Sunday, June 7, 2009

PA - City may change sex offender law

View the article here


By Anna Teletovich

SUNBURY — No one has ever been fined or jailed for violating the city ordinance that prohibits registered sex offenders from loitering within 1,000 feet of public places where children may gather, Sunbury solicitor Michael Apfelbaum says.

But the American Civil Liberties Union (Contact) says the ordinance is unconstitutional and that it will file a federal lawsuit unless Sunbury addresses the issue by today.

Meanwhile, the city’s solicitor said additions could be made to the law to address the constitutional questions.

The ACLU protest came to light after city resident _____, a registered sex offender and mother of four, was cited for taking her son to a crowded city park last summer.

The outing could have placed _____ in jail for 60 days or cost her $500 in fines, if the ordinance had been enforced.

Apfelbaum said he wrote the ordinance at City Council’s request to replicate a similar ordinance in the city of Allentown.

The ACLU says the vague word “loitering” makes Sunbury’s ordinance unclear and unconstitutional.
- I agree.  Loitering doesn't mean being somewhere, it means being somewhere without a purpose, read the definition!

With many similar ordinances throughout the state and country, Apfelbaum said he was surprised the ACLU is concerned about Sunbury’s ordinance.
- Because someone there complained, and this is proof, IMO, that the ACLU does nothing, unless an offender complains, and even then, they may not do something.  They should be attacking this at a state level in the supreme court.

Asked if the intention of the May 2006 ordinance was to keep registered sex offenders outside city limits, Apfelbaum said: “The main purpose was to keep the specifically geographical areas safe. From there, if (sex offenders) had trouble finding a living place, that’s their problem.”

The solicitor called the ordinance “tailor-made” to Sunbury, and includes playgrounds and schools as off limits to all registered sex offenders.

It is possible that the city will add to the ordinance, he said.

I want to make sure, most importantly, that there is an ordinance that protects against people on the list,” he said. “From there, if we want to put some additional restrictions on the ordinance that satisfy people who have questions about constitutionality, we can put in those restrictions.”

There are 23 registered sex offenders who live or work in Sunbury, according to the Pennsylvania Megan’s Law Web site. However, the ordinance applies to all registered sex offenders, regardless of where they live.

We don’t want our nice playgrounds to be a fun place for sexual predators to hang out,” Apfelbaum said. “My sense has always been that people on the list went to other towns to do their hanging out.”

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

AK - Offender won't have to register

View the article here

Old article, but still relevant.



ALASKA SUPREME COURT: Convict argued law should not be applied retroactively.

An anonymous man who has been fighting Alaska's sex offender registration law since the mid-1990's when it was first enacted has finally won.

He doesn't have to register, but most others still do.
- So you see, they admit it's an ex post facto issue, thus violating the constitution, but, because this one man fought, he won, but all the others still have to register.  So they are violating the constitution.  All the others who are in the same situation as this man, should be removed from the registry.

Known variously in federal and state lawsuits as _____ and John Doe, the unnamed man is a child molester who had been convicted, sentenced, done all his prison time and most of his probation by 1994 when Gov. Wally Hickel signed the registry into law. It was retroactive to 1984.

The law requires all convicted sex offenders to provide Alaska State Troopers with a current address and other identifying information, including updates from one to four times a year -- some for the rest of their lives. The information, along with the convict's record and physical description, are made accessible to the public, including online.

Doe-_____ filed suit with others in federal court in Anchorage the day after Hickel signed the law. He argued it was unconstitutional on several grounds, including that it was unreasonable search and seizure, and that it violated his right to privacy.

But his main argument was that the law was not in effect when he committed his crimes, that it was punishment applied to him retroactively. In general, retroactive laws are called "ex post facto" and are barred by both the U.S. and the Alaska constitutions.
- You hear that?  They are BANNED by these documents, and they are basically ignoring the constitutions to punish people.  And people think the government is not corrupt?  The Alaska Constitution says:

15. Prohibited State Action

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. No law impairing the obligation of contracts, and no law making any irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed. No conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate.

And the US Constitution says basically the same thing:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

It took years, but the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Doe-_____ lost.

Alaska and other states with similar laws argued that they were not punishment, but merely regulations used to keep track of sex offenders for the protection of the public.
- This is a load of BS!  The registry is punishment.  If it was offline and used by police only, then it would be a lot better.

Each federal court that ruled on the case reversed the ruling of the previous court, an indication of how contentious the issue is. In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the states, concluding the registration requirement was not an "ex post facto" punishment.

So Doe-_____ started over. In 2005 he filed suit in state court, arguing that the Alaska Constitution offers stronger protection of individual liberties than the federal constitution.

Doe-_____ lost in Anchorage Superior Court and appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court.

In a 52-page split decision issued Friday, the court voted 2-1 that forced public registration is punishment as well as regulation, and cannot be added retroactively to the sentence of someone who committed their crime before the law existed. Two justices did not participate in the case and Chief Justice Dana Fabe disagreed with the conclusion.

Justices Warren Matthews and Robert Estaugh particularly faulted the sweeping effect of the law, noting that it applies equally to all people convicted of a sex offense, regardless of the severity of the crime, the success of their rehabilitation, or their continuing danger to the public.

Ex-offenders lose jobs and housing because of the registry, the justices noted. There is no way to petition to be allowed to stop registering, or to limit registration information to legitimate law enforcement purposes.

Even someone who becomes physically incapacitated and therefore incapable of committing another offense must keep signing up, they said.

Although the aims of the registration law are "undeniably legitimate and important," Estaugh wrote, "Alaska's statute is excessive in relation to the state's interest in public safety."

In her dissent, Fabe said her colleagues did not offer convincing reasons for coming to a different conclusion than the U.S. Supreme Court.

Friday's decision relieves Doe-_____ of the obligation to register, but the law remains in effect for those convicted of covered crimes committed after August 1994, when the law took effect.
- Ok, so it's after August 1994.  So have all those who committed their crime and are done with their sentence, before this date, been removed from the registry?  I doubt it!

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

PA - Wrong man attacked in vigilante injustice

View the article here
Beaten man leaves hospital
Person of Interest in Rape of Girl, 11, Badly Beaten by Furious Neighbors

There is NEVER any reason for street justice! But, the reporter in the video below, seems to think some street justice is okay. It's because of idiots like this reporter, who help spread hate and cause crime, IMO.


By Dann Cuellar

CENTER CITY - Street justice sometimes gets it right, and sometimes gets it wrong.
- No, street justice is NEVER the answer.  If we all thought like this, then why have laws in the first place?

The case of 26-year-old _____ is a disturbing reminder of what can happen when the police search for a child rapist fuels a potent intoxicant of street justice and an innocent victim is caught in its web.

"He calls me by my nickname, he says 'Romeo, we need to speak to you, we need to talk to you for a second, I got something to show you,'" _____ said.

_____ says it was Monday afternoon and he was walking home at Ontario and Argyle Streets when he was suddenly attacked by 5 or 6 people, some of whom he knew from the neighborhood.

"Out of nowhere, I just start getting hit with sticks; I get hit with a baseball bat on my back. I was just getting stomped, I was just getting beat up for at least 45 seconds before I knew what was going on," _____ said.

It wasn't until then that he knew why he was being pummeled when someone yelled, 'You raped that little girl!.'

"I kept yelling, I'm innocent, I didn't do anything, I don't know what's going on," _____ said. "They were just calling me, 'Rapist! You deserve to die!' They were saying, 'Kill him, kill him!', and it was just too much."
- And you see, their intent was to kill him, attempted murder, and no charges were filed against these street thugs!

Five days since the attack, _____ is still marred with the bruises left from the vicious and brutal attack, on his eye where he was hit with a stick, on his back where he was hit with a baseball bat, his left shoulder, and his left foot which was bandaged up tonight.

"It still hurts a lot; I'm still going through a lot of pain here," _____ said.

Police officers took him to the hospital and then the special victims unit, where detectives realized he was not the guy they were looking for and let him go. He says he feels terrible for the little girl that was raped and understands the anger people felt, but:

"They shouldn't have took the law into their own hands, ok? Because look, they got the wrong guy. What if they would have killed me? Then what?" _____ said.
- They would've been seen as a hero by the evil, sick people in this world!

Further, he believes after he was beat up, police had a responsibility to warn the public not to take matters into their own hands.

"Me being beat up like that, they should have done something about it, because I was on the ground, I was bleeding and I was hurt. I think the police should have done something about it cause they knew I was beat up," _____ said.

After being prompted by his family, _____ says he went to East Detectives on Wednesday and identified two of his assailants from a photo lineup. He wants to press charges not just because of what happened to him, but for the next person who could be mistaken for a vicious criminal.

And read these comments on the LiveLeak Video!

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

UK - 'Condom Cards' Given to Youth to Combat Teen Pregnancy

View the article here

You tell me, what kind of message is this sending? Those under the age of consent, if they have sex, are committing a crime! This is from FoxNews and no state specified, so I'm assuming it's in the UK somewhere.


Boys as young as 12 are to be issued with condom "credit cards" allowing them to pick up free contraception at football grounds, barber’s shops and scout huts.

Condoms will be distributed at places where boys congregate, to spare them the embarrassment of visiting sexual health clinics or GPs’ surgeries or facing a shop assistant at a pharmacist's counter.

They will be able to collect the condoms by showing a plastic card issued to them after they have attended a safe-sex lesson, according to new government guidance. Boys who take advantage of the scheme will not have to give their names or answer questions about their sex lives.

The scheme is intended to cut teenage pregnancies and persuade boys to take greater responsibility for contraception.

However, critics believe it will encourage children to be sexually active from a younger age. Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe and the government has failed in its pledge to halve rates of pregnancy in girls under the age of 18.

The plastic cards are already used by some local authorities, but will be made available to all boys in Britain aged 13 and over after the guidance is published in the autumn.

Councils will, however, have discretion to offer the cards to younger boys who may already be sexually active, and to instil safe-sex attitudes at an early age in those who are not.

The strategy is being drawn up for the Department for Children, Schools and Families by the Brook advisory service, which offers contraceptive advice to teenagers. There is concern that sex education has been too focused on teenage girls, who tend already to take full responsibility for using contraception.

The condom card, or C-card, scheme is intended to encourage boys to learn about safe sex as well.

They will be given a lesson about the use of condoms before being issued with the card.

Boys who attend additional talks about sexually transmitted diseases will get a stamp on their card, which those running the scheme hope will become a status symbol.

Simon Blake, chief executive of Brook, said the C-card would make condom use “an everyday reality”.

He said the new government guidance would be designed to make boys more confident about using contraception and asking for advice on sex.

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

Making hatred


The United States has had a long, and ample history of creating internal problems. From the old problems with slavery, to problems with racial and ethnic divisions created and used by enterprising politicians, we are good at hating. We've hated so long that we've forgotten why we hate, and often have taken up the same weapons that we claim to hate.

This has, always and ever, been one of the greatest problems with hatred. We tend to forget the target, forget the reasons, and indulge in that unfettered brutality for which some of our hearts long.

What causes hate? The greatest cause is fear and lack of understanding, lack of compassion feeds into this. We fear, and we are angry for the threat the fear creates. Part of this is a near-instinctual process, wherein we tended to avoid others who appeared similar, though acting oddly, in order to reduce disease. Part of it is an educational process, by which our enforcement in schools of the necessity for everyone 'fitting in' and punishment of those who do not tends to create the situations for anger and hatred.

But why do we hate? Perhaps the answer can be found in who we hate, and how.

We are fond of our hatred, as a nation, and as a species. When we feel powerless we hate ever the more, grasping for something to control.

And that control is the core of hatred. It removes compunctions against actions which would normally horrify us, removes the civilized veneer that we hide our own ignorance and fear with, and makes us powerful for that moment. It objectifies the targets, personifies in them all of the evil and viciousness we see out there, and see in ourselves. At its base it is all about control.

Being different is not a bad thing. That is the ultimate lesson we need to learn to get past hatred, to get past the barriers which politicians and well-meaning pundits put up. It is no less racist to profile a person as being racist due to their skin color, or their ethnicity. It is no less intolerant to say that all 'x' are intolerant. Racism is one of the many cross-cultural ties that bind us, but it is also one of the ugliest.

It can be used as a club to silence dissent, as an identity, as part of who we are. If we were truly colorblind, would the race of the candidate matter, even if he or she is considered a 'minority'? Would political considerations trump the ability to do the job? Does it matter what race they are, if they are capable of doing the job for which they are elected, and doing it faithfully?

But we harp on Obama being a 'black' and Sotomayor for being 'Hispanic' and saying that such is a good thing... when it matters even less than if a penny is copper. They have no control over the person to whom they were born, and we have no control over how they lived their lives, therefore the qualifications are far more important than the race or lack thereof.

Let's look at who we hate.. let's pick an easy target, shall we? In my search for hated persons and classes, the Judaic race, the African Americans, the Native Americans all got thought of.. but there are more classes that transcend these. In the cases of the African Americans, it's people seeking power once again that keep that brew mixed and fermenting, the Hispanics have much the same going on, as do the Caucasian and all the other races. To have a protector, you must have a boogeyman, and what better one than the tyranny of the 'other races'? What is more vague, and therefore more likely to continue, easy to blind yourself against things that are similar and focused on any slight or fault done by one of these 'oppressors'? Is it not also racist?

There are very few groups of persons we hate that cross racial or ethnic lines. Perhaps the most powerful hatred we have is visceral, and directed against those that transgress against the laws of our society. We look at history of the United States where people not guilty of capital crime were restored their rights, powers, immunities, and priviliges at the end of the sentence, their sentence was spent, and they were made peaceable again with the society until they once again transgressed.

Today, however, we want our pound of flesh, from the heart. We claim to do it without blood, but we look at the felon once again as a second class citizen. We feel a moral superiority that 'at least we haven't broken any laws', or 'at least I didn't do that'. The smug certainty we hold leaves little room for seeing the trials and travails of humanity that they undergo due to a spent punishment.

If the punishment was insufficient, what more could we do to them to make it so? If it was judged sufficient, how can we as people assume that they have not paid enough, if the court and jury believed they had?

Let's focus in a little closer. You have your murderers, your drug offenders, your larcenists and arsonists, you have your manslaughter, your property offenses and then you have your deviants and sex offenders.

Among these who is most likely to recommit their original or a related act? Would it be the murderers or sex offenders? No, actually, it's not. The murderers and sex offenders have a lower reoffense rate than any other class of criminal.

We see these sex offenders out there, and our instinctual response is 'kill them, mutilate them, open their corpse and torture them'. What is it in us that goes so far? It's not just a righteous indignation, it's something of a more visceral fear... a fear that in the correct or incorrect circumstances we'd be the same. It is a lingering guilt, a shame, over our own sexualities. We see this same shame against those accused of homosexuality, and in some cases people speak against it, but who dares... speak about attacks against a sex offender?

Only a total idiot would, or a sex offender, goes the reasoning.

But let's look at things a bit closer.

Compared to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime. Within the first 3 years following their release from prison in 1994, 5.3% (517 of the 9,691) of released sex offenders were rearrested for a sex crime. The rate for the 262,420 released non-sex offenders was lower, 1.3% (3,328 of 262,420).

The first 12 months following their release from a State prison was the period when 40% of sex crimes were allegedly committed by the released sex offenders. Recidivism studies typically find that, the older the prisoner when released, the lower the rate of recidivism. Results reported here on released sex offenders did not follow the familiar pattern. While the lowest rate of rearrest for a sex crime (3.3%) did belong to the oldest sex offenders (those age 45 or older), other comparisons between older and younger prisoners did not consistently show older prisoners’ having the lower rearrest rate.

The study compared recidivism rates among prisoners who served different lengths of time before being released from prison in 1994. No clear association was found between how long they were in prison and their recidivism rate.

Before being released from prison in 1994, most of the sex offenders had been arrested several times for different types of crimes. The more prior arrests they had, the greater their likelihood of being rearrested for another sex crime after leaving prison. Released sex offenders with 1 prior arrest (the arrest for the sex crime for which they were imprisoned) had the lowest rearrest rate for a sex crime, about 3%; those with 2 or 3 prior arrests for some type of crime, 4%; 4 to 6 prior arrests, 6%; 7 to 10 prior arrests, 7%; and 11 to 15 prior arrests, 8%. Rearrest for a sex crime against a child The 9,691 released sex offenders included 4,295 men who were in prison for child molesting.

Of the children these 4,295 men were imprisoned for molesting, 60% were age 13 or younger. Half of the 4,295 child molesters were 20 or more years older than the child they were imprisoned for molesting. On average, the 4,295 child molesters were eeleased after serving about 3 years of their 7-year sentence (43% of the prison sentence).

Compared to the 9,691 sex offenders and to the 262,420 non-sex offenders, released child molesters were more likely to be rearrested for child molesting. Within the first 3 years following release from prison in 1994, 3.3% (141 of 4,295) of released child molesters were rearrested for another sex crime against a child. The rate for all 9,691 sex offenders (a category that includes the 4,295 child molesters) was 2.2% (209 of 9,691). The rate for all 262,420 non-sex offenders was less than half of 1% (1,042 of the 262,420).

Of the approximately 141 children allegedly molested by the child molesters after their release from prison in 1994, 79% were age 13 or younger.

Released child molesters with more than 1 prior arrest for child molesting were more likely to be rearrested for child molesting (7.3%) than released child molesters with no more than 1 such prior arrest (2.4%).

Rearrest for any type of crime compared to non-sex offenders released from State prison, sex offenders had a lower overall rearrest rate.

When rearrests for any type of crime (not just sex crimes) were counted, the study found that 43% (4,163 of 9,691) of the 9,691 released sex offenders were rearrested. The overall rearrest rate for the 262,420 released non-sex offenders was higher, 68% (179,391 of 262,420).

The rearrest offense was a felony for about 75% of the 4,163 rearrested sex offenders. By comparison, 84% of the 179,391 rearrested non-sex offenders were charged by police with a felony.

Reconviction for a new sex crime Of the 9,691 released sex offenders, 3.5% (339 of the 9,691) were reconvicted for a sex crime within the 3-year followup period.

Reconviction for any type of crime Of the 9,691 released sex offenders, 24% (2,326 of the 9,691) were reconvicted for a new offense. The reconviction offense included all types of crimes.

Returned to prison for any reason Within 3 years following their release, 38.6% (3,741) of the 9,691 released sex offenders were returned to prison. They were returned either because they received another prison sentence for a new crime, or because of a technical violation of their parole, such as failing a drug test, missing an appointment with their parole officer, or being arrested for another crime.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice.

Let's look at this a moment. 5.3% vs 1.3%... sounds like a hugely higher risk.

At the risk of being idiotic, let's look at the math there.. 517 sex offenders vs 3,378 non-sex-offender prisoners. Which is more likely?

They say that sex offenders inevitably reoffend.. but does 5.7% (on the maximum end, depending on the nature of the crime, reoffense rates drop to as low as 1%) and there is less likelihood of reoffending the longer that the person is without an offense.

Let's take 700,000 offenders and assume a steady rate of 6% (the number as of last year that were on the registry) and exceeding the offense rate proposed by the data.

Let's also assume none of them die until the sequence terminates.

According to my spreadsheet, the first year 42,000 would reoffend, assuming static reoffense rates, and assuming that there is no changes in supervision, hormones, etc, or new offenders coming into that set.

How many years does it take for them all to reoffend at that rate? About 218. Now, the study notes something else.. that offense rates decrease the longer the offender goes without reoffense. At this point we've got a scale that increases closer to the origin, and approaches something indistinguishable from 0 at infinity.

The initial decay is fast.

So.. how do we have 700,000 offenders on the registry without hearing about 42,000 Lundsfords, Kankas, or Walshes a year?

The statistic is misleading. A 'reoffense' can be as little as public indecency, at this point, and the microscope is on them. If you are in public and rip out the crotch of your jeans picking something up, even if no flesh is exposed, the offender can be cited. Some indeed choose new victims, some choose young victims, but these are in the minority as well. (7.3% of the total of multiple child molesters versus single-offense child molesters at 2.4%.) This is a great difference from 90% to 100%.

You have a non-hetrogenous group, being dealt with in a hetrogenous and punitive manner, seeking further control. Precedents are being established that allows them to 'regulate' due to past offenses the possibility of future offenses. This gives them a huge amount of power. Perhaps this would indicate why they shifted from the 'black crime problem' to one that nobody was willing to defend. Race will always have defenders... and registered sex offenders, when defending themselves, are considered to be 'in denial' or 'making excuses'. It's a catch 22. Even if you are innocent, there is no way out.

Power and control, gentlemen. Any idiot can see what you've had done to you. Maybe' it's time to look other directions and at why you hate.

Besides.. how many of you have said 'I'd tap that', and then found out the person was underage?

And how many politicians got a pass on it after the 'Boys Town' scandal of the 80s?

It would seem an act of total idiocy to question the official line when a boys prostitution ring (and not always a consentual one) was linked through the congress and white house, and the story got buried. It would seem an even greater act of idiocy to claim that the government would potentially hide evidence and such a story in such a way that several of the persons later were involved in the legislation attacking such offenders, and were further accused of indecent acts against underage individuals in the congressional offices themselves?

After all.. who would believe such a story about those who pushed the legislation the most...

Only a total idiot.

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

NC - Professor: Many sex offenders have "brainwashed" themselves

View the article here

What a retard!  And this lady is a teacher?


By Justin Schoenberger

Many sex offenders were molested as children and commit sex crimes because they're confused about love - that is, they grow to learn what felt physically good as a child is unacceptable to society, according to professor Laura Barnes, chairwoman of the Lenoir Community College Behavior and Social Sciences Department.
- So what is this lady' expertise in sex offenders?  Or is she just some teacher who thinks she knows what she is talking about?

Many victims of child molestation end up fine with extensive therapy, she said, but some of those who don't get help act on their conflicting beliefs.

Treating a sex offender, in turn, has become a difficult task.

"What they try to do is build up empathy skills," Barnes said. "Many sex offenders have been molested themselves and have convinced themselves what they're doing is a favor - that the child wants it and it feels good to the child even though it's through fear and intimidation."

"They have so brainwashed themselves with their narcissism that they truly don't get it. And if they do get it even a little bit, they don't care because they're narcissistic and they're sociopathic at the same time."
- And what is your experience in this field again?

"These are people who can convince themselves that if a child walks into the bathroom at the same time - ‘Oh, he's here because he wants it' - and would work to justify in their thinking.

"They can work to rationalize anything like that."

"So because their thinking is so off the chart and their justification for the behavior is so off the chart, you have to set artificial boundaries around them because they can't set a boundary inside."

"What we do in society is create those fences that will stop them. We try to create a sense of safety and protection for our kids by creating artificial barriers that person will have to observe."

"Society's stepping in and trying to make the ego boundaries the person can't make for themselves."

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

NH - Predator law faces big tests

View the article here

So we have now flipped 180 degrees. Instead of them proving he is a risk, he has to prove he is not. Bass Aackwards!



State's treatment policy, results will be scrutinized

With the state's first sexually violent predator now confined, perhaps indefinitely, the state's new sexual predator law faces its biggest tests: How rigorous and effective will the state's treatment be, and will _____, 49, have a fair chance of eventually earning his freedom?

To do so, he must persuade a judge that through treatment he is unlikely to commit more acts of sexual violence.
- So, how does someone "persuade" a judge, who doesn't want to look soft on crime, nor release someone who may reoffend, making them look bad?  Why don't you prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he is a threat?  Since when did we start predicting the future?  Are we still consulting astrologers?

State officials have developed a five-page policy laying out the kinds of treatment sexual predators like _____ will receive, and the director of the Department of Corrections' forensics and medical services division, Robert MacLeod, says he is committed to providing individualized, intense treatment.

"Any of the residents coming in here under (the new sexual predator law), I can assure you, will be treated appropriately according to medical models," MacLeod said. "It will not be punishment. It will be treatment. And as we move this program along, we hope that it will be successful for individuals."
- Well, many in the general public have been persuaded that people cannot be helped, and if that is true, then why even have civil commitment or treatment?  Why?  Because it works.  Not all the time, but it does work a lot of the time.  Also, civil commitment costs a lot more than being in prison, and in prison, almost all the time, they do not get help.  Sounds backwards to me.  They should get help in prison, before their time is served.  Also, you say "it's not punishment!"  Well, that depends on how you look at it.  It's easy for someone not having to go through it, to say that.  Live in the shoes of a sex offender for a couple years, then tell me that!

Leo Keating, who oversees psychiatric care for sex offenders and others committed to the state's secure psychiatric unit, added to that: "If we are successful, the world will be a safer place."

But so far, New Hampshire's plan is untested because _____ is the first offender to be committed under the new law, which took effect in 2007. The law allows convicted sex offenders to be held past their prison sentences for treatment if a jury believes they have a mental abnormality that makes them likely to re-offend.
- So tell me, who is on this jury?  Why aren't sexual experts determining this, or are they?  And if they are such a threat, why let them out of prison to just lock them up again?  And in a place that costs more tax payer dollars than prison?  I think there is a hidden agenda here, personally!  Maybe to keep people in business, or something?

In addition to New Hampshire's absence of a treatment record, there's no consensus nationwide on what treatment works best. In addition, there have been vastly mixed results among treatment facilities in the nearly 20 states with sexually violent predator laws.

According to a 2007 study by Adam Deming, director of Indiana's sex offender management and monitoring program, only eight of 17 states surveyed had released an offender because they'd completed treatment and/or earned a recommended release from treatment staff. (Others were let out on legal or technical grounds.) And those eight states released few: Of the more than 3,600 civilly committed sexual predators nationwide in 2007, only 57 had been released, Deming reported in the fall issue of The Journal of Psychiatry and Law.
- So you see, it's prison outside of prison.  So if the odds of you getting out are slim, why bother?

That concerns defense attorneys and civil rights activists.

"There are a lot of fancy words in (New Hampshire's treatment plan)," said attorney Michael Iacopino, past president of the New Hampshire Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, "and it looks like it will involve a lot of people's time and a lot of money. A whole lot of money."

Anatomy of treatment

The state's treatment policy, written by mental health, prison and legal officials from various state agencies, calls for an exhaustive intake examination as well as weekly, monthly and annual progress reviews.

MacLeod and Keating said the treatment provided to civilly committed offenders will differ greatly from the sex offender program offered at the prison. Whereas that program is the same for all offenders, treatment will be tailored to an offender's particular needs while confined under the new law.

"It's important that the treatment on day one is not set in stone," Keating said. "It really has to be developed around the population that we have. At this point, we have one convicted offender. If we had 25, there would be some differences in the way we'd interact with the population."

MacLeod put it this way: "A physician will develop a plan, and it will twist and turn in terms of someone's presentation as we work with them."

Treatment will be provided by medically trained staff inside the secure psychiatric unit, which sits inside the prison but is not run by the prison, MacLeod said. Staff will use a variety of industry-standard tests to monitor an offender's risk and arousal triggers, MacLeod said.

Tools will include a polygraph (junk science) and a device that connects to an offender's genitals and measures his arousal to appropriate and deviant images. There will be individual therapy, but the plan calls for a heavy emphasis on group therapy and peer confrontation, something that will be difficult until there are more than one or a few sex offenders committed.
- You are saying "his" genitals!  What about females?  Oh yeah, they usually get slapped on the wrist and sent on their way, I almost forgot!

MacLeod and Keating said they will work around that by including _____ and other sexually violent predators in other groups within the unit. The unit also houses residents suffering from mental illness or people found not guilty by reason of insanity. Often, Keating said, they share a need for help with anger management, emotion control and checking distorted thinking.
- The entire prison system is filled with mentally sick people.  That is the problem.  We lock them up, without treatment, then when their time is done, throw them out the door and wish them luck!  The prisons are the new mental hospitals!

The treatment will be overseen by Keating's employer, MHM Services, a private company that also provides treatment for the male sex offenders in Massachusetts who've been civilly committed for treatment.

What does it cost?

MacLeod and Keating said they looked at the Massachusetts program, which developed from the state law passed in 1999, for an example.

According to a 2007 New York Times survey of treatment programs throughout the country, Massachusetts was spending $30.7 million to confine and treat a little more than 105 sexually violent predators between the ages of 20 and 70.

The cost broke down to about $48,300 per prisoner. Only four offenders had been fully discharged, without ongoing supervision, when the story ran in March 2007.

The Times found that the cost of treatment programs varies widely among states, from $32,000 a year for each offender in Texas, which, unlike other states, treats them in the community, to $180,000 a year for each offender in Pennsylvania, where they are confined.

The price tag for New Hampshire isn't available yet, but it's bound to be more than the nearly $30,000 it costs the state a year to incarcerate a prisoner, experts said.

"The interesting thing will be, can the state maintain the program?" Iacopino said. "And if they don't, and anyone who's deemed a sexually violent predator is supposed to receive treatment and doesn't, they would have a valid right to sue the state of New Hampshire."

In 2007, the New York Times reported on a Florida facility's failure to adequately treat sexually violent predators confined to its care. The private contractor providing the care blamed the state, saying it had not budgeted enough money for proper treatment.
- The usual thing to do, blame someone else!

The men in the Florida facility were having sex with one another or staff, assaulting staff and hiding knives in their rooms, the Times reported. One escaped on a helicopter that set down within the facility. In 2005, 35 percent of the offenders were not attending therapy, and only one of the hundreds committed had earned a recommendation for release, the Times said.

Iacopino and others said the state has to be ready to adequately pay for the law it passed.

"If our intention is to lock these people up for the rest of their lives, and that does appear to be some peoples' intentions, it's going to be a cost at least as much as incarcerating them, and in some states, twice as much," said public defender Mark Larsen, who is supervising the defense of sex offenders targeted for confinement and treatment under the new law.

Future cases

In August, a second sex offender, _____, will go on trial in Hillsborough County to face civil commitment. And state officials have been asked to assess another sex offender from Keene to see if he meets the definition of sexually violent predator.

It's those potentially high costs that concern Iacopino.

"I'm afraid of a future where we have these nice rules but where (sexually violent predators) will end up being warehoused," he said.
- That is exactly what the prisons do, and the next will be concentration camps (leper colonies).  Ring a bell?

In New Hampshire, sexual predators such as _____ are committed for up to five years at a time if a jury believes they suffer from a mental abnormality that makes them likely to commit more acts of sexual violence.

That's what a Hillsborough County Superior Court jury concluded about _____, 49, last week. He has served a 10-year sentence for sexually assaulting a boy twice in the 1990s and admitted to prison officials that he had 20 to 50 other victims, children included.
- So did anybody actually review this to see if he actually has had that many victims, or are they just taking his word for it?  We all know many people with mental problems, say they did things, they did not.  Take Charles Mansion or Henry Lee Lucas for example?  They lied all the time, and bragged about it!  I am not saying what he says is not true, but where are the facts?

A state mental health expert testified that he believes _____ continues to suffer from pedophilia in a way that makes him unable to control himself and that he's likely to commit more sexually violent acts.
- So is this based on the one case of the abuse of a boy twice, or his words about 20 to 50 victims?  If you have no proof he actually has 20 to 50 victims, but only the sexual abuse of one boy twice, I don't think that results in someone being a pedophile, by definition, unless he said he prefers children only.  But I'm no expert either, I'm just saying!

_____ or his treatment providers can petition the court anytime between now and five years for his early release if they believe treatment has made him safe to be in the community. If the petition comes from the provider, a court must hold a hearing on the request. If it comes from _____, it can hold the hearing or dismiss the request outright.

At the end of five years, _____ will be freed unless prosecutors can persuade the court that he still suffers from a mental abnormality that makes him dangerous. If the court agrees, _____ will be recommitted for up to five more years, a process that can be repeated indefinitely.

_____'s public defenders will monitor his treatment and progress as much as they are able, Larsen said. He'd like _____ and other offenders to have more rights before the court to request their early release and clearer language in the law allowing offenders' lawyers to intervene in their care if it is not adequate.

Larsen hesitated to guess what _____'s experience might be like. He said he believes the state will find it challenging to create an effective program immediately - especially since there is such disagreement over what treatment is best and whether treatment helps.

"Nationwide, either they're not treating them or they don't have any effective treatment because people aren't getting out," Larsen said. "The jury is still out on what is effective treatment. It's not one of those areas where the answers are absolutely clear."

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)

TX - Column - Greg Abbott: 1,000 reasons for safety

View the article here

I am so sick and tired of self righteous, idiotic, egocentric, ignorant, boasting, grand standing politicians who spread lies to further their own holier than thou agenda to make themselves look like they are actually doing something, while exploiting peoples fears and sex offenders to look good to the sheeple of this country.  It just makes me want to puke!  Instead of the old way of obeying the Constitution, they constantly trample on peoples rights for temporary (if any) safety!  See these famous quotes from the good men of the past.  Where have the good men and women gone?


AUSTIN - Young Texans are literally the future of this great state.

As law enforcement officers, we must do all we can to protect children.
- And nothing about these laws will do that.  It's just laws to further punish and shame those who have already served their time (see above comments also), instead of actually doing something.  These laws are nothing more than a placebo to make the public think they are doing something.

When it comes to convicted sex offenders who have been release and are back on the streets, we must be especially vigilant. There are far too many stories about sexual predators who get out of prison, only to strike again.
- And you are basing this on what?  Your own emotions?  Why not look at the facts?  Here, I'll point you to many studies which disprove what this idiot is saying.

These previously convicted offenders have already proven they are a threat to innocent children.
- Some have, yes, but you are lumping all sex offenders into one large group, as if they are all ticking time bombs ready to explode. Well, when you pass insane laws, forcing people to live under bridges, without jobs, homes, friends, food, then yeah, eventually these time bombs created by you and your laws, may eventually explode.  Just look back in history at how others, who have been treated in similar fashion, have worked out.  Eventually they started fighting back against the corruption of the government, which we apparently have in today's world, just look around you.

So, it is critically important that law enforcement closely monitor these offenders - and react swiftly if they violate the terms of their release.
- So tell me Mr. Idiot, how is any of this punishment and trampling on citizens rights, going to protect ANY child from someone who is intent on committing a crime?  You care to answer that question?  The online registry is nothing more than a public shaming list, and is increasingly becoming a hit-list for those in the public, which have been stirred up by the media and idiots like you, using false statistics and lies, to locate and hunt down sex offenders to enact their own punishment.  Yep, you sure are solving a lot of problems!  You are creating crime to keep the fear and prison business rolling!

To help crack down on sexual predators, I established a Fugitive Unit that locates and arrests sex offenders who either fail to register with local authorities or violate their parole conditions.
- More grandstanding and boasting!  No, what you have done is eradicated people's rights, forced people to lose their jobs, their homes, family, friends, and have forced them into leper colonies under bridges, overpasses, etc.  That is what you have done, you have basically ignored the constitution, to look "tough on crime," while doing nothing to help solve the problem!  It's called grandstanding and boasting for a reason!

With the arrest of our 1,000th child sex offender last month, we reached an important milestone.
- So what have you done as far as treatment for those 1,000 people to help prevent them from committing whatever they did?  All you did was lock them up for years, no treatment in prison, kicked them out of prison, then kicked them out of their job, home and families.  Now, eventually, those who are forced to live like this, will eventually result to crime to survive, and possibly vanish.  When you treat people like animals, remove their humanity and dignity, eventually they will become the monsters you are creating.  You know, this country sounds like Hitler is running it more and more each day, to me anyway.

Fugitive Unit officers arrested _____, 46, for violating his parole after he reported to work in Houston without all of his mandatory monitoring equipment. In 1989, _____ was convicted of indecency with a child by exposure in Nueces County. His victims were four young children whose ages ranged from 8 to 11.

Importantly, these 1,000 arrests would not have been possible without the close cooperation with police departments, sheriff's offices and other law enforcement agencies across Texas.
- So, these people helped catch these people, so why are you boasting about something you did not do?

That collaboration has been crucial to our successes - especially considering the fact that the Fugitive Unit had only five staff members when we created it in 2003.
- So tell me, what constitutes success to you?  The more people you lock up, or the less number of people you lock up?  I'll vote for the latter, because that shows something is working!

In 2007, the Texas Legislature authorized additional funding that allowed the OAG to expand the Unit. With this funding, we established regional offices in the greater Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth areas, which allowed us to respond more quickly and effectively to protect children.
- And all that money could have been used to work on prevention, but you would rather stick with the punishment and torture aspects instead!

Since opening the Houston office in 2007 and the Fort Worth office in 2008, these regional offices have improved our ability to protect Texas children. Thanks to coordinated efforts with local law enforcement, Fugitive Unit arrests increased more than 130 percent.
- So, you care to elaborate on how this has "improved" your ability to "protect" children?

The Fugitive Unit's efforts are complemented by our Cyber Crimes Unit, which cracks down on child pornographers and sexual predators who use the Internet to prey upon children. To date the Cyber Crimes Unit has arrested more than 100 child predators.

Just as we partner with local law enforcement to crack down on criminals, we also partner with legislators to help ensure the law stays up with criminals.

To adequately protect our fellow Texans, law enforcement must have the right legal tools.

State Sen. Florence Shapiro and state Rep. Aaron Pena authored a law that would update state sex offender registration laws. If enacted, their legislation would require convicted sex offenders to provide their e-mail addresses, mobile telephone numbers, social networking aliases and other electronic identification information to the Department of Public Safety's sex offender registry.
- Yep, who cares about the constitution and people's "right to privacy!"  It's only a piece of paper!  So how many rights are you going to trample on to feel better about yourselves that your insanity is working?  Why don't you just tear up the constitution, and tell everyone in the US they have NO rights anymore.  Let's see how well that goes.  Of course, you'd have a major riot on your hands, so you eradicate them slowly, so the sheeple do not know what is going on.  Check out this gem of a video!

With access to this information, law enforcement can help ensure that offenders are complying with their parole requirements and make the Lone Star State safer for young Texans.

"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (Bill Of Rights)