Friday, May 29, 2009

MT - Small Montana Town Offers to Take Guantanamo Prisoners

View the article here

More proof that prison is a business, and even the people who designed it, admit that.

05/29/2009

On Capitol Hill, politicians are dead-set against transferring some of the world's most feared terrorists from Guantanamo to prisons on U.S. soil. But at City Hall in this impoverished town on the Northern Plains, the attitude is: Bring 'em on.

Hardin, a dusty town of 3,400 people so desperate that it built a $27 million jail a couple of years ago in the vain hope it would be a moneymaker, is offering to house hundreds of Gitmo detainees at the empty, never-used institution.

The medium-security jail was conceived as a holding facility for drunks and other scofflaws, but town leaders said it could be fortified with a couple of guard towers and some more concertina wire. Apart from that, it is a turnkey operation, fully outfitted with everything from cafeteria trays and sweatsocks to 88 surveillance cameras.

"Holy smokes — the amount of soldiers and attorneys it would bring here would be unbelievable," Clint Carleton said as he surveyed his mostly empty restaurant, Three Brothers Pizza. "I'm a lot more worried about some sex offender walking my streets than a guy that's a world-class terrorist. He's not going to escape, pop into the IGA (supermarket), grab a six-pack and go sit in the park."
- Total ignorance!  That last statement just shows how ignorant people are.  They'd rather a terrorists walk the streets with bombs strapped to their chests, than some sex offender who may or may not be a threat.  Wow, we sure have out priorities screwed up, don't we?

After Hardin's six-member council passed a resolution last month in favor of taking the Guantanamo detainees, Montana's congressional delegation was quick to pledge it would never happen.

Notwithstanding the reputation of Montanans as Second Amendment-loving gun owners, they said that putting terrorists on Montana soil could invite attacks from the detainees' sympathizers.

"These Gitmo guys, they're a scary bunch," said Sen. Jon Tester, a Democrat. "You've got to realize what you're getting into."
- And he's probably right, but how does this Senator know this?  Has he visited them in person?  If not, then he's only speculating, nothing more.  Once again, instead of proof and facts, he believes the hype!

Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer said this week that it is every state's obligation to do its part in addressing terrorism. But he dismissed Hardin's jail as not up to the task.

A White House spokesman on Thursday declined to comment on Hardin's proposal and said there has been no decision on what to do with the detainees.

The jail's No. 1 promoter, Greg Smith, executive director of Hardin's economic development agency, said the Two Rivers Detention Center could easily be retrofitted to increase security. And while the town hasn't had its own police force since the 1970s, Smith said the jail's well-armed neighbors would constitute an "unofficial redneck patrol."

While some townspeople welcome the idea as a way to produce jobs and put the jail to use, others worry that it would be too dangerous.
- You see, prisons bring jobs and money, that is why prison is a business!  It's not about helping people become productive citizens, but locking them up to keep the business going!

One of the jail's neighbors, Bill Eshleman — a 72-year-old retired postal worker who said he keeps his .30-06 hunting rifle loaded and ready — said the detainees would invite trouble, and he would rather see them sent back where they came from.

But he joked that his rifle was "very accurate," and backed up the claim by pointing to a pronghorn antelope head propped along his fenceline, a trophy from last hunting season.

His wife, Clara, squirmed uncomfortably in the face of her husband's bravado, and said she is dead-set against Hardin becoming America's Gitmo. As a matter of civic pride, she said she wants to put bad guys in the jail to relieve the town of what has become a community embarrassment.

"But not the Gitmos," she said. "They're the worst of the worst."
- I don't see the problem.  You have serial killers, hardcore gang members and worse in prisons across this country, so what's the problem?

Hardin — situated about an hour's drive from Billings on the edge of the Crow Indian Reservation, not far from the Little Bighorn, where Custer made his last stand — is beset with high unemployment and a poverty rate double the national average. It built the 464-bed jail on spec — that is, with no contracts lined up ahead of time to take prisoners.

Attempts to bring offenders, out-of-state criminals and federal inmates to Hardin have all failed, and the bonds issued to pay for construction are now in default.
- So why not call California?  They have tons of prisoners and an overflowing prison system!

Some prison agencies, including the Montana Corrections Department, have said the jail does not meet their design and security standards, in part because of its dormitory-style rooms and lack of an exercise yard. Others said they had no need for the jail or selected a competing proposal.

Inside its concrete walls, orange jumpsuits, rubber sandals and stacks of white tube socks weigh down the shelves of the storeroom. Computers, phones and video monitors line the tables in the control room. In the cafeteria, stacks of plastic trays and cooking utensils wait to be put to use.

Mayor Ron Adams said the jail could generate up to $300,000 a year for Hardin's coffers if it were to open. That is about 20 percent of the town's annual budget. It would also create more than 100 jobs.
- Hell, why don't we just lock everyone in the US in a prison?  Think of all the money that could be made!

Some townspeople — whether they like the idea or not — doubt it will come to pass.

"I saw on the news last night that there are only three prisons in the country that could hold them, maximum-security prisons. So what's this little one-horse deal? There ain't a chance in hell," said Bill Moehr, 77, a former cattle ranch manager who lives next to the jail.

Bonnie Kennedy, a 60-year-old convenience store clerk who also lives next door, chuckled when asked if she thought terrorists would be moving in any time soon.

"Like that's going to ever happen. But it did put us back on the map," she said. "I can't say I like it, but it might get us some interest from somebody who could actually use it."


NC - Gazette launches sex offender database

View the article here

05/29/2009

By Corey Friedman

Signing up for a new e-mail address or instant messenger screen name now means a trip to the local sheriff's office for North Carolina's registered sex offenders.

A law that took effect May 9 requires sex offenders to appear in person at their local sheriff's office within 10 days of obtaining new online identifiers. They also are required to provide their county sheriff with all current e-mail addresses, screen names and other identifiers.
- So I would suggest all RSO's generate thousands of email and IM names, with offensive words in them, and send them on to their local sheriff's department, but I won't.


The General Assembly passed the measure last year along with a series of new laws and modifications to existing laws under the Jessica Lunsford Act. A law that's been in effect for six months restricts offenders' activity online by banning them from social networking Web sites such as Facebook and MySpace.

Once convicted, offenders appear on the N.C. Sex Offender and Public Protection Registry, a Web site maintained by the state Department of Justice. The offenders' names, aliases, photographs, current addresses are displayed online, along with information about their crimes and the sentences they received.

The Gazette has created an online database of the 291 registered sex offenders who currently live in Gaston County, along with every other county in the state.

Searches of the state sex offender registry on Friday yielded 80 registered sex offenders in Lincoln County, 170 in Cleveland County and 627 in Mecklenburg County.

Laws that took effect Dec. 1 restrict some sex offenders' shopping, dining and recreation habits. Offenders whose victims were younger than 16 cannot go within 300 feet of any place "intended primarily for the use, care or supervision of minors," including schools, child care centers, nurseries and playgrounds.

The Attorney General's Office told Gaston County sheriff's deputies that the ban could prevent offenders from attending worship services if their church maintains a nursery or child care room within 300 feet of the sanctuary.

Formerly, offenders had 10 days to notify their local sheriff's office when they changed addresses. A provision in the Lunsford Act slashed that notification window to three days.

Gaston County Sheriff Alan Cloninger takes a proactive approach to keeping tabs on the county's sex offenders. Deputies make "knock and talk" visits to every sex offender four times a year, providing a possible deterrent to those who may commit other offenses.
- Should be called "knock and harass!"

Sheriff's Cpl. Shane Farmer told The Gazette for a December story that most offenders are cooperative when deputies visit.

"They know what we're there for," he said. "They'll come out on the porch or they'll even invite us in briefly. Generally, unless they're in violation and they know they're in violation, they won't avoid us at all."

North Carolina residents can sign up to receive e-mail or phone alerts whenever a sex offender moves within a one-, three-, or five-mile radius of their homes.


Sex Offender Speech


TX - Don't Mess With Texas CPS

Texas CPS Web Site


Oral Sex Is The New Goodnight Kiss

Web Site | YouTube Channel | See Also






ID - Jury trial set for boy accused of assaulting 5-year-old girl in Nampa

View the article here

If a child under 16 cannot consent to sex, cannot smoke, cannot drink, cannot drive, and are not considered adults, then how can they "all of a sudden" say the child is an adult and prosecute him/her as an adult?  They are not adults, period!

05/29/2009

By Mike Butts

CALDWELL - Judge Thomas Ryan this morning set an August jury trial date for a 15-year-old Nampa boy accused of sexually assaulting and beating a 5-year-old girl in a Nampa alley in January 2007. _____ appeared in 3rd district court charged as an adult.

Ryan set the trial for August 24-28 to begin at 9 a.m. each day. _____ will be tried as an adult for attempted murder, battery and forcible penetration with a foreign object of a 5-year-old girl. The Idaho Supreme Court ruled in a 4-1 decision last month that the boy be tried as an adult.

Ryan said the charge of attempted murder carries a fine and prison sentence of up to $50,000 and 15 years. He said the penetration with a foreign object charge carries a penalty of up to life in prison and that if convicted _____ would have to register as a sex offender.

In court, the judge asked _____ if he had any questions; _____ said no.

The 5-year-old victim was found Jan. 24, 2007, in an alley near Lone Star Road and High Street wearing only a T-shirt and not breathing. _____ was taken into custody as the only suspect in the case.

_____ has pleaded not guilty to the charges. He will continue to be housed in the juvenile detention center during the remainder of the case, including after today's arraignment, according to Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney John Bujak.

_____'s case was in limbo since November 2008, when Canyon County sheriff's deputies transfered the boy from the juvenile facility to the adult jail after receiving a signed court order to do so.
- This is just wrong!

Canyon County defense lawyer Scott Fouser then filed a motion to appeal the decision to prosecute _____ as an adult in connection with the brutal attack. The adult criminal case against _____ was put on hold pending a decision on the appeal.

According to Idaho law, if a juvenile age 14 or older commits a serious crime, his or her juvenile status is automatically waived. However, _____ was 12 years old at the time the girl was attacked.

Forcible sexual penetration can be punished by up to life in prison, and aggravated battery and attempted murder by up to 15 years each.


NY - Staten Island pol wants residents to be notified when sex offenders move into their neighborhoods

View the article here

05/29/2009

Staten Island Assemblyman Lou Tobacco (Email) is calling on legislators to pass a law that would provide residents with an e-mail alert when Levels 2 and 3 sex offenders move into their community.

A proposed bill, currently before the state Assembly, would allow state residents to register with the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) to receive such free e-mail notifications.

"By providing families with e-mail alerts when a sex offender moves into their neighborhood, this legislation gives residents important and timely information, which will help them keep their families safe," Tobacco (R-South Shore) said. "In most cases, sex offenders are transient individuals. This makes it harder for parents to know if a sex offender has moved into their neighborhood, especially when most people only check the sex offender Web site periodically."

Tobacco noted that while a subdirectory of the highest risk is available on the Internet, the information is constantly changing and it is time-consuming to keep up with.

Staten Island District Attorney Daniel Donovan (Email) supports to legislation.

"The primary purpose of the Sex Offender Registry law was to post public notice of the location of sex offenders in our communities," said Donovan, who is also president of the District Attorney's Association of the State of New York. "This legislation protects the public by giving residents more timely notice of the relocation of sex offenders into our neighborhoods. It significantly enhances public safety, and it does so at minimal expense to the taxpayers,"

The legislation, which was co-sponsored by Senator Diane Savino (Email) (D-North Shore), unanimously passed the Senate earlier this month.


FL - Bal Harbour Cop Denied Bond On Child Sex Charges

View the article here

Another perverted cop in Florida.  Man, they need to do something with the water in Florida!

05/29/2009

BAL HARBOUR (CBS4) - Bal Harbour police officer Rene Guillen had an intial court hearing on Friday where he faced a judge for the first time over charges of a sex crime involving a child. The Judge denied Guillen bond, and Guillen has allegedly confessed to the crime.

Officer Rene Guillen, 32, was taken into custody late Thursday afternoon, said Bal Harbor Police Captain Jay Smith. Smith would not say what charges were filed against Guillen, but the Miami-Dade Corrections Department booking center said Officer Guillen was booked on a charge of sexual battery against a minor under the age of 12.

A press release later stated the victim was seven-years-old, and was allegedly sexually assaulted the victim while she visited Guillen's residence on April 25, 2009, at approximately 8:00 p.m.

Officer Guillen was suspended without pay, according to Captain Smith, and released into the custody of the Miami-Dade police department for transport to the Miami-Dade County Jail, where he was set to be booked on the charge against him.


MA - Bill would create registry for drug dealers

View the article here

I am all for this, the more registries the better. Why pick on sex offenders and drug dealers, why not put all people on a public accessible registry for anyone convicted of ANY crime, felony or misdemeanor? I'll send in my email supporting this right now.  Everyone call them and voice your support for this bill!

05/29/2009

By Jake Berry

Convicted drug dealers could join rapists and other sex offenders on the list of criminals forced to register with the state if a bill sponsored by a Cape Cod lawmaker gains support on Beacon Hill.

State Rep. Demetrius Atsalis (Email), D-Hyannis, has filed legislation seeking to create a drug offender registry, similar to the state's sex offender listings, to help identify and track convicted drug dealers throughout the state.

The proposed registry, which would include all convictions for distribution, trafficking or possession of drugs with intent to distribute, is intended to alert residents to drug dealers in their community, while providing police with a useful tool to combat drug use and drug-related violence, Atsalis said yesterday.

"While we know what sex offenders are in our neighborhoods, we don't know what drug offenders are (coming in)," he said. "And in a lot of ways drug offenders are just as bad. ... They bring some dangerous people into our neighborhoods."

But the legislation, which will now go to Beacon Hill for consideration in the state House of Representatives, could also make it harder for some drug dealers to reform their ways, some critics said.
- Where have I heard that before?

Such registries — Minnesota, Tennessee and several other states have launched methamphetamine databases — often stigmatize reformed drug dealers, making it more difficult for them to find employment and housing as they look to rehabilitate, said Ann Lambert, legislative counsel to the Massachusetts branch of the American Civil Liberties Union.
- Well, they say the same thing about reformed sex offenders.

In 2008, Cape Cod police departments made 814 arrests for drug-related crimes, including possession, distribution and other crimes, according to the Cape and Islands District Attorney's Office.

"What it's talking about is branding forever people who are substance abusers," Lambert said. "There are large numbers of them that are amenable to treatment."
- Well, they say the same thing about sex offenders.  You see, if one group of people are demonized and their rights eradicated, more will follow.  So again, I'm all for this, and my email has been sent!

Modeled after the state sex offender registry, Atsalis' proposal would require convicted drug offenders to report their name and personal information to local authorities, as well as to the registry's five-member governing board upon moving to a new city or town.

It would divide the registrants into a tiered system based on the severity of their crime: Level 1 offenders, those considered unlikely to repeat an offense, would be registered to an internal database available to law enforcement authorities; the names of Level 2 offenders, those considered somewhat likely to repeat, would be available only through inquiries to the state or local police; and Level 3 offenders, considered high risk to repeat, would each be listed on a public Internet database.
- Why not put Tier I, II and III on a public accessible registry, like you do with sex offenders?  Come on, if it's good enough for one group, it's good enough for everyone!

The program would be self-funded through registration fees paid by registrants, Atsalis said.
- More extortion fees!

The registry could prove to be a useful tool both for residents who want to protect the safety of their neighborhood and to police conducting investigations, police officers said.
- If that is true, which I know it's not, but why not put all criminals on a public registry, so we know where the murderers, gang members, drug dealers/users, DUI offenders, thieves and other criminals are?  Yeah, it's coming, it's only a matter of time.

It could help ensure police safety as officers respond to calls and it could cut down on the length of investigations, providing officers with easy access to information, according to Barnstable police Sgt. Michael Clark, who helped Atsalis develop the bill.

"Oftentimes we'll respond to calls and not realize who's residing at a particular residence," Clark said. "We'll respond to a scene and then go back to the station ... and realize they have long criminal records."

To the public, this information could prove more alarming than helpful, some critics said.

"What are people going to do with this information?" David Rossman, director of Boston University's Criminal Law Clinical Programs asked. "In what way would this help the public as opposed to hurt people who might have at one point had a drug problem? ... I don't see what good this would cause."
- It's to further heighten the fear factor, and to extort money from people.  Many have said the same about sex offender registries, but I see nobody coming out and saying the same about those.  Again, the more registries, the better!


OH - County to charge sex offenders to register

View the article here

05/29/2009

By Brad Dicken

ELYRIA — It’s going to start costing money to be a registered sex offender in Lorain County.

The county commissioners on Thursday approved a resolution that will allow Sheriff Phil Stammitti to charge sex offenders to register with the county — something they’re required by law to do.

It will cost Tier III sex offenders — who are required to register every 90 days for life — $100 per year to register. Tier I and Tier II offenders, who must register annually for a certain number of years, will pay $25.
- Yep, pure extortion!  $100 per offender for life, now that is a lot of money!

It’s not a whole lot, but it’s something to help defray the costs,” Stammitti said.
- Well, for someone who is homeless or almost homeless, due to the draconian unconstitutional laws, yeah, it's a lot of money.  And I'm sure, many will go back to prison because they cannot pay the extortion fee.

It’s also a new trend throughout the state, and so far sheriffs in 18 other counties have implemented similar programs, Stammitti said. He expects other sheriffs will follow because of budget problems throughout the state.
- Tax payers help bail out banks, automotive industries and other businesses, who should've just gone backrupt, and now offenders are bailing out the states with extortion fees.  What other criminal has to pay an extortion fee like this?

Stammitti said he doubts the program will bring in enough money to allow him to hire back any of the 10 full-time deputies who are currently laid off. But it will help with administrative costs — if the money, which is paid into the county’s cash-strapped general fund, comes back his way.

The commissioners slashed $6 million from the county’s budget late last year and have imposed a 0.5 percent sales tax increase that is expected to generate $15 million annually. Although the tax hike went into effect in April, voters must approve it in November in order for it to become permanent.
- What?  So you put something into effect, even before the people vote and approve it?  Wow, corruption sure runs deep in this country!

Commissioners have warned that if that doesn’t happen there will be additional cuts.

The county currently has 699 registered sex offenders, 291 of whom are Tier III offenders.
- So just for the 291 Tier III offenders, that is an income of $291,000 per year, not including the Tier I and II offenders.

There are 213 Tier II offenders, 90 Tier I offenders and 105 offenders who are fighting a recent change in how sex offenders must register, Stammitti said.
- We should have ALL sex offenders fighting these draconian laws, not just 105.

But all of those offenders won’t end up paying the fee to register, he said.

If an offender makes less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level — $13,537 annually for an offender who is single with no dependents or $27,562 for an offender in a family of four — they won’t be required to pay, Stammitti said.

The fees will go into effect July 1.


Sex Madness (1938)

View the article here

Sex Madness (1938) is an exploitation film directed by Dwain Esper, along the lines of Reefer Madness, supposedly to warn teenagers and young adults of the dangers of venereal diseases, specifically syphilis.

Wild parties, lesbianism, and premarital sex are some of the forms of "madness" portrayed. The "educational" aspect of the film allowed it to portray a taboo subject which was otherwise forbidden by the Production Code of 1930, and its stricter version imposed by Hollywood studios in July 1934.

The film has fallen into the public domain and can be freely downloaded from the Internet Archive.

It has been reissued under many titles, including Human Wreckage, They Must Be Told, and Trial Marriage.


CA - Judge: Police Can Forcibly Take DNA Samples Upon Arrest

View the article here
Tennessee speeders could get fingerprinted

HEIL HITLER!!!!!

05/28/2009

By Declan McCullagh

In the first case of its type, a federal judge in California has ruled that police can forcibly take DNA samples, including drawing blood with a needle, from Americans who have been arrested but not convicted of a crime.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Gregory Hollows ruled on Thursday that a federal law allowing DNA samples upon arrest for a felony was constitutional and did not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of "unreasonable searches and seizures."
- And the American public still think we are not a Communist country?

Hollows, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush (That explains it all!), said the procedure was no more invasive or worrisome than fingerprinting or a photograph. "The court agrees that DNA sampling is analogous to taking fingerprints as part of the routine booking process upon arrest," he wrote, calling it "a law enforcement tool that is a technological progression from photographs and fingerprints."
- You see folks, when they can trample on anybodies rights, more will follow.  Now you will be on a DNA database for Big Brother to do whatever they wish with your DNA.

"The invasiveness of DNA testing is minimal," Hollows wrote. "The DNA can be taken by an oral swab, and even blood tests have been held to be a minimal intrusion."

A bill that President Bush signed in January 2006 said any federal police agency could "collect DNA samples from individuals who are arrested." Anyone who fails to cooperate is, under federal law, guilty of an additional crime.

In addition, federal law and subsequent regulations from the U.S. Department of Justice authorize any means "reasonably necessary to detain, restrain, and collect a DNA sample from an individual who refuses to cooperate in the collection of the sample." The cheek swab or blood tests can be outsourced to "private entities."

While other courts have ruled on the constitutionality of DNA sampling after conviction, this is the first case to deal with defendants who have only been accused of a crime. (The 9th Circuit, in U.S. v. Kincade, ruled that mandatory DNA testing of violent felons on supervised release was constitutional; a dissent by Judge Alex Kozinski said that same logic could lead to mandatory testing of every American citizen: "The more DNA samples are included in the database, the better off we are: More guilty parties will be found, more innocents will be cleared and more unknown crime victims will be identified...")
- So they say!

The defendant in the current case in California, Jerry Albert Pool, is accused of possessing child pornography in the form of illegal images of minors on his computer, a felony. He has no prior criminal record and has pleaded not guilty.

Hollows ruled that in the case of felony charges lodged against a defendant by a judge or a grand jury -- resulting in a formal finding of probable cause -- mandatory DNA sampling was reasonable. He noted that he took no position on whether or not DNA sampling for misdemeanor offenses was reasonable and constitutional.

The list of possible federal felony charges includes ones you might expect, including counterfeiting and kidnapping. But it also includes some forms of peer-to-peer piracy, circumventing e-book protection, or using innocent words like "Barbie" on a sexually-explicit Web site.

"In utilizing the totality of the circumstances, the decision to impose the DNA testing requirement on pre-trial detainees or releasees seems clearly warranted, if not compelling," Hollows wrote. "An arrestee's identity obviously becomes a matter of legitimate state interest... While fears of a 'Big Brother' style government harassing or persecuting individuals based on genetic characteristics is always theoretically possible, that is not the purpose of the amendments before the court, nor is it at all likely."