Wednesday, October 1, 2008

CA - State imposes tough new rules on homeless sex offenders

View the article here

10/01/2008

Struggling to stop paroled sex offenders from "couch surfing" to skirt the tight living restrictions under Jessica's Law, state officials on Wednesday set new rules concerning where homeless parolees can stay and for how long.

The new policy, sent in a memo to parole agents statewide, bars sex offenders who register as transients from staying at any address more than two hours — or the time it takes to charge their GPS anklets — except for work, business or government reasons or for care or treatment services.
- Since when did staying somewhere more than two hours become a crime?  This is just insane!  What gives you the right to say if they can "couch surf" or not?  NAZI GESTAPO!  You are just setting them up to fail, and you might as well arrest them, that is your true intention, right?

It also requires them to register the address if they stay at any house, apartment, motel, hotel or other building for "at least one full day or night."
- So if they are homeless, how do you expect them to get down to the sheriff's office, register, get back to the place they are staying, stay the night, then come back the next day and register the next address?  This is just pure harassment!!

Among other provisions, Jessica's Law bans registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children "regularly gather." In many urban areas, that leaves sex offenders who fall under the law few if any options. According to the new policy, however, the 2,000-foot rule does not apply to bridges, homeless camps or bus stops because they have no address.

The policy, which takes effect immediately, mirrors one the state Department of Corrections issued in July, then quickly rescinded after legal questions arose. It comes as the number of transient sex offenders steadily rises two years after voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 83. As of last week, nearly 1,300 paroled sex offenders in California are registered transient, according to the agency.
- I thought there was a law suit preventing police from enforcing the SO law, until this was through the legal process?  Guess not!

Many of them now bounce between motels and other places that fall within the banned zones, corrections officials say. Most wear GPS anklets allowing the state to track their location. Jessica's Law also allows cities to craft tighter restrictions on where registered sex offenders can live, and some have responded with laws further limiting the housing options — increasing the number of transient offenders.
- You people are just pure evil.  You are making it impossible to find a place to live, and when they register as homeless, you then make it impossible to be homeless.  Why don't you just admit you want them all in prison and get the GESTAPO out arresting people?  This is a DAMNED IF YOU DO, DAMNED IF YOU DON'T situation!

"It is growing," Scott Kernan, the department's acting Undersecretary of Operations, said of the transient numbers. "This policy further strengthens our ability to manage the transient population." Sex offenders and their advocates complain that the new rules threaten to further marginalize them, despite a consensus among experts that a stable environment is key to preventing a reoffense. Ernest Galvan, a San Francisco attorney who represents four parolees in a case challenging part of the 2,000-foot rule, said he was "incredulous" about the new rules.

"At some point prohibiting someone from even going indoors starts to encroach on your basic human rights," he said.

"What if it's raining? At some point you're starting to say the person can't operate as a human."

Until now, some parole agents have worked out arrangements that allow transient sex offenders to live in the gray area of a law that did not clearly define a school, a park or how to measure the 2,000 feet. S.T., a registered sex offender in West Contra Costa, said he pays rent on five rooms around the area while he works as a contractor and cares for his ailing wife, who suffers seizures. His parole agent approves of the arrangement, he said.

He spends about six hours a day with his wife at her apartment — which he can't do under the new rules. He can't live with his wife because her apartment is too close to a school.

"It would have a disastrous effect on her medical care," he said. "If the next thing she's on the floor dead, what's the state going to say about that?"

Kernan acknowledged a public safety concern with sex offenders who have no permanent residence, but said the agency must enforce the law.

"To the extent it imposes some hardships on the offender, we continue to try and work with them to find them compliant housing," he said.
- This is a flat out lie!  By creating this very law, that proves you are not trying to help anybody!


CANADA - Accused sex offender commits suicide in jail

View the article here

10/01/2008

SASKATCHEWAN (CBC) - A Regina man being held on sexual assault charges involving children has taken his own life while awaiting his next court appearance, the RCMP confirmed on Wednesday.

Darren Philpott, 38, died Friday evening, Sept. 26, in a Regina hospital.

Ambulance personnel and RCMP had been called to the provincial correctional centre on the outskirts of Regina two days earlier in response to a reported suicide attempt.

Philpott, who had been in custody since his arrest nearly a year ago, was facing 21 charges, including allegations involving sexual assault, voyeurism and child pornography. The alleged offences happened over five years starting in the summer of 2002.

He had once volunteered at Big Brothers and also worked as an enrolment officer with the Western Christian College.

Police had reported that some charges were related to Philpott's time at the school and with the volunteer organization.

Philpott was the subject of one of the largest child pornography investigations in the province.

According to the prosecutor in the case, investigators had seized more than three million images from a computer allegedly in Philpott's possession.

Noah Evanchuk, Philpott's lawyer, called it a difficult case with a tragic ending.

"Anytime somebody dies in custody it is a tragedy," Evanchuk told CBC News on Wednesday. "Moreover, this was an emotional and difficult case for everyone involved and, out of respect for the Philpott family, I don't wish to comment too much more, other than it's a very sad sad day for his family."

Evanchuk said the charges against Philpott will likely be officially stayed.

RCMP and the provincial coroner's office are investigating the death.


WY - Police officer faces child sex charges

View the article here

10/01/2008

A Wyoming police sergeant surrendered to state police today to face sexual charges involving a minor.

Sgt. William F. O’Neal, 50, of Smyrna, was later released on $42,000 secured bail after being charged with felony dangerous crime against a minor, sexual solicitation of a child, endangering the welfare of a child and two counts of criminal solicitation.

O’Neal has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the trial, Wyoming Police Chief Chuck Manuszak said.

State police spokesman Sgt. Joshua Bushweller said the charges stem from two separate cases against O’Neal.

The investigation began on Sept. 25 after police were notified that O’Neal had allegedly been involved in soliciting sexual acts from a juvenile, Bushweller said.

The acts allegedly occurred four years ago when the victim was 11 years old.

Bushweller said the suspect allegedly engaged the victim in a game where he would pay her a certain amount of money if she would remove her clothing.

The Child Advocacy Center assisted in the police investigation because the victim was a juvenile.

During an examination of the victim, Bushweller said, social workers confirmed the victim’s story and also learned that O’Neal offered to pay her more money to remain naked after she removed all her clothes.

The girl declined to participate in this behavior, Bushweller said.

As investigators were working on the case, they learned Sept. 29 of another alleged incident that O’Neal was involved in.

While working in his capacity of a Wyoming police officer, O’Neal allegedly asked a woman if he could take photos of her naked and that he would pay her.

The woman consented to participating in the act, which allegedly occurred a year and a half ago, Bushweller said.

The woman also agreed to have sex with O’Neal for money.

The acts occurred on two separate occasions in the Dover area.

The investigation is continuing.

Police are asking anyone with information regarding this investigation to call Detective Andy Goode at (302) 697-2104, ext. 309.

Contact Terri Sanginiti at 324-2771 or tsanginiti@delawareonline.com.


CA - Andy Dick Avoids Sex Charge

View the article here

Of course he avoids charges, he's a celebrity and they are above the law. If the average Joe did this, they'd be in jail and probably on the sex offender registry!

08/25/2008

LOS ANGELES — Prosecutors say they won't charge Andy Dick with sexual battery stemming from his arrest last month.

The "NewsRadio" actor with a reputation for crude public behavior is still scheduled to face a judge later this week on misdemeanor drug possession and battery charges. But he escaped felony charges after prosecutors reviewed video of the incident, Riverside County District Attorney spokesman Ryan Hightower said.

A teenage girl accused the 42-year-old actor of pulling down her top at a restaurant in Murrieta, a city about 80 miles east of Los Angeles in mid-July. Dick was arrested by officers responding to reports of an intoxicated male.

Dick is scheduled to appear in court Wednesday.


MT - Tim Fox: Get Tough on Sex Predators, KULR-Billings

Of course he is, it's an election year, so what do you expect. Bust out the sex offender issues, use them as their scapegoat to get the votes.


WI - Attorney examines offender ordinances

View the article here

Why in the hell is a LAWYER doing deciding who should and should not be affected by the ordinance? Isn't that a job for a professional therapist?

10/01/2008

Aldermen worry Muskego could become ‘island’

Muskego is moving ahead with sex offender residency limits for the city.

City Attorney Donald Molter has been asked to research which sex offenders should be included in an ordinance, if the city’s ordinance could cover schools just across the border from Muskego, and if violators of a potential Muskego ordinance would simply be fined or if they could be forced to move.

Those questions came up in the discussion at a recent Committee of the Whole meeting Sept. 23 when aldermen informally agreed to continue investigating the ordinance.

Other ordinances studied

Aldermen said they were concerned that, with other communities passing similar ordinances, Muskego could become an island for people on the state sex offender registry. Aldermen also wanted to make sure any ordinance the city passes is enforceable.

The committee planned to invite Franklin Alderman Steve Olson to speak on that city’s sex offender residency ordinance, which was recently upheld by the courts, at its meeting Oct. 14.

“He was very involved with this (in Franklin) since its inception,” Mayor John Johnson said.

Molter said his office has looked at model ordinances from Franklin and from North Prairie.

“I prefer the North Prairie format,” Molter said. “It’s simpler and much more readable.”

Franklin developed its ordinance under the city zoning code, while North Prairie’s is more of a police powers ordinance, he said. To change Franklin’s ordinance, a public hearing would be necessary.

Molter said neither community’s ordinance regulates all state registered sex offenders. Both confine the ordinance to violent offenders or those who commit crimes against children.

Franklin’s ordinance bans residency of offenders within 2,000 feet of schools and other designated facilities. North Prairie’s regulates residency on properties contiguous to those facilities.

“That bothers me,” Johnson said. “You could have a property within sight of a school that is not contiguous. The number of feet is ambiguous, too.

“I think there are other ways to do this. I just can’t get my hands around it.”

Alderwoman Tina Schaefer said she would like to hear from the Franklin alderman about that ordinance’s 2,000-foot limit.

Some rules needed

To have a good ordinance, there must be somewhere a sex offender can live, Molter said.

“I’m concerned we’ll be so restrictive it will be challenged,” Alderman Keith Werner said.

“You want to have something on the books so you’re not an island out there,” Molter said. “Eventually the state will step in.”

Johnson suggested the city get an ordinance on the books.

“I don’t believe the people (sex offenders) who are looking for a community to live will look at all the details,” he said. “They will look at who’s got an ordinance.”

Molter said if the city passes an ordinance, it can be amended later.

John Schultz can be reached at (262) 446-6611.

NEXT STEP

WHAT: discussion on sex offender residency ordinance featuring Franklin Alderman Steve Olson

WHEN: 6:15 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 14 (following Finance Committee meeting)

WHERE: Muskego City Hall, S8200 Racine Ave.


NY - Internet Sexual Predator Law Gets Federal Approval (Updated)

View the article here

Audio below. Once again, they are assuming all sex offenders are dangers sexual predators, when they are not. Just more political BS, IMO!

10/01/2008

Sen. Chuck Schumer (Contact) announced today that Congress late Tuesday passed his legislation that would help to keep sexual predators off social networking sites by requiring them to submit e-mail addresses, instant message addresses or other identifying internet information to be placed on the National Sex Offender Registry.

The federal legislation comes after New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo reached an agreement with the state Legislature to pass a similar law in New York this year to keep convicted sexual predators off sites like Facebook and MySpace.

Schumer said the federal law, if passed by President Bush, will require the U.S. Attorney General “to set up a secure system that will allow qualifying social networking websites to cross-check users’ information against the registry to protect users from sexual predators. Without such a checking system, social networking websites have struggled to police their own precincts for sexual predators.”

Updated: Cuomo applauded the legislation’s passage, saying it’s another “important step in protecting our children online.

“I am proud that New York State has once again set the example for the nation by enacting e-STOP on April 28, 2008. E-STOP was the first law of its kind in the country prohibiting dangerous convicted sex offenders from using the Internet to access social networking Websites to communicate with minors, requiring convicted sex offenders to submit any Internet identifiers to law enforcement, and allowing Websites to use the information for the purposes of prescreening or removing sex offenders from their services.

“I congratulate Congress for taking this vital step in protecting our children, and I applaud Senator Schumer for leading the way and displaying extraordinary leadership in getting this bill passed and making it the law across the country.”


DC - High Court Denies Rehearing Of Child Rape Case Decision

View the article here
More Detailed Article Here

10/01/2008

The U.S. Supreme Court will not reconsider its decision in Kennedy v. Louisiana, denying the use of the death penalty in child rape cases, The Washington Post reports. Louisiana officials and the U.S. Department of Justice had asked the high court to reconsider its June 25 decision, arguing that the majority opinion should have taken into consideration military law that allows the imposition of the death penalty in child rape cases. The Post notes that the five justices in the Kennedy majority agreed today not to rehear the case. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the military law “does not draw into question our conclusions that there is a consensus against the death penalty for the crime in the civilian context and that the penalty is unconstitutional.” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., argued for a rehearing of the case


WA - Schumer-McCain bill targets online predators

View the article here
eAdvocate Article (MUST READ)

This is obviously a campaign move to garner more votes!  I predict a TON or more law suits coming down the pipe, thus wasting more tax payer dollars in a time of national crisis!

10/01/2008

WASHINGTON - Congress has passed legislation offered by Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer, with Republican presidential candidate John McCain, seeking to keep sex offenders off Internet social networking sites.

The Senate approved the Schumer-McCain measure Tuesday, and the House approved it the previous weekend.

Once signed into law by the president, the law will require registered sex offenders to submit e-mail addresses, instant message addresses and other identifying Internet information to law enforcement for recording in the National Sex Offender Registry.

Social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook will then be able to cross-check the registry against their list of users, and remove any offenders.


OH - Ohio Supreme Court upholds retroactive restrictions on sex offenders

View the article here

10/01/2008

By JIM PROVANCE - BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS — The Ohio Supreme Court Wednesday upheld the retroactive application of tougher registration and notification restrictions imposed on sex offenders convicted before the law took effect.

The court voted 4-3, dividing over the question of whether additional restrictions enacted in 2003 are civil protections for the public or additional punishment unconstitutionally imposed on offenders after the fact.

Convicted Cleveland sex offender Andrew Ferguson "may be negatively impact by the amended provisions, just as he was burdened by the former provisions," wrote Justice Maureen O’Connor for the majority. "But the sting of public censure does not revert a remedial statute into a punitive one… Ohio retroactivity analysis does not prohibit all increased burdens. It prohibits only increased punishment."

The 2003 law expanded on Ohio’s 1996 Megan’s Law, which required the classification of convicted sex offenders before they left prison and retroactively subjected them to mandatory registration of their whereabouts with authorities and required public notification depending on the severity of their classification.

The court had previously upheld the retroactive application of Megan’s Law. Among other changes, the 2003 expansions made the most severe classification, sexual predator, a lifelong designation; required sex offenders to register not only with their local county sheriff but also the sheriff in counties where they work or go to school; and allowed the use of offenders’ photos on public databases.

Ferguson was convicted of rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 15 to 25 years in prison in 1990, well before passage of either law. He was eventually classified as a predator under Megan’s Law and is, therefore, subject to the even stiffer restrictions enacted under its follow-up.

The decision is the latest in which the all-Republican court has demonstrated division. Justice O’Connor was joined in the majority by Chief Justice Thomas Moyer and Justices Terrence O’Donnell and Robert R. Cupp.

The minority consisted of Justices Judith Lanzinger, Paul E. Pfeifer, and Evelyn Lundberg Stratton.

"The stigma attached to sex offenders is significant, and the potential exists for ostracism and harassment, as the [prior Megan’s Law decision] recognized…," wrote Justice Lanzinger. "Therefore, I do not believe that we can continue to label these proceedings as civil in nature. The restraints on liberty re the consequences of specific criminal convictions and should be recognized as part of the punishment that is imposed as a result of the offender’s actions."

Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com, or 614-221-0496.


CA - Ex-officer pleads no contest in sex case

View the article here

10/01/2008

Boy Scout coordinator showed teens porn, taped sex acts

By L.A.CARTER - THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

A former Sonoma County police officer and volunteer fire captain faces up to 12 years in prison after he pleaded no contest to several sex charges involving teenagers.

Matthew Phillips, 33, agreed to accept responsibility for six felony charges, including a child endangerment charge that was reduced from child molestation. The plea, entered Friday, will require Phillips to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
- You see, when it's a cop, they reduce the charges...  Why?  If it was child molestation, then he should be charged with that.

Phillips was a volunteer Bennett Valley Fire Department captain and Rohnert Park Public Safety officer when he was arrested on charges that could have meant more than two decades in prison if he'd been convicted. He was fired from Bennett Valley and quit Rohnert Park when the investigations began in 2005.

Phillips served as the coordinator of the Explorers, a Boy Scout training program for teens ages 14 to 18 interested in firefighting careers, when he committed the criminal acts.

Several teenage witnesses testified that Phillips gave them alcohol, showed them pornography and offered them the use of his home, creating a fraternity house-type atmosphere for teenage boys.

They said over time, Phillips, who became a father figure or big brother substitute for them, convinced them it was normal to masturbate together and tape couples having sex.

He pleaded to child endangerment, one count of exhibiting child pornography to a minor, one count of taking photographs of a minor engaged in sexual activity for commercial purposes, and three counts of surreptitiously filming people engaged in sexual activity.

Witnesses testified that Phillips arranged the taping of sex acts between two teenage Explorers and their unwitting female partners, once at the fire station and twice at Phillips' home.

In one of those incidents, a young man said Phillips was wearing his Rohnert Park police uniform while he was taping.

Phillips' attorney, Chris Andrian, noted that the plea deal did not include a child molestation charge, which he argued didn't fit the facts of the case.
- Well, he should be charged with child molestation, IMO.  In most states, if someone does anything sexual to arouse themselves or the victims, and they are under XX years old, then it's child molestation, by definition!

After a preliminary hearing, Phillips was held over for trial on nine of 19 charges. But as his trial approached, negotiations commenced between attorneys.

"There's been this perception that he didn't want to take responsibility for bad conduct. It was just what (conduct), and under what circumstances," Andrian said. "This plea deal allows him to accept responsibility for things that he did and not bite the whole thing. We had some issues on some of the counts."

You can reach Staff Writer L.A. Carter at 568-5312 or lori.carter@pressdemocrat.com.


GA - Update, New Order

View the article here

10/01/2008

Friends,

We hope this finds you well. We write today to provide you with a brief update.

Yesterday, Judge Cooper issued an Order moving us forward. Among other administrative instructions, the Order includes the following:

  • The Court will allow us to amend the lawsuit to include the language of SB 1. (This is a positive development, as the State had urged the Court to dismiss the entire lawsuit in light of SB 1).
  • Acknowledging the Mann decision, the Court has given us the opportunity to present evidence on the Takings Clause claim, which recognizes that people’s property cannot be taken without just compensation. In considering the Takings Clause claim, the Court will allow us to present evidence that this claim extends to people who rent their homes.
  • The Court is not allowing us to move forward with the homelessness challenge at this time. This matter, however, is still under consideration in the Georgia Supreme Court in the Santos case.
  • The Court has scheduled a hearing for November 13 to hear arguments, primarily on two limited issues: the Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction to prevent the State from criminalizing protected religious activity and the preliminary injunction to keep our first named plaintiff, Wendy Whitaker, from being evicted from her home. At this hearing, we will also likely discuss scheduling matters (such as the setting of a trial date) and will ask the Court to address the merits of the case as soon as possible.

The full Order can be viewed here: Judge Cooper's Order

As always, we will be sure to keep you updated as any new developments arise and as we prepare for the hearing. We know that the outcome of this hearing is of great importance to you and your families. That said, we would ask if you would allow us to report back to you about the hearing, rather than attending it in person. We are all very conscious of how much is riding on the Judge’s decision in this case; maintaining decorum in the courtroom is as important as the evidence we will put forth for the Judge. The courtroom is not large. The legal team from SCHR well as the Governor and Attorney General’s offices, numerous witnesses, the nine named plaintiffs and experts from both sides must fit in this small space. A big crowd at the hearing runs the risk of irritating the court staff, and we cannot take that risk. Our legal team will need to focus all of our energy on putting the best evidence before the court. We would be most grateful if you would respect this very important request.

Finally, we are receiving many telephone calls each week from persons asking for news about the case. Please be assured that we always post any new information about the case on our listserv as soon as we receive it. If we have not posted new information, it means that we do not have anything new to report.

All the best,

Sara, Sarah, Lisa, Gerry, James and Mica



Mica Doctoroff
Southern Center for Human Rights
83 Poplar St.
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 688-1202 -phone
(404) 688-9440- fax
mdoctoroff@schr.org
www.schr.org


UK - Have you the right to know if your neighbour is a sex fiend?

View the article here

I am sick of reporters using "fiend" instead of "offender!" What is the purpose of demonizing someone?

10/01/2008

By Lisa Smyth

Should the public be told if a convicted sex offender is living in their neighbourhood? The question raises a host of other questions — does such disclosure actually protect the public or put them in greater danger?

Can someone who has carried out a sex attack ever be trusted not to offend again? Is it right that convicted sex offenders should be subjected to a lifetime of fear of violent reprisals because of their crime?

Nobody disagrees that when dealing with sex offenders, priority must be given to protecting the public. How this can be best achieved is where opinions vary.

The public largely believes they have the right to know if they live next door to a convicted rapist or if the route their child walks to school takes them past the front door of a paedophile.

After all, forewarned is forearmed. If you know you live, work or socialise in the vicinity of a sex offender, you can take steps to avoid them. And yet, many experts believe that the idea of identifying sex offenders can actually have the opposite effect.

As a member of the Child Sex Offender Review group, Barnardo’s has warned that disclosure can plunge children into much greater danger. Martin Narey, Barnardo’s chief executive, said: “Disclosing the whereabouts of sex offenders will not necessarily make children any safer. We still remain concerned that this is not the best way to protect children.

I am gravely concerned that the effect of greater disclosure will prompt more sex offenders to flee police and probation supervision, at which point they become very dangerous indeed.”
- Just because someone doesn't register and runs, doesn't mean they are "more dangerous!"

This stance is shared by the Northern Ireland Prison Service which has even gone to the extraordinary length of fighting a legal battle to stop photographs of a convicted sex killer, Ken Callaghan — due to be released this month — from being published by the media.

At the High Court last month, it argued that the best way to ensure the safety of the public from convicted sex offenders is by the successful rehabilitation of these criminals into normal society and that this can be best achieved when the issue of identification is left to the authorities.

But can sex offenders ever truly be rehabilitated and can we rely upon the system currently in place to protect us? The Prison Service psychologist giving evidence at the High Court hearing seemed to think so.
- Yes, most can be rehabilitated, but there is always those who do not want to be.  That is the same with anybody else!

Perhaps, in a comment which would appear shocking — even abhorrent to most — she said that ideally, Callaghan, and other convicted sex attackers, will go on to form normal sexual relationships after their release from prison.

This, she argued, can prove to be an important part of the rehabilitation and can in turn help them become a valued member of society, capable of behaving and contributing like everyone else.

However, there are a number of issues arising out of this. The idea that someone who raped and battered someone to death going on to live a happy and fulfiling life does not sit well with most, least of all the relatives of his victim, even if it does mean he is less likely to re-offend. Will possible sexual partners be informed of the sex crime before they make a decision as to whether they get involved in a relationship?
- If someone murders another human being, IMO, they should be in prison until they die!

And are people willing to put their safety in the hands of a system which has failed with tragic consequences in the past? One only has to consider the case of Strabane pensioner Attracta Harron, murdered by one of Northern Ireland's most closely monitored sex offenders. Psychopath Trevor Hamilton was released from jail half way through a seven-year sentence for a brutal rape.
- That first statement, even if they passed the laws, it's the same thing!  The laws will fail, and are doing so, if you'd look around!  So no matter what you do, the issue will still be there!

As a teenager the socially awkward Hamilton was placed on probation for two years for exposing himself to female drivers on a country road. Within less than a year, and still on probation, Hamilton had transformed from a low-level sex offender into a dangerous sexual predator.

At 17, he terrorised a 29-year-old mother-of-two, subjecting her to brutal sex attacks after he abducted her. Just three-and-a-half years later, under Northern Ireland's controversial 50% remission policy — and while still in denial about the seriousness of his previous crimes — Hamilton was free to search for his next victim.

Two weeks before Christmas 2004 Hamilton abducted and murdered retired Strabane librarian Attracta Harron as she returned from Mass.
- So, leave him in prison until he dies!

While it can be argued that this is an extreme example, this is of no comfort to the families of his victims. And as it was admitted during the Callaghan case, much of the rehabilitation of sex offenders depends upon them being honest and open with the authorities.
- Yeah, it is an extreme example, and that is what is always used to make a point.  You cannot judge all sex offenders as if they are the extreme example, that is just wrong.

Yet, despite the fact that Callaghan was temporarily removed from the pre-release scheme after lying to authorities about relationships he was conducting with two women and being considered as a low to medium risk, he will be released from prison next month.
- Why?  He murdered someone, and should be in prison until he is dead, period!

It is fair to say that Callaghan’s rehabilitation is ongoing and that it will never be fully complete until he is returned to society. But, many would ask, why should people accept a system where offenders learn to control their behaviour among the community and why should the public give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has committed one of the most heinous types of crime imaginable? Why should the safety of ordinary people be put at risk to allow sex offenders the chance to live a normal life?
- And when offenders are demonized and laws are passed making it impossible for them to get a job, home or integrate into society, then that stress increases the likelihood they will reoffend.  So you are creating another problem, for something to make you temporarily feel better!

This is the dilemma with which editors, academics, prison chiefs, lawyers and judges will wrestle for a long time to come.
- So when are all the above mentioned, going to talk to experts who deal with sex offenders on a daily basis?  Why do they ignore what the experts say?  Answer me that question!


CA - INTERNET STALKING BILL SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR

View the article here

It's about time. All states need something like this to prevent the PJ/AZU terrorists from stalking, harassing, threatening people.  Click the link below for AB919 to view the bill.

09/30/2008

By California Political Desk

(Sacramento)Assemblyman Guy Houston´s (Contact) (R-San Ramon) legislation aimed at preventing online harassment was signed by the Governor on Monday. Assembly Bill 919, the Internet Stalking Bill, is designed to protect citizens from stalking, harassment and other abuse over the internet.

"The most important duty of government is to protect its citizens. We must write laws with one eye on the present, and one for the future," stated Houston. "California is always at the cutting edge of technological advancement. We need laws to keep up with the technology."

The measure came about after a 17-year-old Danville girl was harassed when her picture and cell phone number was taken from her MySpace page, and posted on Craigslist with a lewd advertisement. The dozens of phone calls she received were obscene and threatening yet, police were unable to prosecute because it was not against the law.

"My daughter was harassed by someone who maliciously posted her private information over the internet," said Kathy Dillingham. "The laws of our state allowed this person to get off the hook and this means when any of our children are on the internet, they are vulnerable too. I want to thank Assemblyman Houston for taking action to protect our children from those who use the internet to harass and harm others."

This bill provides law enforcement officials the tools to go after these crimes. Assembly Bill 919 makes it a misdemeanor to use the internet to intentionally incite a third person to cause fear, harass or harm an individual.
- Misdemeanor?  It should be a felony!

"We need to send a message to people out there who think that it is ok to send out these messages intended to cause harm to others – your actions have consequences and will not be tolerated," said Houston.