Saturday, January 24, 2009

KS - Kansas Man Accused of Incest and Child Murder

View the article here

And yet more proof that most child abuse happens by family, or close friends.

01/23/2009

A bizarre case of incest is unfolding in Cass County, Kansas, involving a man who allegedly fathered four children with his daughter. Three of those children are now dead and the fourth is in protective custody.

According to the Cass County Sheriff’s Office, Danial "Danny" M. Rinehart, 47, began molesting his 19-year-old daughter six years ago. During those years, Rinehart impregnated his daughter on at least four separate occasions. The skeletal remains of two of the children were recently found in coolers on a property in Harrisonville. The third child's skeletal remains are believed to be on an Indian reservation in Oklahoma.

"There have been four pregnancies and four births," Cass County District Attorney Teresa Hensley said at a Friday afternoon press conference. "One child is still alive. That child is in the custody of Division of Children's Services. The other three children are deceased. One of those children was born and died in Oklahoma; the other two children, in an investigation through the sheriff's office, were found in coolers."

The case first came to light on Oct. 3, 2008. Court documents show that on that day one of Rinehart's daughters called police and reported that her father had been having sex with her sister. She went on to describe the birth – the first in 2004 and the last in 2008 – and death of each of the children and instructed police as to where the remains could be found.

On Oct. 15, authorities, assisted by a team of cadaver dogs, conducted a search of a Harrisonville property that Rinehart once owned, but they were unable to locate any remains. The investigation stalled; however, investigators received a break on Jan. 1, when the new property owners found two coolers containing child skeletal remains inside a garage. The investigation continued until Wednesday, when the Cass County Sheriff’s Office announced that they were looking for Rinehart.

The manhunt did not last long, and by Wednesday evening Rinehart was arrested in Missouri. When investigators picked him up, he was in the company of the daughter he has allegedly been molesting and their only surviving child.

Charges against Rinehart include statutory rape, endangering the welfare of a child, one count of second-degree murder, two counts of incest and two counts of accessory abandonment of a corpse.

The second-degree murder charge is related to the death of a baby boy, J.R., that Rinehart had with his daughter on Nov. 17, 2006. Police say that the boy died of pneumonia on Feb. 28, 2007, because Rinehart did not seek medical attention.

A cause of death in the other two cases has not yet been announced.

Rinehart's wife and mother of his other four children, Linda Rinehart, has also been arrested and charged with one count of endangering a child in the first degree. The couple is reportedly separated; however, police believe she was aware of the abuse and was involved in at least one of the births.

Danial Rinehart remains behind bars. His wife is currently free on $10,000 bond.

Photo Credit: Danial and Linda Rinehart: Police file photos.

***Suspects appearing in mug shots are considered innocent until proven guilty***


What Do Women Want?

View the article here

01/22/2009

By DANIEL BERGNER

Meredith Chivers is a creator of bonobo pornography. She is a 36-year-old psychology professor at Queen’s University in the small city of Kingston, Ontario, a highly regarded scientist and a member of the editorial board of the world’s leading journal of sexual research, Archives of Sexual Behavior. The bonobo film was part of a series of related experiments she has carried out over the past several years. She found footage of bonobos, a species of ape, as they mated, and then, because the accompanying sounds were dull — “bonobos don’t seem to make much noise in sex,” she told me, “though the females give a kind of pleasure grin and make chirpy sounds” — she dubbed in some animated chimpanzee hooting and screeching. She showed the short movie to men and women, straight and gay. To the same subjects, she also showed clips of heterosexual sex, male and female homosexual sex, a man masturbating, a woman masturbating, a chiseled man walking naked on a beach and a well-toned woman doing calisthenics in the nude.

While the subjects watched on a computer screen, Chivers, who favors high boots and fashionable rectangular glasses, measured their arousal in two ways, objectively and subjectively. The participants sat in a brown leatherette La-Z-Boy chair in her small lab at the Center for Addiction and Mental Health, a prestigious psychiatric teaching hospital affiliated with the University of Toronto, where Chivers was a postdoctoral fellow and where I first talked with her about her research a few years ago. The genitals of the volunteers were connected to plethysmographs — for the men, an apparatus that fits over the penis and gauges its swelling; for the women, a little plastic probe that sits in the vagina and, by bouncing light off the vaginal walls, measures genital blood flow. An engorgement of blood spurs a lubricating process called vaginal transudation: the seeping of moisture through the walls. The participants were also given a keypad so that they could rate how aroused they felt.

The men, on average, responded genitally in what Chivers terms “category specific” ways. Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women. They were mostly unmoved when the screen displayed only men. Gay males were aroused in the opposite categorical pattern. Any expectation that the animal sex would speak to something primitive within the men seemed to be mistaken; neither straights nor gays were stirred by the bonobos. And for the male participants, the subjective ratings on the keypad matched the readings of the plethysmograph. The men’s minds and genitals were in agreement.

All was different with the women. No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, they showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men. They responded objectively much more to the exercising woman than to the strolling man, and their blood flow rose quickly — and markedly, though to a lesser degree than during all the human scenes except the footage of the ambling, strapping man — as they watched the apes. And with the women, especially the straight women, mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad weren’t in much accord. During shots of lesbian coupling, heterosexual women reported less excitement than their vaginas indicated; watching gay men, they reported a great deal less; and viewing heterosexual intercourse, they reported much more. Among the lesbian volunteers, the two readings converged when women appeared on the screen. But when the films featured only men, the lesbians reported less engagement than the plethysmograph recorded. Whether straight or gay, the women claimed almost no arousal whatsoever while staring at the bonobos.

“I feel like a pioneer at the edge of a giant forest,” Chivers said, describing her ambition to understand the workings of women’s arousal and desire. “There’s a path leading in, but it isn’t much.” She sees herself, she explained, as part of an emerging “critical mass” of female sexologists starting to make their way into those woods. These researchers and clinicians are consumed by the sexual problem Sigmund Freud posed to one of his female disciples almost a century ago: “The great question that has never been answered and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my 30 years of research into the feminine soul, is, What does a woman want?”

Full of scientific exuberance, Chivers has struggled to make sense of her data. She struggled when we first spoke in Toronto, and she struggled, unflagging, as we sat last October in her university office in Kingston, a room she keeps spare to help her mind stay clear to contemplate the intricacies of the erotic. The cinder-block walls are unadorned except for three photographs she took of a temple in India featuring carvings of an entwined couple, an orgy and a man copulating with a horse. She has been pondering sexuality, she recalled, since the age of 5 or 6, when she ruminated over a particular kiss, one she still remembers vividly, between her parents. And she has been discussing sex without much restraint, she said, laughing, at least since the age of 15 or 16, when, for a few male classmates who hoped to please their girlfriends, she drew a picture and clarified the location of the clitoris.




Unrelated Video entitled "Experiment in Homophobia


One of These Laws is Not Like the Others: Why the Federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act Raises New Constitutional Questions



Date posted: August 01, 2008 | Last revised: January 23, 2009

John Marshall Law School, Chicago

Harvard Journal on Legislation, Vol. 46, 2009

Abstract:
In 2003, the United States Supreme Court issued its only two opinions regarding the constitutionality of sex offender registration and notification statutes. The two opinions, Smith v. Doe ("Smith") and Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. Doe ("DPS"), upheld the Alaska and Connecticut registry and notification laws against Ex Post Facto Clause and due process challenges. Three years later, the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ("SORNA") was passed as part of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. The federal statute was very different from the state statutes that the Court reviewed. Most notable among the differences was the creation of the federal crime of "failure to register" which was punishable by up to ten years imprisonment. Despite the significance of the disparities between the state and federal laws, district courts across the country have virtually rubber stamped the criminal provisions of SORNA as constitutional. The district courts' reasoning has been almost entirely based upon superficial, mechanical applications of the Court's decisions in Smith and DPS. This article contends that most district courts have been severely misguided in reading the two Court opinions and the statutory provisions of SORNA. Consequently, this article concludes that either Congress should amend SORNA or courts should strike down portions of SORNA on Ex Post Facto Clause, due process, and Commerce Clause grounds.


One of These Laws is Not Like the Others: Why the Federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act Raises New Constitutional Questions



Date posted: August 01, 2008 | Last revised: January 23, 2009

John Marshall Law School, Chicago

Harvard Journal on Legislation, Vol. 46, 2009

Abstract:
In 2003, the United States Supreme Court issued its only two opinions regarding the constitutionality of sex offender registration and notification statutes. The two opinions, Smith v. Doe ("Smith") and Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. Doe ("DPS"), upheld the Alaska and Connecticut registry and notification laws against Ex Post Facto Clause and due process challenges. Three years later, the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ("SORNA") was passed as part of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. The federal statute was very different from the state statutes that the Court reviewed. Most notable among the differences was the creation of the federal crime of "failure to register" which was punishable by up to ten years imprisonment. Despite the significance of the disparities between the state and federal laws, district courts across the country have virtually rubber stamped the criminal provisions of SORNA as constitutional. The district courts' reasoning has been almost entirely based upon superficial, mechanical applications of the Court's decisions in Smith and DPS. This article contends that most district courts have been severely misguided in reading the two Court opinions and the statutory provisions of SORNA. Consequently, this article concludes that either Congress should amend SORNA or courts should strike down portions of SORNA on Ex Post Facto Clause, due process, and Commerce Clause grounds.