unreliable evidence. With the victim’s (mistaken) identification and (inaccurate) forensic testimony, the jury took less than an hour to convict Gillard.
This case and countless others also illustrate a post-DNA-era truth: Prosecutors cannot simply present evidence, and then “let the jury decide.†They must first do all possible to assure that the evidence presented is truthful and reliable.
A single piece of unreliable evidence, such as a misidentification, can easily trump an alibi and other exculpatory evidence and convict an innocent person. A combination of two or more pieces of unreliable evidence is frighteningly effective in convicting the innocent. Until we implement reforms and recommendations that will preserve the integrity of evidence, juries will be mislead, innocent people will be convicted, and actual criminal perpetrators will continue to victimize.
Appeals court rules against Orange County on sex offender law
By Abby Sewell
January 10, 2014,7:10 p.m.
A panel of California appeals court judges found Friday that state law trumps Orange County's regulations on sex offenders that ban them from parks and beaches.
The fourth appellate district decision reverses the conviction of Hugo Godinez, a registered sex offender who was convicted of a misdemeanor for violating the county ordinance after he went to a company picnic at Mile Square Regional Park in Fountain Valley in 2011. Godinez had been convicted of misdemeanor sexual battery in 2010.
The county's restrictions on sex offenders, passed in 2011, were among the most aggressive in the state.
A number of cities within Orange County adopted versions of the law at the urging of the district attorney's office, and many of them also faced court challenges.
An Orange County Superior Court appeals panel overturned Godinez's conviction in 2012. In response, the Orange County Sheriff's Department stopped enforcing the law, and the Lake Forest City Council voted to repeal its ban.
The county appeals panel said the sex offender law appeared to be illegal and asked the 4th District Court of Appeal to hear the case.
"Godinez argues state law preempts the county ordinance and therefore his conviction is void. We agree," the appeals court ruling said.
The state Legislature has already enacted a "comprehensive statutory scheme regulating the daily life of sex offenders," and the Orange County law conflicts with it, the panel found.
Orange County's law allows sex offenders to go to parks with written permission from the county sheriff. The appeals court found that requirement amounts to a "de facto registration requirement" that conflicts with the state's existing sex offender registration requirements.
Representatives of the Orange County district attorney's office could not immediately be reached for comment.
NYS Council on Community Re-Entry and Reintegration
From The Fortune Society:
Yesterday, we were very excited to hear Governor Cuomo’s announcement in his 2014 State of the State address that he will establish the NYS Council on Community Re-Entry and Reintegration, which will bring leadership from a wide array of agencies together to maximize the effectiveness of New York’s efforts to promote successful reentry from prison and to ensure that State policies regarding the broad spectrum of issues that impact formerly incarcerated individuals are aligned with federal and local efforts. We at The Fortune Society recognize the urgency of the situation, as we see more than 4,000 formerly incarcerated individuals each year walking through our doors in need of assistance and conduct advocacy on behalf of hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers with criminal histories who are struggling to reintegrate into society upon release from prison or jail. While the State has made many strides in this area, in partnership with federal and local government, we still have a long way to go in eliminating discrimination directed at formerly incarcerated individuals and ensuring that they have access to opportunities, so that they can establish a positive and productive life for themselves and their families. We are eager to hear more about the launch of this new Council and will actively seek out the opportunity to participate in its work and ensure that it lives up to its mission.
We also applaud Governor Cuomo’s announcement to establish the Commission on Youth, Public Safety & Justice to provide recommendations related to youth in New York’s criminal and juvenile justice systems. The fact that New York is one of only two States in the country that treats 16-year-olds as adults in the criminal justice system is a travesty. We should not accept such a harmful punishment imposed on young people who are still in the middle stages of their development as adolescents. The damage done by the adult criminal justice system to these young people – many of whom have already suffered from the combined impacts of poverty, abuse/neglect, homelessness, and inadequate education – can last a lifetime and seriously hinder them from ever becoming successful adults. We commend the Governor for tasking this new Commission with the responsibility of developing a plan to raise the age of criminal responsibility and creating a roadmap to promote youth success and ensure public safety so that all young people have the opportunity to become productive, successful adults.
The Fortune Society is eager to work with Governor Cuomo to ensure that this new Council and Commission work aggressively to ensure that both youth and adults who have been involved in the criminal justice system have access to housing, employment, education, health care, substance abuse and mental health treatment, family reunification assistance, public benefits, and other supportive services they need to thrive and live successful lives in the community.
JoAnne Page President and CEO
Websites will no longer bill to remove mug shots
TOLEDO, Ohio – Two Internet sites that make money by posting millions of mug shots of people who’ve been arrested have agreed to stop charging them to take down their photos as part of a settlement in a federal lawsuit.
The lawsuit came about after a number of complaints from people who said the websites were charging hundreds of dollars to remove the mug shots even if the cases against those arrested had been dropped.
The settlement in U.S. District Court in Toledo doesn’t apply to all of the mug shot sites that can be found online, just two – BustedMugshots.com and MugshotsOnline.com.
NEWS RELEASE: National women's organization opposes Alabama’s proposed HB 14.
The question we are asking is an obvious one; “do laws such as this truly PROTECT children?â€
Alabama Representative Steve Hurst seems to think so. His previous years’ and newly introduced legislation, if enacted, would mandate the Department of Corrections to surgically castrate any person over the age of 21 who has been convicted of a sexual crime against a minor under the age of 12 years.
But a national women's organization is challenging the usefulness of such a law, asserting that it does nothing to increase community safety but seriously infringes upon the rights of registrants and those who are maintaining their innocence of any crime. If the intention is to have sexual offenders not be able to commit another crime against a child, then this legislation is a waste of time and tax payer’s dollars.
Empirical evidence proves that a person willing to offend sexually can and will do so, without the use of body parts. Further, many states’ ACLU organizations have fought and won court cases regarding castration of any means as a violation to the Constitution’s eighth amendment under Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Additionally, a quote taken from the ACLU states, "The United States penal system effective or not is designed to protect society from harmful members and to rehabilitate those who can eventually rejoin society. Chemical castration does not make sex offenders ready to face society."
In an article published, "Thoughts on Castration for Sex Offenders." The Curvature. March 12th, 2009, states“The idea that it would stop the castrated rapists from raping again, as a general rule? I can believe that. But it won’t stop rape. Not even close. And in the process of stopping a few rapes while failing to stop the vast majority of them, a false sense of what rape is about is heavily stitched onto the public’s consciousness."
As a nationwide organization of wives, mothers, daughters, sisters and other family members, W.A.R. advocates for the rights of the families. The public registry has evolved into a public ‘hit list†and there is no direct statement indicting “any person or group of persons who bring harm to a registrant OR any member of their family will be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Aren’t all of us, as citizens, entitled to protection under the Constitution?
In a decision from the Supreme Court of the United States,( Skinner v. State of Okl. ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541, 62 S. Ct. 1110, 1113, 86 L. Ed. 1655 (1942)),“But the instant legislation runs afoul of the equal protection clause, though we give Oklahoma that large deference which the rule of the foregoing cases requires. We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, far reaching and devastating effects. In evil or reckless hands it can cause races or types which are inimical to the dominant group to wither and disappear. There is no redemption for the individual whom the law touches. Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty. We mention these matters not to reexamine the scope of the police power of the States. We advert to them merely in emphasis of our view that strict scrutiny of the classification which a State makes in a sterilization law is essential, lest unwittingly or otherwise invidious discriminations are made against groups or types of individuals in violation of the constitutional guaranty of just and equal laws. The guaranty of ‘equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws.â€
Women Against Registry supports the findings and statements of the ACLU in regards to castration of anyone convicted of a sexual crime. “W.A.R. will stand beside the ACLU, The United States Supreme Court and any other organization to back any legal cases to protect the rights of all citizens in the United States, including those who are convicted of sexual offenses,†states Vicki Henry, President. “The effect is just the polar opposite in that it exposes registrants to discrimination and further imposes punitive punishments where our judicial system has failed to rehabilitate our citizens and prepare them for re-entry,†Ms. Henry adds.
"House Bill 14 unjustifiably discriminates against the rights of those convicted of sexual crimes as well as promotes a new type of public discrimination" says Kimberly DuBina, also of W.A.R..
As a matter of policy the organization and its members vigorously oppose any legislation that prohibits those convicted of sexual crimes in maintaining the same rights as any other citizen who have been sentenced and served their time for a crime.
Proponent D. R. Madison concluded, "We oppose any legislation that humiliates and places individuals as well as their families in harm’s way or punishes individuals for longer than their sentence requirements given by the courts."
For more information, visit www.womenagainstregistry.com, contact@womenagainstregistry.comOR contact Vicki Henry at 202-630-0345.
###
Irish to House Sex Offenders
Ireland has it right!
Niall O'Connor Political Correspondent – 30 December 2013
SEX offenders should be given homes by local authorities on their release from prison, according to a report being considered by Justice Minister Alan Shatter.
A high-level plan devised by a number of powerful state agencies recommends that sex offenders be placed in social housing estates and apartment complexes so as to avoid homelessness.
The plan, which relates to the Dublin region, is designed to assist sex offenders who have just left prison or returned from abroad.
The state agencies, which include An Garda Siochana, the Irish Prison Service and the HSE, recommended the setting up of "placement committees" who will decide where sex offenders should live.
According to the plan, the following steps will take place:
* Offenders will undergo a risk assessment prior to their release from prison, categorising them as low risk, medium risk, high risk or very high risk.
* They will liaise with an official local authority staff member prior to their release.
* A placement committee will decide what "suitable" estate or apartment complex the offender should reside in. This committee will meet at least every two months.
The "implementation plan", seen by the Irish Independent, has been brought to the attention of the Justice Minister.
However, a spokeswoman for the minister insisted that work on the plan is "ongoing".
According to the report, councils would be obliged to take part in an "exchange" programme involving the transfer of sex offenders "due to victim and offender protection issues".
It states that "wherever possible, sex offenders on release from prison should be accommodated in housing services rather than in emergency homeless accommodation".
RESPONSIBILITY
The report added: "Local authorities will have a responsibility to consider the move on accommodation requirements of all sex offenders including those placed in the proposed supported temporary accommodation unit for very high-risk offenders."
If implemented, the radical measures will shift the onus of housing responsibility on to local authorities.
The report added: "It is currently difficult to place offenders who've been convicted of a sex offence into emergency, transitional or long-term social housing due to concerns regarding public protection, the risk of reoffending and the potential reaction of local communities."
Serious concern has been raised about the current system, which leaves sex offenders staying for weeks and months on end in hostels and temporary accommodation when they leave prison.
PLACERVILLE - The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors is expected to repeal a 2-year-old sex offender ordinance Tuesday to settle a federal civil rights lawsuit.
The 2012 ordinance was inspired by Phillip and Nancy Garrido, the county's most notorious sex offenders, who were convicted the year before of kidnapping Jaycee Dugard and holding her for 18 years.
The measure forbids registered sex offenders from coming within 300 feet of parks, schools, libraries, public pools and other places where children congregate.
"The ordinance that's on the books today is, in fact, unconstitutional," said attorney Janice Bellucci, who represents a 48-year-old sex offender from Pollock Pines who sued El Dorado County in federal court last summer.
"Phil Garrido is an extreme case and an extreme situation and unfortunately the ordinance that was passed by the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors is just too broad," Bellucci said.
The final item on Tuesday's agenda calls for county supervisors to repeal the ordinance as a condition of Bellucci dropping the lawsuit.
The repeal would become effective 30 days later.
Bellucci said she would begin discussions with the cities of Placerville and South Lake Tahoe, which followed the county's lead and enacted similar ordinances.
El Dorado County District Attorney Vern Pierson said he would help draft a new ordinance in the coming weeks, using recent court decisions as guidance, to craft a measure that will withstand another challenge.
"You go into it trying to be as careful as you can in terms of the drafting of it, but you can never anticipate everything that can come up," he said.
We can all become angry and frustrated with life. Some of us have been known to express that frustration in ways that later, upon reflection, seem foolish or even tragically self-destructive. John Walsh, with the help of a public that cannot have rational conversation about how to intelligently manage sexual criminality, has succeeded in turning his son’s memory into a curse on a nation.
Adam Walsh was abducted from a Sears department store in Hollywood, Florida, on July 27, 1981, and was later found to have been murdered and decapitated. Walsh’s father, John Walsh, became an advocate for victims of violent crimes and the host of the television program America’s Most Wanted. Convicted serial killer Ottis Toole eventually confessed to the boy’s murder but was never tried for the crime due to loss of evidence. [Toole] claimed [his motive was] that he wanted to make Walsh his adopted son… The police investigation of Walsh’s abduction was extremely inept, and they lost the bloodstained carpet from Toole’s Cadillac, the machete used to decapitate Walsh, and eventually, the car itself.
The Adam Walsh Child Act was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on July 27, 2006. The Walsh Act organizes sex offenders into three tiers and mandates that Tier 3 offenders (the most serious tier) update their whereabouts every three months with lifetime registration requirements. Tier 2 offenders must update their whereabouts every six months with 25 years of registration, and Tier 1 offenders must update their whereabouts every year with 15 years of registration. Failure to register and update information is a felony under the law.
To summarize, John Walsh took the horrible murder of his young son and turned it into a legacy that would have done NOTHING to have prevented the crime against his son. The inflamed passions around this subject have, however, resulted in legislation that has SEVERELY impacted the half million Americans convicted of sex crimes and their families including…their own children. The AWA has never seen any supportive research or a study of any kind. It never will. This is because the AWA classifies offenders solely based on the name of the crime of which they were convicted. A person’s likelihood of reoffending is not even considered. What the what? Yes, Tier 3 is “the most serious,†but what does “most serious†mean? It does NOT mean that the person is likely to reoffend. Offenders with crimes similar to John Walsh’s own history (see video above) have become Tier 1 or 2.
Consider Bill, a 45-year-old husband, father and grandfather who lives in Nevada where the AWA has recently become law. When Bill was 19 years old he had a 16-year-old girlfriend–26 years ago. The records clearly show the correct age of the victim; but the crime was charged under a law that has in its name the phrase, “…under the age of 14 years.†These sorts of legal fictions and mistakes in paperwork are common in plea bargaining. Bill was recently informed that he is now, per the AWA, a Tier 3 whose neighbors will be informed at their front doors of his crime from decades ago. They (and Bill’s employer) will also see his name in their newspapers and on TV news. The fact that assessments based on, get this, science, show he has no greater risk than any other member of the community–this too is irrelevant. He was fired upon showing up at work for being a Tier 3–as were three other men. How does keeping felons from getting or holding a job promote community safety?
Millions of dollars in precious resources squandered, police staff misdirected, millions of family members punished unjustly, unthinkingly. Adam Walsh deserves better from his father. We all do. Come, reason with us.
To protect our children, It’s an emergency, if the passage of this law saves just one child then it has served its purpose. We have all heard these type of comments from our legislators. Friedrich August von Hayek once wisely said,
“‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.â€
Such is the case with many of these ‘protect the children’ laws. But what if the passage of such a law were to actually put a child in jeopardy of being harassed, threatened, bullied, beaten up or possibly even leading to the child’s suicide. Well this is exactly the sort of collateral damage that has occurred recently as a result of laws created by our nations legislatures. So who is responsible for this damage to the hundreds of thousands of children whose parents are affected by these laws. Ultimately it goes back to those legislators who ignored statistics and data showing that the people whom they targeted with these laws as a disfavored group do not have the high recidivism rates often used to justify the laws. Those legislators who for their own personal gain allowed the disfavored group to have unconstitutional laws passed against them. Laws that have taken away the Constitutionally protected rights of American citizens so that those legislators could look tough on crime, and thereby guaranteeing they remain in their positions of power.
Think about it, are these the type of legislators that you want representing you. Legislators who with total disregard for the Constitution that they are sworn to uphold in many cases without so much as even reading the bills that they pass into law, or even bothering to do research on the reasons behind the supposed need for the bills, instead choose to listen to industrial lobbying groups and pass the laws regardless of what sound research says. These lobby groups and the legislators they pander to care only about their own personal agendas and the all mighty dollar. They do not care if they destroy the individual rights of the citizens of the United States in the process. Shouldn’t those lobbyists be held accountable for the false information that they provide to the law makers, shouldn’t all participating in an unconstitutional law be held accountable for the damage that their discriminatory laws cause. It is not uncommon for the legislature to pass a law without knowing or caring if it is constitutional or not and simply saying that it will be decided in the courts afterward. Yet when it is found unconstitutional by the courts later on, the people that introduce and pass the bill will not take responsibility nor be held accountable for the direct or collateral damage to the citizens of the United States which their unconstitutional laws have effected.
The Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights were formed to protect individual, and I repeat that word Individual rights, not to allow the government to control every facet of our lives. In fact, the framers of our Constitution found government control repugnant! With that in mind I would like to present you with a bit of extensive reading that best expresses just how repugnant our forefathers and high courts found governmental control, corruption, and the erosion of Constitutional rights and protections. Consider the following opinions of Alexander Hamilton in his, ‘History of the Republic of the United States‘:
“The advocates of the bill pretend to appeal to the spirit of Whigism, while they endeavored to put in motion all the furious and dark passions of the human mind. The spirit of Whigism is generous, humane, beneficent, and just. These men inculcate revenge, cruelty, persecution, and perfidy. The spirit of whigism cherishes legal liberty, holds the rights of every individual sacred, condemns or punishes no man without regular trial, and conviction of some crime declared by antecedent laws, reprobates equally the punishment of the citizen by arbitrary acts of the legislature, as by the lawless combinations of unauthorized individuals ; while these men are the advocates for expelling a large number of their fellow-citizens unheard, untried ; or, if they cannot effect this, are for disfranchising them in the face of the constitution, without the judgment of their peers, and contrary to the law of the land.â€. . . . “Nothing is more common, than for a free people in times of heat and violence to gratify momentary passions by letting into the government principles and precedents which afterward prove fatal to themselves. Of this kind is the doctrine of disqualification, disfranchisement, and banishment by acts of the legislature. The dangerous consequences of this power are manifest. If the legislature can disfranchise any number of citizens at pleasure by general descriptions, it may soon confine all the votes to a small number of partisans, and establish an aristocracy or an oligarchy ; if it may banish at discretion all those whom particular circumstances render obnoxious, without hearing or trial, no man can be safe, nor know when he may be the innocent victim of a prevailing faction. The name of liberty applied to such a government, would be a mockery of common senseâ€. . . . . “The people at large are sure to be the losers in the event, whenever they suffer a departure from the rules of general and equal justice, or from the true principles of universal liberty.â€â€¦.
“There is a bigotry in polities as well as in religion, equally pernicious to both. The zealots of either description are ignorant of the advantage of a spirit of toleration. It is remarkable, though not extraordinary, that those characters throughout the States who have been principally instrumental in the Revolution are the most opposed to persecuting measures. Were it proper, I might trace the truth of these remarks from that character who has been THE FIRST in conspicuousness, through the several gradations of those, with very few exceptions, who either in the civil or military line, have borne a distinguished part in the war.â€
The landmark US Supreme Court case,Cummings versus the state of Missouri (71 U.S. 277), shares much of Alexander Hamilton’s sentiment in regards to the deprivation of rights and further elaborates on this topic.
“The disabilities created by the Constitution of Missouri must be regarded as penalties undefined they constitute punishment. We do not agree with the counsel of Missouri that “to punish one is to deprive him of life, liberty, or property, and that to take from him anything less than these is no punishment at all.†The learned counsel does not use these terms undefined life, liberty, and property undefined as comprehending every right known to the law. He does not include under liberty freedom from outrage on the feelings as well as restraints on the person. He does not include under property those estates which one may acquire in professions, though they are often the source of the highest emoluments and honors. The deprivation of any rights, civil or political, previously enjoyed may be punishment, the circumstances attending and the causes of the deprivation determining this fact. Disqualification from office many be punishment, as in cases of conviction upon impeachment. Disqualification from the pursuits of a lawful avocation, or from positions of trust, or from the privilege of appearing in the courts, or acting as an executor, administrator, or guardian, may also, and often has been, imposed as punishment. By statute 9 and 10
William III, chap. 32, if any person educated in or having made a profession of the Christian religion did, “by writing, printing, teaching, or advised speaking,†deny the truth of the religion, or the divine authority of the Scriptures, he was for the first offence rendered incapably to hold any office or place of trust, and for the second he was rendered incapable of bringing any action, being guardian, executor, legatee, or purchaser of lands, besides being subjected to three years’ imprisonment without bail.
By statute 1 George I, chap. 13, contempts against the King’s title arising from refusing or neglecting to take certain prescribed oaths and yet acting in an office or place of trust for which they were required were punished by incapacity to hold any public office, to prosecute any suit, to be guardian or executor, to take any legacy or deed of gift, and to vote at any election for members of Parliament, and the offender was also subject to a forfeiture of five hundred pounds to anyone who would sue for the same.
“Some punishments,†says Blackstone, “consist in exile or banishment, by abjuration of the realm or transportation; others in loss of liberty by perpetual or temporary imprisonment. Some extend to confiscation by forfeiture of lands or movables, or both, or of the profits of lands for life; others induce a disability of holding offices or employments, being heirs, executors, and the like.â€
In France, deprivation or suspension of civil rights, or of some of them, and among these of the right of voting, of eligibility to office, of taking part in family councils, of being guardian or trustee, of bearing arms, and of teaching or being employed in a school or seminary of learning, are punishments prescribed by her code.
The theory upon which our political institutions rest is, that all men have certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and that, in the pursuit of happiness, all avocations, all honors, all positions are alike open to everyone, and that in the protection of these rights all are equal before the law. Any deprivation or suspension of any of these rights for past conduct is punishment, and can be in no other wise defined.
Punishment not being, therefore, restricted, as contended by counsel, to the deprivation of life, liberty, or property, but also embracing deprivation or suspension of political or civil rights, and the disabilities prescribed by the provisions of the Missouri Constitution being in effect punishment, we proceed to consider whether there is any inhibition in the Constitution of the United States against their enforcement.
The counsel for Missouri closed his argument in this case by presenting a striking picture of the struggle for ascendency in that State during the recent Rebellion between the friends and the enemies of the Union, and of the fierce passions which that struggle aroused. It was in the midst of the struggle that the present constitution was framed, although it was not adopted by the people until the war had closed. It would have been strange, therefore, had it not exhibited in its provisions some traces of the excitement amidst which the convention held its deliberations.
It was against the excited action of the States, under such influences as these, that the framers of the Federal Constitution intended to guard. In Fletcher v. Peck, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, speaking of such action, uses this language:
“Whatever respect might have been felt for the State sovereignties, it is not to be disguised that the framers of the Constitution viewed with some apprehension the violent acts which might grow out of the feelings of the moment, and that the people of the United States, in adopting that instrument, have manifested a determination to shield themselves and their property from the effects of those sudden and strong passions to which men are exposed. The restrictions on the legislative power of the States are obviously founded in this sentiment, and the Constitution of the United States contains what may be deemed a bill of rights for the people of each State. “
“No State shall pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts.â€
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without a judicial trial.
If the punishment be less than death, the act is termed a bill of pains and penalties. Within the meaning of the Constitution, bills of attainder include bills of pains and penalties. In these cases, the legislative body, in addition to its legitimate functions, exercises the powers and office of judge; it assumes, in the language of the textbooks, judicial magistracy; it pronounces upon the guilt of the party without any of the forms or safeguards of trial; it determines the sufficiency of the proofs produced, whether conformable to the rules of evidence or otherwise; and it fixes the degree of punishment in accordance with its own nations of the enormity of the offence.
“Bills of this sort,†says Mr. Justice Story,
“have been most usually passed in England in times of rebellion, or gross subserviency to the Crown, or of violent political excitements undefined periods in which all nations are most liable (as well the free as the enslaved) to forget their duties and to trample upon the rights and liberties of others.â€
These bills are generally directed against individuals by name, but they may be directed against a whole class. The bill against the Earl of Kildare and others, passed in the reign of Henry VIII, enacted that “all such persons which be or heretofore have been comforters, abettors, partakers, confederates, or adherents unto the said†late earl, and certain other parties, who were named, “in his or their false and traitorous acts and purposes, shall in likewise stand, and be attainted, adjudged, and convicted of high treason,†and that, “the same attainder, judgment, and conviction against the said comforters, abettors, partakers, confederates, and adherents, shall be as strong and effectual in the law against them, and every of them, as though they and every of them had been specially, singularly, and particularly named by their proper names and surnames in the said act.â€
These bills may inflict punishment absolutely or may inflict it conditionally.
The bill against the Earl of Clarendon, passed in the reign of Charles the Second, enacted that the earl should suffer perpetual exile, and be forever banished from the realm; and that, if he returned, or was found in England, or in any other of the King’s dominions, after the first of February, 1667, he should suffer the pains and penalties of treason, with the proviso, however, that if be surrendered himself before the said first day of February for trial, the penalties and disabilities declared should be void and of no effect.
“A British act of Parliament,†to cite the language of the Supreme Court of Kentucky,
“might declare, that if certain individuals, or a class of individuals, failed to do a given act by a named day, they should be deemed to be, and treated as convicted felons or traitors. Such an act comes precisely within the definition of a bill of attainder, and the English courts would enforce it without indictment or trial by jury.â€
If the clauses of the second article of the Constitution of Missouri to which we have referred had in terms declared that Mr. Cummings was guilty, or should be held guilty, of having been in armed hostility to the United States, or of having entered that State to avoid being enrolled or drafted into the military service of the United States, and, therefore, should be deprived of the right to preach as a priest of the Catholic Church, or to teach in any institution of learning, there could be no question that the clauses would constitute a bill of attainder within the meaning of the Federal Constitution. If these clauses, instead of mentioning his name, had declared that all priests and clergymen within the State of Missouri were guilty of these acts, or should be held guilty of them, and hence be subjected to the like deprivation, the clauses would be equally open to objection. And further, if these clauses had declared that all such priests and clergymen should be so held guilty, and be thus deprived, provided they did not, by a day designated, do certain specified acts, they would be no less within the inhibition of the Federal Constitution.
In all these cases, there would be the legislative enactment creating the deprivation without any of the ordinary forms and guards provided for the security of the citizen in the administration of justice by the established tribunals.
The results which would follow from clauses of the character mentioned do follow from the clauses actually adopted. The difference between the last case supposed and the case actually presented is one of form only, and not of substance. The existing clauses presume the guilt of the priests and clergymen, and adjudge the deprivation of their right to preach or teach unless the presumption be first removed by their expurgatory oath undefined in other words, they assume the guilt and adjudge the punishment conditionally. The clauses supposed differ only in that they declare the guilt instead of assuming it. The deprivation is effected with equal certainty in the one case as it would be in the other, but not with equal directness. The purpose of the lawmaker in the case supposed would be openly avowed; in the case existing, it is only disguised. The legal result must be the same, for what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows. Its inhibition was leveled at the thing, not the name. It intended that the rights of the citizen should be secure against deprivation for past conduct by legislative enactment, under any form, however disguised. If the inhibition can be evaded by the form of the enactment, its insertion in the fundamental law was a vain and futile proceeding.â€
Given that the legislatures are slowly eroding our individual freedoms that were promised to us by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If people don’t start standing up for each others rights, including the rights of what many of you may consider a disfavored group, you must realize that there will be no one to save you when the ax swings the other way and you find yourself the target of the same sort of laws that a paranoid and power hungry government have used to silence & strip unpopular groups of their Constitutional rights.
The directors of W.A.R. would like to recap the organization’s accomplishment in 2013 and share some 2014 projects with you.
2013 Year at a Glance
As you know, due to your memberships and donations we were able to attend three BIG national events. We shared the plight of our registrant families, offering credible study materials and forged relationships after their initial shock of seeing an organization advocating for registrants and families which was fun to be a part of. In February we attended and had an exhibit at the Prisoner’s Family Conference in Houston. Then in August we had distinct pleasure of being part of the exhibit floor of the Legislative Summit at the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta, Georgia where we talked to many legislators as they browsed our display. One Pennsylvania legislator wanted a picture of Vicki at the booth with our W.A.R. banner so she could blog about it and then hugged Vicki before leaving the exhibit. It was there that we were told we were brave for doing this. Then in September the National Association of Defense Attorneys Seminar in Savannah, Georgia was specifically for topics relating to sexual crimes. Our friend and advocate Attorney Norm Pattis was a presenter and we were invited to be part of a task force where we will be afforded the opportunity to talk about the challenges of our families.
In addition to the above W.A.R. was represented at:
1. The Child Abuse Prevention March in St. Louis where Vicki participated with others to promote awareness of child physical and sexual abuse as part of a month long nationwide initiative.
2. Kim DuBina attended the Indiana Department of Justice regional conference to represent W.A.R. with DOC officials and Governors who attended from other states.
3. The New York ATSA Conference in New York City
4. RSOL National Conference in California
We have also accomplished many tasks this year:
1. Establishing a Registrants and Families Hotline, equipped with trained volunteers to answer phones on a daily basis. Additionally creating a database of all calls and emails of contacts made through the hotline which can be used for future grant and donations to W.A.R..
2. Contributed to a national lawsuit to stop online exploitation of those listed on the registry
3. W.A.R.’s name and contact information has been listed with the National United Way 211 assistance hotline.
4. A National Database of all newspaper and television contacts for each state.
5. A Mass Mailer to Public Defenders offices throughout the United States with W.A.R. information and contacts
6. Made contacts with two major media personalities to start projects for television attention to our cause
7. Began collaborating with a National organization to further develop a solid and attainable society geared toward “prevention†rather than mass incarcerations after children have been harmed.
8. Started work on a National Database for housing and employment within each state to be used in conjunction with the assistance requested by folks contacting the hotline.
9. The necessary steps are under way to become a 501c4 not for profit organization!
We can’t thank you enough for the support and help each one of you have given and in many cases W.A.R.. Without you, we could not have been involved and accomplished all that we have this past year!
Women Against Registry Goals for 2014
As our movement grows we have set our goals even higher for next year!
1. Attend the three conferences listed above, as we believe our presence is needed to get our voices heard.
2. Continue providing the hotline service to those in need and working to engage them in advocacy for their family and others.
3. Complete the process of obtaining our 501c4 status
4. Work with the state POC’s to educate and encourage their members in helping to bring about awareness to the collateral damage experienced on a daily basis by communicating with legislators, church leadership, media and the community.
5. Continue our affiliation with the National organization to work on “prevention†and to provide solutions to legislators to reduce registry laws and restrictions.
6. Continue our outreach to state and local shelters and ministry leaders to obtain housing and employment to be given out to support line callers and shared on our website.
What you can give………
1. Your time and attention
2. Your monetary donations
3. Reach out to others who are facing similar hardships with these laws and restrictions
4. Consider becoming the possibility of your becoming a state point of contact (POC) for W.A.R.
5. Assist in projects as needed
6. Attend local events with legislators, city councils, town hall meetings, school organizations to represent W.A.R.
7. Pass out our brochures to churches, schools, football games or other social venues
If you can, please consider a financial contribution to help with current and future endeavors which will benefit all of us. As we stated before, we could NOT have done this without every penny that was donated and for which we will gladly be held accountable to all paying members and donors! It’s time we all stand up and do all we can to stop the destruction of our families!
We look forward to working along-side all of you in 2014!
Happy Holidays!
Vicki, Kim, Georgina and Dolley
Vermont: Bills aim to stop wrongful arrests, convictions
Lawmakers in Vermont are working to implement policy reforms they say will help stop wrongful arrests and convictions within the state.
Sen. Dick Sears (D-Bennington) is co-sponsoring two bills in the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, S.184 and S.297, which seek to standardize statewide practices of dealing with alleged offenders.
If passed, the first would require all law enforcement agencies to adopt a model eyewitness identification policy on how to administer live or photo-lineups; the second would require the recording of interrogations in homicide and sexual assault cases.
"Taping interviews -- that's pretty much supported by most people in law enforcement, including the states' attorneys and the federal attorneys," said Sears. "They feel like anything they have that makes it easier and better to hear testimony, helps. The major hold-up on that one is the idea of how do you pay for it for the smaller departments."
While many of the larger departments already have equipment in place to record interviews, Sears said the bill is written in a way that would specifically provide ways of looking at how to help the underfunded law enforcement agencies in the state.
"Obviously it's to everyone's benefit to [record interviews] on all [crimes], but given the cost and given the difficulty sometimes, we thought we'd at least start with some of the more serious crimes," said Sears, of the decision to promote the recording of interrogations in violent crime cases only.
"What these reforms would really accomplish, especially from the eyewitness front, is ensuring that all law enforcement agencies are operating on the same page and carrying out procedures consistently," said Rebecca Brown, nationwide director of state policy reform for The Innocence Project.
"We're very hopeful that there will be uniformity across the state," said Brown, of New York, who works on the state level in collaboration with lawmakers around the country on behalf of the nonprofit, which seeks to exonerate those wrongfully convicted and sentenced for crimes they did not commit through DNA testing.
Law enforcement officials at the local level are already receiving training to eliminate human error from taking place as much as possible when dealing with both victims of crimes and potential suspects.
They learn communication tools necessary to interact with witnesses of crimes without asking leading questions, as well as how to properly handle cases of eyewitness identification and misidentification.
"The feedback we've gotten from some of the officers is very positive -- they see it as having value in terms of how well they do their job," said Rick Gauthier, executive director of the Vermont Criminal Justice Training Council, and who largely supports the proposed legislation.
Many Failed Efforts to Count Nation's Federal Criminal Laws
WASHINGTON For decades, the task of counting the total number of federal criminal laws has bedeviled lawyers, academics and government officials.
"You will have died and resurrected three times," and still be trying to figure out the answer, said Ronald Gainer, a retired Justice Department official.
In 1982, while at the Justice Department, Mr. Gainer oversaw what still stands as the most comprehensive attempt to tote up a number. The effort came as part of a long and ultimately failed campaign to persuade Congress to revise the criminal code, which by the 1980s was scattered among 50 titles and 23,000 pages of federal law.
Justice Department lawyers undertook "the laborious counting" of the scattered statutes "for the express purpose of exposing the idiocy" of the system, said Mr. Gainer, now 76 years old.
It can often be very difficult to make a call whether or not something counts as a single crime or many. That task fell to one lawyer, Mr. Gainer says, who read the statutes and ultimately used her judgment to decide: If a particular act fell under multiple crime categories undefined such as forms of fraud that could also be counted as theft undefined she had to determine whether it could be prosecuted under each. If an offense could be counted in either of two sections, she counted them separately, Mr. Gainer said.
The project stretched two years. In the end, it produced only an educated estimate: about 3,000 criminal offenses. Since then, no one has tried anything nearly as extensive.
The Drug Abuse Prevention and Control section of the code undefined Title 21 undefined provides a window into the difficulties of counting. More than 130 pages in length, it essentially pivots around two basic crimes, trafficking and possession. But it also delves into the specifics of hundreds of drugs and chemicals.
Scholars debate whether the section comprises two offenses or hundreds. Reading it requires toggling between the historical footnotes, judicial opinions and other sections in the same title. It has also been amended 17 times.
In 1998, the American Bar Association performed a computer search of the federal codes looking for the words "fine" and "imprison," as well as variations. The ABA study concluded the number of crimes was by then likely much higher than 3,000, but didn't give a specific estimate.
"We concluded that the hunt to say, 'Here is an exact number of federal crimes,' is likely to prove futile and inaccurate," says James Strazzella, who drafted the ABA report. The ABA felt "it was enough to picture the vast increase in federal crimes and identify certain important areas of overlap with state crimes," he said.
None of these studies broached the separate undefined and equally complex undefined question of crimes that stem from federal regulations, such as, for example, the rules written by a federal agency to enforce a given act of Congress. These rules can carry the force of federal criminal law. Estimates of the number of regulations range from 10,000 to 300,000. None of the legal groups who have studied the code have a firm number.
"There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime," said John Baker, a retired Louisiana State University law professor who has also tried counting the number of new federal crimes created in recent years. "That is not an exaggeration."
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court threw out portions of the state's sex-offender registration law on Monday, telling lawmakers they violated the constitution's requirement that bills that become law must be confined to a single subject.
The justices ruled that a set of changes made to Megan's Law in 2004 was not constitutional, noting that the legislation also included such measures as a two-year statute of limitations on asbestos actions, the jurisdictional parameters of park police, and revisions to real estate law.
The court then put its decision on hold for three months to allow the Legislature to find a remedy.
"We will stay our decision, as we have done under similar circumstances, in order to provide a reasonable amount of time for the General Assembly to consider appropriate remedial remedies, and to allow for a smooth transition period," wrote Justice Debra Todd for the five-justice majority.
As revised in 2004, Megan's law created a searchable online database of offenders, set new punishments for offenders who did not register, and added luring and institutional sexual assault to the list of offenses that require 10-year registration.
It also set notification rules for out-of-state offenders who move to Pennsylvania, altered duties of the Sexual Offenders Assessment Board, and established community notification about sexually violent offenders.
Todd said the single-subject rule, which dates to 1864 and has recently been a factor in several high-profile cases, gives people confidence they can weigh in before a bill is passed, and helps lawmakers know what they are voting on ahead of time.
"When an act of the Legislature violates the single-subject rule, all of its provisions are equally repugnant to the constitution, and, thus, equally void," Todd said.
Chief Justice Ronald Castille filed a lone dissent, saying it was a close question but that he would have upheld the law.
"Any law passing through the enactment process is the result of salutary legislative compromise and the single-subject rule is not intended to completely discourage such compromise," Castille wrote.
Sex-Offender Porn Ban Passes First Legislative Hurdle
Lakeland Republican Senator Kelli Stargel petitioned her colleagues in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee to broaden an existing ban on pornography. The law already prohibits sex-offenders from viewing or possessing pornography related to their conviction. Florida Action Committee President Gail Colletta agreed reforms to sex offender statutes are needed but questioned the senator’s approach.
“Why is that if we’re trying to change the behaviors and we want these individuals to act more mainstream and more normal and have more normal sexual interests, are we going to prohibit them from having access to materials that are considered mainstream and normal?†Colletta said in a phone interview Monday.
Colletta became involved with sex offender issues after her son was convicted on child pornography charges in 2010. She said lawmakers should be focused on treatment, not penalties. But, Florida State University Political Scientist Lance Dehaven-Smith pointed out that even if Stargel’s method isn’t proven to be effective, it’s popular nonetheless.
“I mean I think there’s a clearly constitutional issue at stake and this may be overreaching. But, by the same token, unless somebody comes forward to defend a very unpopular category of individuals it’s likely to move forward,†Dehaven-Smith explained.
And move forward it did, passing the Senate Criminal Justice Committee unanimously. The bill’s next review will be in the Children, Families and Elder Affairs Committee. Stargel filed the ban shortly after a recently released sex offender murdered an 8-year old girl in Jacksonville.
SANTA ANA – A court ruling involving an Orange County case could result in hearings for thousands of California sex offenders seeking to have their names removed from the “Megan’s Law†registry, says an attorney who represents a sex offender.
California’s 4th District Court of Appeal found unconstitutional a state law that allows some sex offenders to have hearings for certificates of rehabilitation while denying that right to others.
New Study Sheds Light On Prevalence Of Child Pornography
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (WHNT) – You may think of child pornography as something that could never hit close to home, or some uncommon perversion. Now a new study is shedding light on the prevalence of child pornography in the United States.
The findings are unsettling.
The study focused on just one file-sharing program, Gnutella, over the course of one year. They found that just under 250,000 computers in the US were sharing and receiving images of child pornography.
“What it tells me is there are people you would not suspect involved in this,†said Chris Newlin, Executive Director of the National Children’s Advocacy Center.
For more perspective, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has collected more than 60 million images of child pornography from the internet. They have identified less than one percent of the victims.
Newlin points to a lack of resources available to national and local law enforcement agencies to address, and track down people disseminating images depicting sexual abuse of children.
He stresses the need is great and urgent. For every person who would claim to just ‘look’ at the images, Newlin suggests a much graver reality.
“If someone has this stuff on their computer, there’s a very high likelihood they have abused children. Not just a child. Children.â€
This is why Newlin urges people who know someone who is looking at images of child pornography to turn them in.
'Apostrophe laws' named for kid victims on the wane
When Amanda Moore concluded that her daughter's killer was a drug addict wrongly paroled and wrongly allowed to remain free, she did like many parents before her: she proposed legislation to spare others the same fate. She named it for her child: Amelia's Law.
For the past two decades, parents who've lost children in horrible ways have tried to memorialize them in law, and Americans usually have honored their wishes.
Dozens of state and federal statutes are named for children who died too soon: Megan's Law and Jessica's Law, the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. There's Kendra's Law, Leandra's Law and Lauren's Law, three Jacob's Laws and at least three Laura's Laws.
But, as Amanda Moore has discovered, support for many of these child victim memorials, or "apostrophe laws," is waning.
Few such bills now before lawmakers promise to have anything like the impact of a Megan's Law, which gives the public access to information about sex offenders.And some probably won't become law at all:
In Tennessee, a tight state budget has blocked Amelia's Law, which would make parole tougher for serious offenders, and Dustin's Law, which would honor a son killed in a collision with an intoxicated driver by imposing stiffer DUI penalties.
In South Carolina, Emma's Law and Jaidon's Law both are stalled. The first, which would require ignition locks for some first-time DUI offenders, faces objections that it's too harsh; the second, to weaken child custody rights of drug-addicted parents, runs against a state policy favoring family reunification.
In Indiana, Sheena's Law — named for a daughter killed by a neighbor in an apartment complex and designed to allow renters who've been crime victims to break their leases — has been thwarted by landlords who say it could be abused by tenants to get out of leases.
For grieving parents seeking to redeem their loss, such rejection is agonizing. "I just wanted to do something positive," says Deborah Kiska, who backed Sheena's Law. "People needed to know that my daughter stood on this earth."
(Editorial Note: In no way do I want to minimize the issue of violence against women or children. Rape is clearly a crime of violence, and must be dealt with appropriately. Pedophile predation is abhorrant, and must also be dealt with sternly and appropriately. But I think the issue has become – what actually is appropriate for dealing with the range of sex offenses, and in some cases, have we gone too far; and what does this mean for the wrongfully convicted? It begs the age old question – does the punishment fit the crime?)
Woe be to the wrongfully convicted sex offender, because you’re not just a wrongfully convicted ‘felon.’ You’re a wrongfully convicted ‘sex offender,’ and the state makes sure you get some extra special attention. Note that I’m careful to use the qualifier “wrongfully convicted†here, because in the case of sex offenders, when the justice system “gets it wrong,†the injustice gets amplified. I’m not saying we should let actually guilty sex offenders off the hook, but the punitive measures have become so severe, that when someone is wrongfully convicted of a sex offense, the consequences they are forced to endure magnify the injustice.
To understand why a wrongful conviction in a sex offender case is such a travesty, you need to know a little about the sex offender laws and the mandatory, so-called “rehabilitation†methods. (This will be a little bit lengthy.)
Over the last few decades, states have been steadily rewriting their sex offense laws to become more and more draconian. I judge that this has been caused by something akin the to wave of hysteria that swept the US in the 80′s over preschool child sex abuse. The primary driver for this was the McMartin preschool case in which accusations were made in 1983. All charges were dropped in 1990, after the lives of all defendants involved were completely ruined. Because sex crimes, particularly those involving children, scrape a particularly sensitive region in the human psyche, it makes a great issue for politicians to campaign on. My opinion is that much of today’s sex offender legislation has had little, if any, basis in research, and is an all-too-typical legislative knee jerk to high profile cases that have created something of a bully pulpit for affected victims and families. You can’t blame the victims and families. Your heart has to go out to the them. They have suffered unspeakable tragedy. They want “justice,†but in the case of a wrongful conviction, that justice is visited upon the wrong person. Sadly, the legislative responses have proven to be the classically inefficient and expediency-driven political solutions that treat the symptom and not the disease. The key here is lack of research and the absence of statistically valid data. A classic example of this is “Megan’s Law,†which established the original sex offender registry. This law was enacted by the New Jersey General Assembly in 1994 in response to the rape and murder of seven year old Megan Kanka. Since then, the law has been enacted in some form by every state, and has also resulted in a federal FBI sex offender registry. However, a 2008 federally funded study conducted in New Jersey, where Megan’s Law was first enacted, found that it failed to reduce sex crimes or repeat offenders. Read that story here. If you’re interested in plodding through a 50 state survey of sex offender legislation, you can read the one done by the National Institute of Corrections and the Washington College of Law here.
Sentencing is just one area in which the sex offender laws have become more harsh. Here’s one recent example – the case of former NY Yankees outfielder, Chad Curtis, who has just been convicted of “inappropriately touching†three teenage girls in Michigan at a high school where he served as a volunteer weight room coach. He’s facing 15 years in prison. I do not know the details of the reported “inappropriate touching,†… but 15 years? For touching? Does that punishment fit that crime? Let me emphasize again that I do not want to be dismissive of the issues involving sexual aggressors and violence against women, but it just seems to this old brain that an act that a generation or so ago would have effectively been dealt with by some other means can now turn you into a convicted (and registered) sex offender. My observation has been that “zero tolerance†policies, while well meaning, always run afoul of the complexities of reality.
There are as many different versions of the sex offender laws as there are states, but one thing that has become a common denominator is the sex offender registry. Once released from confinement, a convicted sex offender must register with the state’s sex offender registry. The requirements for frequency of registration and duration of the registration period are tied to sex offender classification levels, which are intended to reflect the measure of risk to the public. The level for any individual offender is determined by the court in some states, and by an administrative board in others. Here are examples of the sex offender classifications from New York and Ohio:
You may wonder, “How can someone be wrongfully convicted of a sex offense?†It’s actually easier than you might think. The National Registry of Exonerations has reported on it’s data for the period 1989-2012, which includes data for 305 wrongful sex offender convictions, and please keep in mind this represents only a small fraction of the wrongful convictions that actually occur. The table below has the data for sex crimes highlighted, and it shows the contributing factors to the wrongful convictions. Note the percentages shown for each of the categories of crime add to greater than 100%, because any wrongful conviction can have more than one contributing factor.
The major contributing cause to wrongful convictions for sexual assault ismistaken eye witness identification. It’s been well documented that eye witness identification is very unreliable. But how could an assault victim mistakenly identify her attacker? It happens frequently, and if you don’t believe it, I strongly recommend you read the book “Picking Cotton†by Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson Canino. The major contributing factor for child sex abuse isperjury or false accusation. One scenario here, although clearly not the only one, would be when a vindictive ex-spouse coaches her children into making false accusations against their father. Another way wrongful sex offender convictions can happen is when a vindictive ex-partner makes false claims about sexual assault. This is an offense which is, among adults, almost exclusively male-on-female in nature. Cases of female perpetrated forcible rape are rare indeed. Consequently, this is an area where it’s so often an issue of “He said. She said.†The wrongful conviction of Brian Banks, extensively reported on this blog, is a perfect example.
So what does happen when a sex offender is released from confinement, either through completion of sentence or parole? Just as with sex offender laws, the requirements vary by state, but it is universally required that the sex offender undergo a mandatory “rehabilitation†program, the details of which also vary by state. An example would be Rules for Sex Offenders in the Community from the state of Washington Department of Corrections. There are, however, some common threads that tend to run through these programs, and typical requirements would include:
1) You must register as a convicted sex offender. Your name and address will appear in a searchable online database of registered sex offenders. In most states, if the offense is anything more than minor, you can be required to register as a sex offender for 15 years, 25 years, or life.
2) Restrictions on where you can live. It is common for localities to pass ordinances that prohibit a convicted sex offender from living in certain areas; for example, within some specified distance from schools and parks.
3) Your place of residence may be marked by a public sign. Please refer to the graphic at the beginning of this article.
4) Mandatory therapy sessions. A key component of rehabilitation is considered to be therapy and counseling. It’s taken as a given, that for therapy to be successful, the subject must admit guilt and express remorse. In fact, the US Appellate Court Third Circuit, in a 2010 decision that has been classified as “precedential,†ruled that it is legitimate to require admission of guilt from sex offenders before being placed in rehabilitation programs, which is a requirement of their parole. If a defendant fails to admit guilt, he can be denied parole, or if he is in “rehabilitation,†he can be sent back to confinement.
6) Plethysmograph evaluation. What’s that? The plethysmograph is a cousin to the polygraph. A mercury filled rubber ring or metal band with a strain gauge (or sometimes an air filled cuff) is placed around the shaft of the subject’s penis, and measures “penile tumescence.â€
The subject is then exposed to photographs, audio, and video of sexually charged situations, and his erectile response is measured. This is supposed to be a gauge of how well he can control his urges. The state of Colorado was an early adopter of this practice (Colorado Sex Offender Manual). However, there is no statistically valid data that shows correlation with any ability of this practice to predict future behavior, with the possible exception of the use of images of children with pedophiles, which has a marginal (32%) accuracy as determined by studies. The most definitive statement I have found concerning this practice comes from Robert M. Stein, Ph.D. from the Center for Neurobehavioral Health, Ltd., Lancaster, PA, who, from 1982-1988, was the Director of the Psychophysiological lab at the Sexual Behavior Clinic in New York City. He personally (not through a technician) assessed and treated over 700 adolescent and adult sex offenders. His comments (abbreviated):
. a. Plethysmograph data is totally useless for determining guilt or innocence regarding deviant sexual acts. It would be like using a personality test to convict someone of burglary.
. b. Plethysmographic data have no diagnostic value of any kind.
. c. About one-third of offenders show no arousal in the lab.
7) You may be required to wear a GPS tracking ankle bracelet, as was the case with Brian Banks.
SO, WHAT’S MY POINT HERE? WELL …. IMAGINE THIS:
A rape victim has mistakenly identified you as her attacker. She testifies in court, and points you out to the jury. You are wrongfully convicted of sexual assault. After serving many years in prison, you’ll do anything to get out, and are willing to admit guilt and express remorse – even though you didn’t do it, and after several attempts, you are granted parole. Upon release, you have to register as a sex offender, and continue doing so for the rest of your life. You have to enter a rehabilitation program run by the department of corrections. Local ordinances force you to live in a rural area. The only job you can get is flipping burgers. You have to wear a GPS tracking ankle bracelet. The Sheriff puts a sign outside your residence stating that you are a convicted sex offender, and this is where you live. You have to attend therapy sessions in which youhave to talk about the rape (you didn’t do). You are periodically subjected to arbitrary polygraph examinations. You are periodically subjected to degrading plethysmograph evaluations. And …. you didn’t do it.
WOE BE TO THE WRONGFULLY CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER.
What NOT TO SAY TO POLICE
What NOT TO SAY TO POLICE
By Norm Pattis (blog 4/20/10)
I'm a battle-hardened criminal defense lawyer, so it always surprises me how weak in the knees I get when a policeman pulls me over. The urge to confess runs rampant, even if I haven't done anything. I assume the authorities must have a reason for wanting to talk to me. What have I done?
Police prey upon our tendency to trust them. Yet confusing the sort of soul-cleansing confession one might give to a priest with the Earth-bound variety police officers ask for is playing with Hell fire. Many a man and woman sits now in a prison cell, convicted by their own words.
I pass along some general observations about cooperating with the police in the hope that it may spare you the sorrow that comes of an improvident confession to a lawman. Mind you, nothing I am writing here is meant to encourage folks to commit a crime. I am simply reminding you that however much confession may benefit the soul in some spiritual sense, the corporeal consequences of a confession could well land you in prison. And prison is not good for the soul.
So here are some common myths and misconceptions about what you must do when the police come calling.
1. The police can order me down to the station to give a statement, correct?
Wrong. The police cannot order you to come down and see them. The Fourth Amendment gives them the power to arrest if they develop probable cause to believe you have committed a crime, and they might have the authority to engage you in a brief investigatory detention. But no case stands for the proposition that you are required to come to the station for a chat. Period.
But fear undermines many folk's sense of self-interest. So does a misplaced sense of hope.
An officer may call and say he needs you to come to the station to tell your side of the story. (He may not tell you just what story that is. My favorite investigative technique? Officers show up at your door and ask: "Why do you think we want to talk to you?") The officer may say that if you don't come to the station he will seek an arrest warrant for you.
News flash: The officer is almost certainly going to seek the warrant anyhow once things have gotten to that point. What he is looking for here is a confession, to bolster the warrant and make a conviction all but a foregone conclusion.
The law does not require police officers to get your side of the story before arresting you. In rare cases only does discussing your case with the police benefit you. The only way to make an intelligent assessment of whether you should cooperate is by consulting a lawyer before you talk to the police. There are no exceptions to this rule. Don't accept the invitation for coffee and donuts at the station.
2. When the police show up at my house, I have to talk to them right?
Wrong again. The normal conventions of polite society do not apply here. The police have not come to your home to trade notes on how your respective fantasy sports teams are doing. They are investigating a crime, and you may well be a suspect. It takes perishingly little to convict of certain crimes. Minor details you give them may be used as a means of corroborating a far-fetched story told about you by others.
This is common in child sex-abuse cases. Suppose your niece or nephew now claims you abused them a decade ago. You are rattled. Shocked. The police want to ask you about the relationship. Where you saw the child. What sorts of things you did together. Why you think the child is saying these things. All of these investigative leads can be turned against you to corroborate the fact that you did, indeed, have contact with the child at certain family events. Your assessment of the child's motives will be transformed into claims that you were deceptive. Evidence that might truly assist you, e.g., the fact that the child has made similar false or exaggerated claims, background on family conflicts that provide the child with powerful motives to lie to assure that mommy and daddy remain together, united in crisis, and other such information can be provided to the police by your lawyer.
3. If the police don't read me my rights, they can't use anything I say, right?
Wrong, unless you are in custody. The so-called Miranda warnings have become part of American folklore. Unfortunately, many people get it wrong, thanks in no small measure to television. Police are only required to advise you of your right to remain silent if you are in custody. If you appear at the station voluntarily and they tell you that you are free to leave, you almost certainly are not in custody. In these cases, courts will regard your statement as voluntary, and, Mirandized or not, you will eat your own words at trial.
If you are unsure whether you are in custody or not, and believe me, figuring that out is no easy task, simply refuse to speak to the police. Once again, don't resort to normal, polite conversational gambits. "Maybe I should talk to a lawyer" is not clear enough to satisfy a court that you were serious about wanting a lawyer present. State the following: "I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK TO YOU WITHOUT A LAWYER PRESENT." Print it out on a three-by-five card. If you really want to short the officer's circuits, ask him to sign the card, signifying that he gets it. (He won't sign.)
This may sound cynical, but it is a conclusion I've reached after many years of head-banging: the courts are increasingly reluctant to meaningfully enforce the rights of the accused. Ask any criminal lawyer about the serious crime exception to the Bill of Rights. Don't become a victim. Call a lawyer.
Police officers are trained in the art of deception. They know how to prey on fear and uncertainty. Whether you have committed a crime or not, odds are you will be putty in their hands. There are ways to get the information important to your defense into the hands of the police, but you are not equipped to do it without a lawyer. I have said this to folks hundreds of times. Sadly, each week I get another call from someone who has given away some significant portion of their future by talking about things they would have been better served keeping to themselves.
Sorry for the all caps, but this is how it was typed and we do not have time to go through and fix everything.
I AM HAPPY TO JOIN YOU TONIGHT IN AN EVENING OF CONSEQUENCE. AN EVENING THAT MAY GO DOWN IN HISTORY AS A TURNING POINT IN A CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT DEDICATED TO RESTORING JUSTICE FOR ALL.
IN 1787, THE FOUNDERS OF OUR COUNTRY CREATED AND ADOPTED A CONSTITUTION WHICH ESTABLISHED THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. FOUR YEARS LATER, THE FOUNDERS AMENDED THE CONSTITUTION BY ADDING PROTECTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS’ RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES. 10 AMENDMENTS KNOWN AS THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
BUT MORE THAN TWO HUNDRED YEARS LATER, THE PROMISES OF THE CONSTITUTION AND OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS ARE BEING DENIED TO A GROUP OF CITIZENS WHO LANGUISH IN THE CORNERS OF SOCIETY AND FINDS THEMSELVES EXILED IN THEIR OWN LAND.
THAT GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS HAS BEEN LABELED BY SOME AS "SEX OFFENDERS". I SHALL HENCEFORTH REFER TO THEM AS "REGISTERED CITIZENS".
REGISTERED CITIZENS HAVE MADE A MISTAKE. THEY HAVE BROKEN A LAW. AND THEY HAVE PAID THEIR DEBT TO SOCIETY BY GOING TO PRISON OR SERVING TIME ON PROBATION.
DESPITE THE PAYMENT OF THEIR DEBTS TO SOCIETY, REGISTERED CITIZENS CONTINUE TO BEPUNISHED BY BEING DENIED JOBS, A HOME IN WHICH TO LIVE, CREDIT, ACCESS TO PARKS, BEACHES, AND LIBRARIES AS WELL EXILED FROM SOME OR ALL MEMBERS OF THEIR FAMILIES.
SOME REGISTERED CITIZENS ARE UNEMPLOYED. SOME ARE HOMELESS. AND SOME ARE MURDERED BY VIGILANTES FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN THEIR LABEL. THIS IS PUNISHMENT!! DESPITE WHAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS RULED. THE REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER IS NOT THE SAME AS -- OR EVEN SIMILAR TO -- BECOMING A MEMBER OF COSTCO!
IN A SENSE WE HAVE COME TO THIS CONFERENCE IN L.A. TO CASH A CHECK. A PROMISSORY NOTE SIGNED BY THE FOUNDERS OF THIS NATION.
IT IS OBVIOUS TODAY THAT AMERICA HAS DEFAULTED ON THIS PROMISSORY NOTE INSOFAR AS REGISTERED CITIZENS ARE CONCERNED. INSTEAD OF HONORING THE SACRED OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION, AMERICA HAS GIVEN REGISTERED CITIZENS A BAD CHECK. A CHECK WHICH HAS BEEN RETURNED AND MARKED "INSUFFICIENT FUNDS".
BUT WE REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE BANK OF JUSTICE IN AMERICA IS BANKRUPT. WE REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE INSUFFICIENT FUNDS IN THE GREAT VAULTS OF OPPORTUNITY OF THIS NATION. SO WE HAVE COME TO L.A.. THE CITY WHICH CREATED THE NATION’S FIRST REGISTRY IN 1947. TO CASH THIS CHECK. A CHECK THAT WILL GIVE US THE RICHES AND SECURITY OF JUSTICE. WE HAVE ALSO COME TO REMIND AMERICA OF THE NEED TO ACT NOW.
IT WOULD BE UNCONSCIONABLE FOR THE NATION TO OVERLOOK THE URGENCY OF THE MOMENT WHEN CIVIL RIGHTS ARE DENIED AND CITIZENS SUCH AS CHARLES AND GRETCHEN PARKER ARE MURDERED BY VIGILANTES IN SOUTH CAROLINA LAST MONTH. THIS SWELTERING SUMMER OF THE REGISTERED CITIZEN’S LEGITIMATE DISCONTENT WILL NOT PASS UNTIL THERE IS AN INVIGORATING AUTUMN OF FREEDOM FOR REGISTERED CITIZENS. 2013 IS NOT AN END, BUT A BEGINNING.
TODAY THERE ARE MORE THAN 750,000 AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO ARE BEING DENIED THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS EVERY DAY. 24 HOURS A DAY, 7 DAYS A WEEK, 365 DAYS A YEAR. THIS MUST STOP! NOW IS THE TIME TO LIFT OUR NATION FROM THE QUICK SANDS OF INJUSTICE TO THE SOLID ROCK OF JUSTICE. NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE JUSTICE A REALITY FOR ALL CITIZENS. BUT WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD ALONE.
INSTEAD, WE MUST INCLUDE OUR LOVED ONES. OUR PARENTS. OUR CHILDREN. OUR NIECES, NEPHEWS, AUNTS, UNCLES, NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS. WHO WILL BE SERVE AS OBJECTIVE WITNESSES TO THE PLIGHT OF REGISTERED CITIZENS.
I AM MINDFUL THAT SOME OF YOU HAVE COME HERE FROM FARAWAY STATES. MARYLAND, MASSASCHUSETTS, FLORIDA. I AM ALSO MINDFUL THAT SOME OF YOU HAVE RECENTLY BEEN RELEASED FROM PRISON AND SOME OF YOU REMAIN ON PROBATION OR PAROLE.
GO BACK TO MARYLAND. GO BACK TO MASSACHUSETTS. GO BACK TO FLORIDA. GO BACK TO THE SLUMS WHERE SOME HOMELESS REGISTERED CITIZENS LIVE. KNOWING THAT SOMEHOW THIS SITUATION CAN AND WILL BE CHANGED.
I SAY TO YOU TONIGHT, FRIENDS, EVEN THOUGH WE FACE THE DIFFICULTIES OF TODAY AND TOMORROW, I HAVE A DREAM. IT IS A DREAM DEEPLY ROOTED IN THE AMERICAN DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY THIS NATION WILL RISE UP AND LIVE OUT FOR ALL CITIZENS THE TRUE MEANING OF ITS CREED, "WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT, THAT ALL PEOPLE ARE CREATED EQUAL."
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE PARKS OF MARYLAND REGISTERED CITIZENS CAN HAVE A FAMILY PICNIC.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE LIBRARIES OF NEW MEXICO REGISTERED CITIZENS CAN READ A BOOK.
I HAVE A DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL BE ALLOWED TO ENTER EMERGENCY SHELTERS WHEN A HURRICANE ARRIVES.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE STATE OF TENNESSEE REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL BE ABLE TO LIVE WITH ALL THE MEMBERS OF THEIR FAMILIES.
I HAVE A DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE STATE OF OHIO REGISTERED CITIZENS CAN CELEBRATE HALLOWEEN IN THEIR OWN HOMES WITHOUT FEAR OF ARREST.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA REGISTERED CITIZENS CAN LIVE IN ANY CITY OR COUNTY THEY WISH TO LIVE IN.
I HAVE A DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL NO LONGER BE REQUIRED TO WEAR GPS MONITORS.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA ARMED POLICE OFFICERS WILL NO LONGER SHOW UP ON THE DOORSTEPS OF REGISTERED CITIZENS.
I HAVE A DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY THE NAMES, PHOTOS AND HOME ADDRESSES OF REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL NO LONGER BE PUBLISHED ON THE INTERNET.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL NO LONGER PASS LAWS THAT DENY THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF REGISTERED CITIZENS IN ORDER TO INCREASE THEIR CHANCE OF RE-ELECTION.
I HAVE A DREAM.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL NOT BE TREATED LIKE LEPERS AND WILL NOT BE PUBLICLY DISGRACED, HUMILIATED AND SHAMED.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL NOT BE HUNTED DOWN AND MURDERED BY VIGILANTES.
I HAVE A DREAM
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL RECOGNIZE THAT REGISTRATION IS A FORM OF PUNISHMENT.
I HAVE A DREAM THAT ONE DAY IN AMERICA REGISTERED CITIZENS WILL LIVE IN A NATION WHERE THEY WILL NOT BE JUDGED BY A MISTAKE THEY MADE DECADES AGO BUT BY THE CONTENT OF THEIR CURRENT CHARACTER AND ACTIONS.
THIS IS OUR HOPE. THIS IS THE FAITH WITH WHICH I WILL CONTINUE MY WORK TO RESTORE JUSTICE FOR REGISTERED CITIZENS. WITH THIS FAITH WE WILL BE ABLE TO HEW OUT OF THE MOUNTAIN OF DESPAIR A STONE OF HOPE.
THAT WILL BE THE DAY WHEN WE ALL WILL BE ABLE TO SING WITH A NEW MEANING, "MY COUNTRY ‘TIS OF THEE, SWEET LAND OF LIBERTY". AND IF AMERICA IS TO REMAIN A GREAT NATION THIS MUST BE TRUE.
SO LET JUSTICE RING FROM MOUNT RAINIER IN WASHINGTON STATE. LET JUSTICE RING FROM THE MISSIPPI RIVER IN LOUISIANA. LET JUSTICE RING FROM THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS IN COLORADO. LET JUSTICE RING FROM THE BEACHES OF CALIFORNIA.
LET JUSTICE RING.
AND WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN, JUSTICE WILL RING. FROM EVERY VILLAGE AND HAMLET. FROM EVERY STATE AND CITY. AND THAT WILL IN TURN SPEED UP THE DAY WHEN ALL CITIZENS. REGISTERED AND UNREGISTERED. JOIN HANDS AND REPEAT TOGETHER THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF THIS MOVEMENT TO LIVE AS CITIZENS. AS EXPRESSED CLEARLY IN THE LAST SIX WORDS OF OUR NATION’S PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. "WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL."
HOW DO WE GET THERE? BY SHOWING UP – STANDING UP – AND SPEAKING UP.
THANK YOU.
Vicki and Larry at National Conference of State Legislatures
I was waiting for Larry to return to our booth at the close of the summit as I had packed up everything. The gentleman who was in the booth to our left and who I personally had not talked with said bye and have a nice day but there was a WOW in his voice and demeanor which to me indicated the three of us had done what he would have found challenging! I noticed him standing near-by several times when we were talking to legislators and could tell he was listening.
Feel like committing a Hate Crime?
Feel like committing a Hate Crime? It’s open season. According to easily accessible White Supremacist web sites, all that is necessary is to pick a name from the National Sex Offender Registry and have at it. There are approximately 750,000 names on the National Sex Offender Registry and pick is apparently just what Jeremy Moody did when he killed the family of Charles Parker.
According to the New York Times article,(www.nytimes) Double Murder Seen as Part of a Man’s Quest to Kill Sex Offenders, dated 7/30/2013, Mr. Moody told Charley Parker just before he pulled the trigger, “I’m not here to rob you. I‘m here to kill you because you are a sex offender.†Fair enough, you say? Maybe you would not personally kill. But what if you, too, are infected with the same virus, the same prejudice that makes hate crimes like the murder of Charley Parker and his family increasingly familiar?
One report, congress-courts-legislation.blogspot.com /2010/12/killed-by-laws-former-sex-ffenders.html, examines the deaths of registered sex offenders and those related to them. It also reports of people directly or substantially made vulnerable to hate crimes. As of July 1, 2012, a total of 38 deaths occurred directly or substantially due to laws passed against adjudicated sex offenders. Deaths occurred in California (12); Michigan (6); Washington (4); Maine (3); Wisconsin(3) and Florida (2). In New York the report notes (2); in Georgia (1); Delaware (1); Missouri (1); Ohio (1) and Texas (2). As of July 1, 2012, when the death count was last updated, North Carolina had only one (1) hate crime substantially related to sex offender laws but with the July 2013 death of Charles Parker and his wife in Jonesville, S.C., add another two deaths to the Carolina hate crimes total. Perhaps you remember more hate crimes recently committed in your state.
As the July 30, 2013, New York Times article by reporter James Swift points out, “Mr. Moody is not the first person accused of targeting sex offenders. As recently as last month (6/2013), a California jury convicted a 36-year-old man of killing a neighbor who was a sex offender, and a Washington State man was sentenced to life in prison for a pair of similar killings.â€
So why shouldn’t all these adjudicated sex offenders and their families be declared fair game? Are all registrants to be despised equally? No, because once a person has been adjudicated, paid their price to society and living a law-abiding life they should be allowed to re-integrate into society. On the other hand, there are some who should be viewable to law enforcement only and that would be after a process including assessment and a judge. We are a nation of laws, not lynch mobs. As citizens we believe in the Constitution and their crimes were judged as NOT worthy of death by hanging or lethal injection.
The home addresses of family members merely associated with any registrant, male or female, assigned to the public national registry are put on the internet for all to see and harass. Did the Parker family deserve to be murdered merely because they happened to be on a “hit list†for members of a group known to seek-out people at which to spew their venom? Although the commission of these type crimes is not officially classified as a “hate†crime it should be even though it would not win a legislator any new election votes to say so. Vigilante justice may be popular on the internet but remember it could be directed at you someday by someone who places themselves above the law.
As citizens we are not innocent bystanders. Our taxes allow all these names and address to be made available to anyone trolling for victims. Access to the Sex Offender Registry should be limited to Law Enforcement.
Let’s not support and thereby encourage these crimes.
![[​IMG]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zNPBpBo7rPc/UieqaLx5fbI/AAAAAAAAvhw/BmhXXt3PGt4/s1600/Janice+Bellucci.jpg)
![[​IMG]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/p480x480/1098181_565905693472040_1835211929_n.jpg)