Wednesday, September 9, 2009

TX - More government, more child molestation?

View the article here

Make sure you view the Police Chief Magazine link. It's full of crap, IMO. Or view the PDF here.

09/09/2009

By Howard Nemerov

As state and local governments create more restrictions over where registered sex offenders may live, there might be dangerous, unintended consequences. Experts now claim that these laws, passed to keep sex offenders away from places where children congregate, result in what they call “clustering.”

When police raided the home of convicted sex offender Phillip Garrido and freed Jaycee Lee Dugard, a girl who'd been kidnapped 18 years earlier, they were astounded to learn that more than 100 other sex offenders lived is [sic] the same area.

Experts say this “clustering” may keep registered sex offenders away from schools and playgrounds, but as they congregate together in smaller and smaller areas, other problems arise:

“Packing them away from cities means there are fewer treatment options, less oversight and less support,” say Miai Christopher, executive director of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. “And stability is the most important element in keeping sex offenders from committing further crimes.”

“It is not where they aren’t living that is the problem, it is where they are,” says Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. “If you put these guys together it will lead to a higher incidence of sex abuse as they talk about this stuff. I see it as a dangerous trend.”

- Ernie Allen is an idiot who wants to be an expert. If you listen to him, you'd be under the impression that sex offenders are getting together to carry out some mass molestation or something. Give me a break!

How this relates to Liberty

First of all, this article is not some politically-correct defense of sexual predators.

There appears to be a consensus among law enforcement that convicted child molesters are likely to suffer greatly if allowed to live among the general prison population, so they are often isolated in (more expensive) secured areas. From Police Chief Magazine:

…child molesters fear going to prison. They have heard and read stories about what happens to child molesters in prison.
- And the police allow it, and even instigate it, in many cases. See this article for one example.

For many, there would probably be support for President Obama if he promoted this “public option.”

The issue here is how passing more laws can have unintended, harmful consequences to those the laws are supposed to protect, but not those passing the laws.

It is most important to remember that government agencies have immunity from criminal prosecution, based upon Supreme Court decisions. In other words, if predation increases after your state legislature passes restrictive housing laws for sex offenders, you have no recourse beyond changing the laws after the fact. You, and your children, are on your own.

In Austin, clustering appears to be happening. Performing a search at the Texas Department of Public Service (DPS) “Sex Offender Registry” for zip code 78701 returned the following results.
- Of course it's going to happen, it's common sense.  You force them to live by unconstitutional buffer zones, which no evidence has been produced to show they actually do anything, except exile people, of course they are going to congregate together.  It's not rocket science!


This area defines East Austin, which is a lower-income area for the most part. The red dots are for what DPS defines as a “high risk” offender; purple dots represent “moderate risk” offenders; yellow dots “low risk.” The gray-green dots represent “unknown risk” offenders, which may mean they are harmless or dangerous.

There are two clear clusters of “high-risk” offenders:
  • Around the intersection of Highways 183 and 290.
  • A rectangular area between Highway 183 and Springdale Road, south of Farm Market Road 969 and north of 1st Street.

Moderate risk” offenders reside mostly within the entire area between Highways 183 and 35, but not east or west of it.

There appears to be an economic factor involved as well. The following DPS search was for zip code 78734, where the upscale bedroom communities of Bee Cave and Lakeway reside. There are very few sex offenders in these areas, despite the fact that there are more secluded areas west of Austin. So there’s more to this issue than “packing them away from cities.”


In any case, consider this article a public service: Keep up on the issue, carry concealed, and love your children by keeping an eye on them and teaching them to beware of friendly strangers.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


CA - Inmate says jailers ordered fatal attack

View the article here

09/09/2009

By RACHANEE SRISAVASDI

Stephen Carlstrom contends he shouldn't be charged in jail assault.

An inmate charged in a high-profile jailhouse killing filed a $100 million claim today against the county, blaming deputies for ordering the fatal attack on _____.

Stephen Paul Carlstrom, 40, is one of nine inmates awaiting trial for the October 2006 death of _____ in Theo Lacy Jail. Authorities allege Carlstrom and other inmates stomped and tortured _____ – whom they believed was a child molester. _____ was awaiting trial on misdemeanor charges of possessing child pornography.

Carlstom, who was serving time on a drug charge, says he is innocent of killing _____, and pointed blame at Deputies Kevin Taylor and Jason Chapluk, who he claims ordered the attack, according to the claim, filed by attorney Richard Herman.

"My life has been destroyed,'' Carlstrom wrote.

He also alleged inmates must adhere to a culture of "discipline by violence,'' including obeying jail guards when they order them to beat other inmates.

The accusation of deputy-ordered violence isn't new.

Taylor and Chapluk – who are no longer with the Sheriff's Department – were criminally investigated during a grand jury probe of _____'s death. But prosecutors said there was not sufficient evidence to charge the deputies.
- Of course not, it's a criminals word against deputies word, and we all know who is going to be believed!

Sheriff interviews obtained by the Register show that one defendant, inmate Jared Petrovich, alleged that Carlstrom gave him a message from Deputy Taylor. According to Petrovich, Taylor wanted to meet. It was during that meeting, Petrovich alleged, that Taylor and Chapluk labeled _____ as a molester. Carlstrom could provide key confirmation of Petrovich's story.

Carlstrom doesn't go to trial until February. He and other inmates, though, have asked a judge to throw out all charges against them – arguing they were singled out for prosecution while sheriff's deputies escaped being charged with any crimes. A hearing on that motion is scheduled for Sept. 18.

The _____ killing sparked multiple investigations that ended with the retirements or dismissals of several sheriff's employees, including two assistant sheriffs. Testimony before a special grand jury revealed an atmosphere of abuse and misconduct at the Theo Lacy Jail, where deputies slept on duty, neglected their rounds and recruited inmates to police each other, often by force.

In December, the U.S. Department of Justice launched a civil rights investigation into Orange County's jail system. Meanwhile, Sheriff Sandra Hutchens has initiated several upgrades and new policies intended to improve jail operations.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


How Judge Judy and CNN report bogus statistics using disinformation (And is Judge Judy an expert on sex offenders?)

Judge Judy, former family court judge and small claims TV personality (a wanna-be experts on sex offender issues), was on Larry King last night ranting about needing tougher laws on sex offenders because of the recent Garrido case. She said, "If only 25% of offenders are not going to re-offend then why should we put 75% of our children at risk?" Weird logic there. But then, while she continued, CNN put the caption at the bottom of the screen, "Judge Judy: 75% will re-offend".  Just goes to show you, a lot of people are very ignorant when it comes to recidivism, and claim or want to be, experts!  Yet the REAL EXPERTS tell you the recidivism rates are low. State specific studies here.

Video Link





CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Interview With Judge Judy

Aired September 8, 2009 - 21:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE JUDITH SHEINDLIN, HOST, "JUDGE JUDY": Listen to me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, Judge Judy is outraged that rapist Phillip Garrido was let out of prison, free to allegedly snatch little Jaycee Dugard off the street and then keep her locked in a shed for 18 years. TV's tough talker puts sex offenders on notice they'll be behind bars forever if she ever has her way.

Plus, exclusive -- the police detective's daughter who was kidnapped and murdered. She dialed 911 from the killer's own phone. A witness who knew she was in trouble made another frantic call.

Why didn't police find Denise Lee before it was too late?

Her husband speaks publicly for the first time since her murder's trial about the heartbreaking crime that left two children without a mother and could send a monster to the chair.

Next on LARRY KING LIVE.

Good evening.

One reminder. Following the president's speech tomorrow to both elements of Congress, we will follow it with a major panel discussion. That's following President Obama's health speech tomorrow night, a major panel discussion right here.

Judy Sheindlin presides over the top rated TV court show, "Judge Judy." The 14th season of "Judge Judy" premiers on Monday night. Congratulations.

Let's get right to things at hand, the Jaycee Dugard case. This is a girl kidnapped -- kidnapped at age 11, allegedly held captive by this convicted rapist and his wife for 18 years, bore two daughters, finally found and freed.

You're a mother, you're a grandmother, you're a judge. Give me your read.
- Why don't you talk with real experts instead of wanna-be's?

SHEINDLIN: Well, first of all, I don't think she was allegedly was kidnapped. She was kidnapped and I don't think...

KING: Well, he's the alleged person. And we (INAUDIBLE)...

SHEINDLIN: He's the alleged person. There are certain things that we know, which...

KING: I didn't say she was allegedly...

SHEINDLIN: Yes, you...

KING: I said allegedly held captive by a convicted...

SHEINDLIN: And there's no question she was held captive.

KING: She didn't leave (INAUDIBLE).

SHEINDLIN: She's 11 years old.

KING: OK.

SHEINDLIN: She's held captive. The only question is who did it and...

KING: We kind of think this guy may have done.

SHEINDLIN: Yes, I think he may have done it. I think that the thing that should outrage people is that he was out of prison. And you and I have talked about that before. So I was thinking -- and I said I have to kvetch -- call and fetch to Larry.

Parole boards have to say to themselves, as every person in the criminal justice system -- involved in the system has to say to themselves, the safety of the community is our primary responsibility. Rehabilitation is second, because rehabilitation, as far as we know, hasn't worked in the vast majority of cases where we've tried it, because the recidivism rate is well over half and probably close to 70 percent.
- Hmm, over half.  So we have about 700,000 sex offenders in the US, so that would be 350,000 offenders!  Wow, and what study did you hear that from?  Or did you pull it out of your own a-- like most wanna-be experts do?  I have many studies here and here, and if you care to know the facts, instead of BS statistics, then read them.

So despite the trillions of dollars that we spend, rehabilitation doesn't work. Therefore, the safety of the community has to be number one.
- So what proof do you have rehabilitation doesn't work?  I like dealing in facts, not someone's personal opinion, and I think the REAL experts who treat offenders and not sentence them to prison, would know more of what works and what doesn't work then some hack judge!

And here is a man who was sentenced federally to 50 years in prison. And he was paroled from a federal penitentiary after serving 11 years. Because he had also committed a state offense by raping a 24-year-old woman in the State of Nevada, he was transported back to the State of Nevada, where he had been sentenced to five to 15 years.

I guess the State of Nevada said if it was good enough for the Feds to let him go, who are we to keep him?

So after seven months, they let him go.

The one thing in all the reading that I have tried to do is tried to find out what was in the mind of the people who signed off on paroling him. That would be the interesting thing -- not even so much why the parole officer didn't find them. Some people are very devious and some parole officers are terrific and some are dumb. So it's -- that's possible. But what was in the minds of the people...
- Why don't you contact them and ask?

KING: How would we know that unless we asked them?
- My point exactly!

SHEINDLIN: You can ask them.
- Why don't you ask them Judy?

KING: We asked one guy at the head of the state board. He explained it. That, you know, that's the time. He had a parole hearing. You know, if...
- Yeah, and that is how it works.  If that is actually the truth.  You go before a parole board, and if they feel like the man is not a threat and deserves parole, then they let him have it.  I'm sure if it was up to many hateful judges on the bench (like you) they'd all be sentence to death!

SHEINDLIN: (INAUDIBLE).

KING: I'm going to be a devil's advocate, weirdly, in this case, which is impossible almost.

Under your system, why have any parole then the communities are guaranteed safe. Nobody gets out.
- That is not true Larry, come on.  If he is sentenced to 10 years, no parole, then he will be out in 10 years free to come and go.  So you solve nothing, you just put it off for awhile.

SHEINDLIN: My...

KING: You'd need more prisons.

SHEINDLIN: Under my -- first of all, no one explained why he was released, because that report has been sealed. I have not seen that report anywhere. If somebody wants to send it to us you and I can renew this debate. But that report...
- Maybe he was released by a parole board, who, through investigating his criminal past and record, determined he was not a threat.  Come on, nobody is perfect, but I'm sure you think you are.

KING: I'm not debating you.

SHEINDLIN: That report has been sealed. But there are certain criteria. In my world, the first criteria would be would you want this person to live next door to you?
- What a witch!  There is MANY people I'd not want to live next door to me, like the drunks next door who party all the time, but that doesn't mean I have a right to tell them to move.  Glad we don't live "in your world!" Hell, I'd not want YOU living next door to me!

If the answer to that question is no, you need not proceed further with this questionnaire, because it is irrelevant whether he ate his broccoli, whether he finished his string beans, whether he got his GED.

KING: You're talking about rapists and molesters, right?
- No, she is doing like most people do, treating all sex offenders as if they are child molesting pedophile predators, which is a flat out lie.  5% or less are truly dangerous, and less than that are actually pedophiles, based on the definition.

SHEINDLIN: I'm talking...

KING: You're not talking...

SHEINDLIN: I'm talking about...

KING: You agree that a bank robber could be rehabilitated?

SHEINDLIN: I'm saying any...

KING: Could a bank robber be?

SHEINDLIN: ...violent felon who is sentenced after a trial by a judge who has heard from the victims, heard from the witnesses -- a violent felon, someone who goes into your home and burglarizes your home with you in it at night and holds a knife to your throat while they go through your property and takes your wife and holds a knife to her throat and then goes into your baby's room and grabs them out of bed...
- Wow, nice job avoiding that question!

KING: But how do you...

SHEINDLIN: ...that's a violent crime.

KING: ...how do you write that law because a violent felon would also be a husband who hits his wife and is sentenced to six months and you'd keep him forever?

SHEINDLIN: No, no, no.

KING: Why?

That's violent.

SHEINDLIN: The answer, if you would want, if you would feel comfortable having this person, with this entire history, living next to you, check it off and go to question number two -- finished his GED, finished all of this.

What I think people fail to realize in the criminal justice system is that those people, if they're smart enough -- and we hope that they're smart -- have heard from victims, have seen the evidence, have seen the photographs and if you are removed...

KING: So what is your conclusion?

Are they idiots?

SHEINDLIN: No, but they are...

KING: Are they malicious?

SHEINDLIN: No. But they're looking at the one person who's sitting before them. And they're saying to themselves, well, he did he's done everything he was supposed to do. That was 10 years ago.

(CROSSTALK)

SHEINDLIN: He's turned around. He's a born-again.

KING: Can't people testify at parole hearings -- victims -- against him?

SHEINDLIN: Well, they weren't even -- in -- in this case, in Jaycee's case, they weren't the -- the prior victim wasn't even notified of the hearing.
- How do you know that? Did you talk with them?  Or are you assuming again?

KING: Now, that's -- that's absurd.
- And Larry believed it hook line and sinker!

SHEINDLIN: Wasn't notified of the hearing. Nor was the prosecutor. So the only person who was interviewed...

KING: Was the...

SHEINDLIN: Was the defendant.

KING: (INAUDIBLE).

SHEINDLIN: ...was the subject of the proceeding. That's ridiculous.

KING: As she said, Phillip Garrido was on parole when Jaycee was abducted. Judge Judy has voiced her strong opinions on sex offenders, incarceration and rehab many times on this show, so this is not like a new view.

Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Isn't the whole purpose of the system rehabilitation?
- Well, it was, now it's about nothing but punishment!

SHEINDLIN: Well, Larry, that's -- that's part of the purpose of the system.

KING: Punishment is a purpose, too?

SHEINDLIN: I think punishment is a big part of it. Part of it is to keep society -- and a big piece is to keep society safe, for me. Incarceration is supposed to keep the community safe from your behavior. And if you don't -- because rehabilitation, despite the fact that we've spent trillions of dollars on various forms of rehabilitation...
- Yep, another person admitting prison and I'm sure she knows the sex offender laws are punishment as well, but I'm sure she'd not admit that.

The only way to rehab cure a pedophile is to kill him. There is no other cure. And what has happened in...
- Wow, this coming from a judge?  Yep, I am so glad you are not running this country, we'd be the next Iran!

KING: You can capitally punish a convicted pedophile.
- No!

SHEINDLIN: I mean, you know, unless you want to put him somewhere in the Sahara and make sure that they can't get away.
- And all this is based on what evidence?  Some bogus statistic of high recidivism rate?  Wow, the system is totally screwed!  These are the type of people we do NOT need to be judges!  They run on their own personal emotions, and not EVIDENCE!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Were the police negligent in failing to find Jaycee Dugard?

That's tonight's Quick Vote question. You go to CNN.com/larryking and tell us what you think.

Sex offender registries -- what about them?

Do you think they're good?

We'll ask Judge Judy next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TINA DUGARD, JAYCEE DUGARD'S AUNT: Jaycee and her daughters are with her mom and younger sister in a secluded place reconnecting. I was with them until recently. We spent time sharing memories and getting to know each other again. Jaycee remembers all of us. She is especially enjoying getting to know her little sister, who was just a baby when Jaycee was taken.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Now, what do you think of the idea of a registry -- that we all know where they are?

SHEINDLIN: We know that they're...

KING: After they're paroled or have served their time?
- Why do commentators not let people finish sentences?

SHEINDLIN: I guarantee you, Larry, not one of them is living next to you in Beverly Hills and not one of them is living next to me in Greenwich. Not one of them is living next to me -- next door to me in Naples, Florida.
- I guarantee you they are.  And what does that have to do with the question?

The question has to be, if you would not be comfortable paroling this person to live next door to you...

KING: Everything goes back to you?

SHEINDLIN: Everything -- no. Everything goes back to common sense.
- Common sense?  Nothing you said, IMO, is common sense!

KING: Thinking of the...

SHEINDLIN: Everything goes back to common sense. Sure, it's wonderful to feel as if the human condition can be changed, the mind can be rewired, we can do -- everybody can do better, you can change everybody. And the truth of the matter is, based upon my 40 years experience in the justice system, and added to that my husband's 45 or 50 years in the system, we know that there are certain people that are just wired wrong and evil.
- Wired wrong?  Come on!  Some may be criminally insane, but a vast majority of people can and do change.  You, like many in the injustice system, think criminals are around every corner, I know this is a fact, from experience talking with police and other folks who work in the criminal injustice system.

KING: What does that do to the Judeo-Christian ethos of forgiveness...
- Exactly!  Many in this world are hypocrites who claim to be religious, yet are not.  They basically bend religion to suit themselves.

SHEINDLIN: Well, there's practical.

KING: Change.

SHEINDLIN: There's practical. Practical. And if you are one of those people -- and I heard in a prior clip I say you've got to either have to kill them or put them away so that they can't hurt anybody else. All right. So, capital punishment, whether you're for it or against it -- let's say you're against it -- build more jails. You know, you want to keep them away, build more jails. Make it part of the stimulus package. Not everybody can be -- not everything can be building a bridge and a sewer.
- I do not think stimulus means building more jails to house people like animals.  What a sick and demented person, and a judge no doubt!

KING: Phillip and Nancy Garrido are accused of holding Jaycee Dugard captive in the backyard of their home in Antioch, California. Philip Garrido is a registered sex-offender. If you go to the national sex-offender registry and type in the zip code for this area, you'll find about 100 names there. Authorities say that's a high number. The county has about 1,700 registered sex offenders.

So what do you do with that, though?

Am I -- if I find out that the guy living two blocks away is a registered -- what do I do?

Not go by his house?

Keep the children two blocks away?

SHEINDLIN: You're asking...

KING: What do I do?
- You go on with your life.  Why do we not have all criminals on a registry, so you can live in even more fear?

SHEINDLIN: You're asking me in my world -- in my world, a sex offender, Larry, someone who is a predatory sex offender -- and we're not talking about a 21-year-old kid who has sex with a 15-year-old girl who looks 18 and they're wearing -- is wearing high heels. We're talking about the kind of guy, like this guy, who planned to kidnap a woman, took her to a storage unit that he had outfitted with pornography...
- No, he's asking in the REAL WORLD, not your fantasy land.  And yes, we are talking about truly dangerous people, evaluated by an expert panel, not some judge who thinks they know if someone is dangerous.  And a vast majority of the offenders on the registries, do not come close to this man, yet you treat them all the same.

KING: (INAUDIBLE).

SHEINDLIN: Kept -- held her captive for hours, put her through something from which she will never recover and some genius interviews him 11 years later and says, well, he ate all his broccoli and he got a GED and he married some other lunatic, that he -- who married this sex offender when she was coming to visit another lunatic in federal prison. So we think he's all ready to re-enter society.

The person who recommended that, I'm sure, in the caveat says, she's not -- he's not moving into 90210 zip code. He's not moving into my zip code. He'll go elsewhere. He'll go to Nevada. Maybe Nevada will keep him.

Nevada says we're not going to support this guy. He was good enough for the Feds to parole, we're sending him back to California.

(LAUGHTER)

KING: I don't mean to laugh.

SHEINDLIN: But that's it. Well, so it doesn't all come back to me. It comes back to common sense. And it comes back to the people making the judgments for other people's lives. And their first priority has to be the safety of the community, not whether Phillip ate his green beans.
- The first priority, IMO, should be treating all people based on their constitutional and God given rights of humanity.  And the government cannot protect you, they cannot protect themselves, yet everyone is so willing to let the government dictate their lives for them.

KING: Is there a sex offender living in your neighborhood?

We're going to show you how to find out. We'll do it in 60 seconds.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back with Judge Judy. Her show "Fourteen Years" premiers Monday night.

We've talked about the large numbers of sex offenders living in Phillip Garrido's neighborhood.

What about your neighborhood?

To show you how easy it is, we're putting our zip code here at CNN Los Angeles in the designated box on the site. Our Sarah Schnare is going to call it up now and you'll see where the sex offenders are and who they are, as well.

Sarah is at the machine. She clicks it in. The color is coming up, as I understand it. There they are.
- Wow, you can tell Larry has no clue about technology!  She clicks it in, the color comes up?  Wow!

What do the -- what does all this mean?

SARAH SCHNARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Larry, there are eight categories. But the color you really need to know about is in red. Those are the offenses committed against children. And, as you can see, there's a lot of red.
- So if all you have to know about is the red dots, why are all other offenders on the public shaming list?  It dilutes the registry, and instills more fear than is necessary.  Why monitor all, when only a few are truly dangerous?  And also, if they are so dangerous they need to be monitored all the time, why did an evaluation by experts not deem them a high risk, before sentencing, then sentence them to a long time, or life in prison?

If you click on each square, you'll loan -- you will learn more about the offender -- who he is and what he did and where he lives -- Larry.
- But most registries leave you guessing, they do not go into details of the actual crime.  So again, it instills more fear than is probably necessary!

KING: So we have a lot -- that's our area now?

Whatever. We have a lot of reds in this area.
- I just checked the California registry, and I see NO red dots, but blue dots.  So did someone lie?


SCHNARE: Yes, Larry, we do. As you can see, we've got a lot red. And those are the ones that we really -- I mean we should be concerned about all of the colors, obviously. But the red are those crimes that have been committed against children. Those are the ones we should really be focusing on.

KING: Judge, what's your comment?

SHEINDLIN: My comment is do you want them living next -- do you want all of those reds living next to you?
- Of course they do not.  They'd say that about 100% of them.  I'd not want a serial killer living next to me either, but we do not have a serial killer registry either.  They have to live somewhere, regardless of what you think.

And if the answer is no, people have to start getting real. And there are...
- Yeah, we can start with you "getting real!"

KING: And what?

SHEINDLIN: ...and there are certain people who are just, despite our best efforts and despite all of God's good work, are wired wrong. There's just something in there that we can't take care of. And even if 25 percent of them will not recidivate, are we willing to risk the other 75 percent of our children?
- So you are saying God wired someone wrong, so therefore we should punish and torture them for life? And enough with the BS statistics, which are a total lie.  Why don't you tell us, or provide a link to where you came up with these "out of thin air" statistics?  I can show you many here and here, unlike you!  Sounds to me like you are one of the people who are "wired wrong!" And wow, your logic is pure stupidity!

You know, if you have a sex offender and he -- let us assume that he doesn't grab another child, but instead exposes himself to your six, sweet year old little girl, who's waiting for the school bus.
- You do know that women commit sexual crimes as well?  Sounds like more feminist BS to me, and, once again, you are talking about sex offenders, then use the term "grab a child" as if all sex offenders "grab children," which the FACTS show it not true, yet you continue to help the DISINFORMATION spread with your lies and bogus statistics.  And also, how many people can you show me, who has harms ANY child at a bus stop?

I remember when I was a child, my friend Elaine and I were walking and we were a block away from our home in front of a convent. And a man walked by in a raincoat and flashed us. I was no more than six or seven years old. It is so vivid in my mind today...
- In a raincoat?  Come on.  Sounds like the typical BS stereotype.

KING: You still see it?

SHEINDLIN: I still see it. And there was nothing.

Can you imagine somebody being touched, being fondled?

I can't.

KING: Neither can I.

We have all this information, by the way, on our Web site. Go to cnn.com/larryking, click on our blog for more.

Next, Nancy Garrido, the wife -- is she a victim?

Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DUGARD: Not only have we laughed and cried together, but we've spent time sitting quietly, taking pleasure in each other's company. We are so very grateful to have her home. The smile on my sister's face is as wide as the sea. Her oldest daughter is finally home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Judge, how do you explain -- you're a family court judge.

How would you explain to the two children that Phillip Garrido fathered with this abductee, who know him as a father and know her as a mother?

What would you say to them...

SHEINDLIN: I don't...

KING: He raped...

SHEINDLIN: I don't know, it's not my role.

KING: What's their life?

SHEINDLIN: It's not my role. But you just think of how many victims there are because of somebody's misjudgment. Certainly, she; certainly, her two children; certainly, her mother; her step father, who lived a life under suspicion that he was the one who had something to do with abducting her.

KING: Yes, my God.

SHEINDLIN: And all of the people that were touched by this evil doer, this badly wired evil doer.
- Okay, if people are evil doers and wired wrong, shouldn't they be in a mental hospital getting help?

You know, I remember years ago, my husband did a trial with a pedophile who had a long rap sheet of pedophilia and he appeared before a lot of judges who said there's a chance for him. We have to send him to school -- to sex offender school. He's going to go to school while he's in jail.

And, finally, he committed another rap. He was -- he appeared before Jerry Sheindlin. And his defense was it's not my fault because I'm wired wrong. That's my defense. It may be. It may be.

KING: Because he can't help it?

SHEINDLIN: He can't help it. That was his defense, I can't help myself.
- So, people who are schizophrenics, they are sent to mental hospitals to get help, yet here, you'd rather thrown all the "incorrectly wired" people into prison for life?  God help us!

KING: That's what most pedophiles can't help...
- Well, that is a misconception as well, and any expert who treats pedophiles would tell you that, but, you get some insane "entertainment" judge to tell you how to handle people?

SHEINDLIN: They can't help themselves.

KING: But why would you do this if...

SHEINDLIN: They can't help themselves. We need places for people who can't help themselves. You don't put them back in the community, you put them where they can't hurt anybody.

KING: What about Mrs. Garrido?

SHEINDLIN: What (INAUDIBLE) -- do I sound shrill when I say that?

I am.

KING: Deservedly shrill.

SHEINDLIN: I am.

KING: What about Mrs. Garrido?

What do you make of her?

We've got more to learn here.

SHEINDLIN: We have a lot to learn here. I doubt the sanity of anybody who decides to be a pen pal of a prisoner and then goes and marries them while they're in federal prison. I have to say, what -- what would I tell my daughter -- if my daughter said to me, I'm going to marry a man who's been convicted of a violent rape in a storage unit and we're getting married because we're going to live a happy life together.

I mean, Larry, you're laughing.

KING: (INAUDIBLE).

SHEINDLIN: But what would I say?

What would I say to my daughter?

KING: Right. Sure, yes.

SHEINDLIN: It doesn't make sense, right?

It's absurd. It's absurd.

KING: I mean what was going on in that house?

What do the kids think Mrs. Garrido was?

I mean there were two Mrs. Garridos in the house.

SHEINDLIN: They'll never be able to figure out their lives. You know, they'll try. They'll go to therapy and they'll have bonding sessions and they'll have time together. But their lives will always be screwed up.
- Possibly, but if they do not get help, and society and themselves continue to see themselves as a victim, and screwed up, then yes, it's common sense they probably will be.

You know, little things happen to us during the course of our lives when we were children that stay with us. I read your book. Little things -- I know in my own childhood, little things stayed with me. But we are able to overcome -- you know, they weren't so tragic that we weren't able to overcome. These children can't overcome.
- Yes they can.  Anything can be overcome.  But, if you continue to say that, people will believe it, and see themselves as broken and a victim for life.  I was molested as a child, and I do not see myself as a victim, but a survivor.

KING: What do you think it's like for the children who have been -- were molested by priests?

Do you think that's different?

Or is molesting, molesting?

SHEINDLIN: Molesting is molesting.

Will they ever recover?

These people are wired wrong. And not only are they wired wrong, but they were placed in a position where they knew they were going to be dealing with vulnerable children and they knew what their plan was.
- So by your own comments above, now the victims are victims for life, and will not recover.  So, should we put them in mental institutions because they are broke for life?  No, of course not, but if using your same logic...

KING: Yes. By the way, investigators are looking into other abductions in the area to see if there's any link. And an expert has determined that the bone fragment found in the backyard of Garrido's neighbor is probably human. We'll be requesting the state to see if they can develop a DNA profile on that fragment.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KING: We're back with Judge Judy discussing -- I don't know if this is even discussing -- how do you analyze something like this, why mistakes are made and why this occurred.

Now, you said an interesting thing, that the violent from -- if Bernie Madoff, you did say that if Bernie Madoff developed cancer and had three months to live, he'd probably not be paroled.

SHEINDLIN: Right.

KING: He never killed anyone, never committed a violent crime.

SHEINDLIN: He didn't kill 270 people.

KING: There's someone who killed 270 people and got off?

SHEINDLIN: Not got off, went back to Libya in order to die.

KING: Oh, yah.

SHEINDLIN: Right?

It was -- Scotland said that's what we do. That's compassionate release. He killed 270 people. But I guarantee you that Bernie Madoff will die in jail. He didn't kill anybody. I'm not saying that he should -- that they should release him. If, God forbid, he had cancer, he should die in jail with whatever medical facilities that they have for him.

But I'm saying to you that the system is screwed up, Larry. That every person in law enforcement -- kudos to those people who were security people on campus that brought this, ultimately, to the attention of the authorities.
- I agree, the system is screwed up, thanks to the like of you, and many others who don't listen to facts, but only hate and punishment!

And there will be people out there who will say, well, she operated on a hunch and we don't like law enforcement people to operate on hunches. Well, having been in law enforcement, I will tell you, as a judge, I always felt my first responsibility was to protect the public -- do justice, but to protect the public. And that's where people should come from. That's the primary job of the president of the United States, to make sure that his country is safe.

KING: Right.

SHEINDLIN: Primary job, that's what his job is. Primary job of a governor, a mayor, judges, police officers, those people who are charged with the judgment of making the rest of us safe, that has to be their first question.
- I see you are one of the many sheeple of this country.  Nobody can protect you, except yourself.  Stop relying on the corrupt government, who cannot even protect themselves, to determine how you live your life.

KING: Speaking of judgment, I'm going to be talking with Nathan Lee very shortly. His wife Denise was abducted from their Florida home. She was raped and killed in January of 2008.

Last week, a jury unanimously recommended the death penalty for her murder. Reports on this case, it seems like a horribly random crime, and the perpetrator apparently had no criminal record. Now, this was a woman who had the perpetrator's cell phone, dialed 911, nothing.

SHEINDLIN: So you're not suggesting that it's the cell phone's fault that nothing happened, that it was the 911 operator.

And Larry, may have no criminal history, you know, there are laws throughout this country that say, well, if you're 18 and 17 and 19, 20 years old, you can be a juvenile offender, and if you eat all your broccoli, we'll -- and eat your green beans, we're going to expunge your record after a certain period of time, seal it so that nobody can ever look at it and say, what's your history?
- Yeah, and that is how it should be.  What about all the potential innocent people you sent to prison?  Should we all be able to see that and use it against you when (God forbid) you try to get another job in the justice system?

So I don't know whether he has a history or not. I don't know enough about it. But, he was convicted of a horrendous act, and you and I have had discussions on the death penalty before.

I don't know what the majority of the people in this country would say if they were queried, but the last time I heard, most people in this country, the majority of people in the country say that should be an option. Not necessarily the option, but it should be an option for the system.
- Not in my opinion.  Murder is murder, doesn't matter who is doing the killing.  Maybe life in prison, but death? I don't think so!

KING: It's a little scary when you find that over 200 people on death row have been released, they didn't do it. The guy just died as an arsonist who didn't commit the arson. How do you redress that grievance?

SHEINDLIN: I'm going to ask you this question, Larry. Somebody was released because they allegedly did not commit a rape, a horrendous rape, based allegedly on DNA evidence that they did not commit a rape. And within, I don't know if it was a year or six months of release -- do you remember how long, Jerry? Two months of his release, he did it to somebody else. Now do you think he was getting even?
- What?  We are talking about innocent people who have been found not guilty due to DNA, and you are talking about someone else!  Another way to dodge the question!

I think that sometimes things can be manipulated. So I don't know the answer to that.

But in a clear-cut case, where there is no issue as to whether or not this was the perpetrator of this atrocity, I believe in my soul that that should be an option, and certainly there should not be any opportunity for that person to get out ever.
- So I take it you are not a religious person?  God said "Though shall not kill!" Period!

KING: You were a family court judge. This is a question, the last one before you leave us.

SHEINDLIN: OK.

KING: Could you sentence someone to death?

SHEINDLIN: Yes. I could. I could.
- What?  A family court judge can sentence someone to death?  Now that is a scary thought.  I thought if someone was to be sentenced to possible death, they'd be before a different judge, not a family court judge.  I think she's insane personally.

I think that if the state where I was sitting had that as an option, and there was no question in my mind that this was the perpetrator, and I listened to the family, which you do now, and the family said to me, "I would sleep better knowing that this person wasn't breathing, that my daughter and her children who he killed during the course of a home invasion robbery" -- no question, they found him in the home with a knife, confessed. He said I was high on LDS, it was the LDS that made me do it.
- So you are basing this on testimony and not EVIDENCE?  Maybe you should make yourself more clear.  And I think it's LSD not LDS!  And yes, drugs can make you do stuff you'd normally not do.  It seems like someone like you would know that...  Guess not!

KING: You could send him to his death?

SHEINDLIN: I could say arrivederci.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Arrivederci judge, but for a short time. I'll be back.

KING: She's always back. She's Judge Judy, 14 years in that slot, doing it again Monday night, another year.

Next, the husband whose life was forever changed by a killer. His victim, a wife and mother did everything right. They called 9/11. So did a witness listen? Don't go away.

The rest has been removed, since it's not relevant to this issue.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


ARC RADIO: George Maschke from AntiPolygraph.org

Hosted by: RealityUSA

Title: George Maschke from AntiPolygraph.org

Time: 09/09/2009 02:00 PM EDT

Episode Notes: Please join us SEPT 9TH-2pm Eastern, as we here at American's Reality Check (ARC) welcome Special Guest George W. Maschke (www.antipolygraph.org) POLYGRAPH "testing" has no scientific basis: it's entirely dependent on your ignorance and fear.

Educate yourself. In this book, you will discover the trickery on which polygraph "testing" depends, and learn how to make sure you pass your polygraph "test." Our government's reliance on unreliable polygraph "testing" is both a danger to our national security and a hazard to the reputations of law-abiding citizens whose trustworthiness is judged by this voodoo science. The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (PDF) exposes polygraph waste, fraud, and abuse.

The dirty little secret behind the polygraph is that the "test" depends on trickery, not science. The person being "tested" is not supposed to know that while the polygraph operator declares that all questions must be answered truthfully, warning that the slightest hint of deception will be detected, he secretly assumes that denials in response to certain questions -- called "control" questions -- will be less than truthful.

An example of a commonly used control question is, "Did you ever lie to get out of trouble?" The polygrapher steers the examinee into a denial by warning, for example, that anyone who would do so is the same kind of person who would commit the kind of behavior that is under investigation and then lie about it. But secretly, it is assumed that everyone has lied to get out of trouble.

Q. What is the Employee Polygraph Protection Act? How does it apply to government agencies like police departments?

A. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 (29 U.S.C. Chapter 22) is a law designed to protect private sector employees from polygraphs and other purported lie-detection devices. It was enacted in the wake of numerous allegations of abusive behavior by polygraphers and after a number of studies concluded that polygraph accuracy was unacceptable.

A number of prominent organizations such as the American Medical Association and American Civil Liberties Union testified in support of its passage. Generally, this law prevents private employers from even requesting that an employee or job applicant submit to a polygraph or any other type of "lie-detection" test (CVSA, etc.).

There are a number of exemptions, which include:
  • Employers under contract with the federal government for defense/energy/law-enforcement purposes;
  • Employers whose primary business involves providing armored car personnel, burglar alarm system personnel, or security personnel whose function includes protection of facilities that have a significant impact on the health and/or safety of any state or municipality (power plants, water supply facilities, etc.);
  • Employers authorized to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance.

In addition, all private sector employers may request that any employee submit to a polygraph interrogation if the employer is investigating a specific loss. However, the employee has the right to refuse the polygraph in this situation and may not be fired/demoted/disciplined/denied promotion solely on the basis of this refusal.

Government employers, such as law enforcement agencies, are completely exempt from this legislation. This exemption applies to all levels of government: federal, state, and local. This means that government entities have carte blanche to use the polygraph however they see fit with virtual impunity.



"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


Immunity for Web Site Owners

Click the image to read the article



"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


CA - How Fox News uses deceptive titles, making it "appear" as if all sex offenders are pedophiles!

View the article here

09/09/2009

Original Title: Growing Pedophile Clusters are Shelters for Sex Offenders, Danger Zones for Public
- Hey Fox, not all sex offenders are pedophiles.  And the very laws you are promoting, and the states are passing, force sex offenders to cluster.  Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that one out.

When police raided the home of convicted sex offender Philip Garrido and freed Jaycee Lee Dugard, a girl who'd been kidnapped 18 years earlier, they were astounded to learn that more than 100 other sex offenders lived is the same area.
- Astounded?  Come on!  What a load of BS!  The very laws cause this clustering.  And why are people shocked? Don't you read the laws and check the registry?  Apparently not!

What they discovered is a trend that has been raising concerns among cops, local officials and experts across the country who study efforts to rein in sex offenders.
- Hell, even before passing the law, if they were actually thinking, they could've figured this out a long time ago.  It's COMMON SENSE, which we have very little of these days!

It is called clustering -- and it is raising alarms from coast to coast, from Florida to Iowa to California.
- Yeah, in Florida, they have FORCED over 80, and at one time, over 100 offenders to live like lepers under a bridge.

As states and municipalities have enacted laws that bar registered sex offenders from living near schools, playgrounds and other places where children congregate, they have been forced to settle down in more remote, often rural, areas where restrictions haven’t been imposed or there is enough space to avoid them.

Experts call that a recipe for disaster that could create far more danger to the public and undo all the work that imposing restrictive living measures for offenders has tried to accomplish.
- So what is the goal of restricting where someone lives?  Show me in the Constitution where you can dictate where someone can and cannot live!

That certainly was the case when police rescued Dugard, who was abducted in 1991 when she was 11 years old. Garrido, who lived in an unincorporated area near the run-down city of Antioch, Calif., just outside San Francisco, allegedly held her in a warren of tents in his back yard and fathered two children by her.

But Garrido wasn't the only one who was drawn to Antioch. It was the legal void that unincorporated areas provide -- a place where isolation and “a mind-your-own-business” attitude are cherished -- that attracted more than 100 other sex offenders to that one zip code, 94509. And it was that attitude that many say allowed Dugard's captivity to go on for so long.

And Antioch isn’t the only place where such a cluster can happen.
- You are right, it's all across the USSA!

In Iowa, transient hotels outside Des Moines and other cities have largely been taken over by sex offenders who can no longer find legal housing inside the city limits. In addition, there are sex offenders who work and stay in Iowa cities during the day and simply drive out of city limits to sleep in their cars ar night.

In Florida, according to Prof. Jill Levenson, there are more than 100 sex offenders living in a 1-square-mile area of Broward County.

Levenson didn’t name the area, but Broward County has become famous for its inability to find homes for released offenders. Instead it houses them under a bridge on the Julia Tuttle Causeway. The only other location, according to local newspaper reports, is a swampy, isolated trailer park on the far west of the county.

In San Francisco, experts say, sex offenders are making up an ever-growing portion of the homeless population because there is literally nowhere in the city where they can live legally. “One hundred percent of San Francisco’s sex offenders are homeless,” says Robert Coombs of Calcasa, the California Coalition against Sexual Assault, “There is just nowhere they can live in the city.”

There are no national data on clustering. The few cases that are known have usually been found after a crime has been committed, or in the case of the Florida causeway because they were so blatant. This is partly because it is a new trend, and partly because restrictive laws are so new that just keeping up with enforcement has been a problem for police.
- It's not a "new trend!"  It's all due to the very laws they are passing, making it impossible to live almost anywhere, so common sense would tell anybody, sex offenders are going to "cluster" in certain portions of the state.

There are 674,000 convicted sex offenders in the United States. An estimated 100,000 of them have failed to register. And their sheer numbers are overwhelming police efforts to keep track of them, according to police and experts in the field.
- Well, if you'd stop passing unconstitutional laws, and treating all sex offenders as if they are child molesting pedophile predators, and only monitor the ones who have been evaluated and deemed dangerous, then it would not be overwhelming, now would it?

But the prognosis for the future is grim as more and more states, counties and municipalities pass ever stricter sex-offender laws.

The simple fact is that wherever restrictive laws are enacted, there is a good chance that clustering will occur,” Levenson said.

The irony of the situation is that efforts to rid towns of sex offenders may actually be making the situation worse. Experts say that as more governing bodies pass laws restricting where sexual offenders can live, the more inclined they are to find "cluster" areas where they can legally settle.

Packing them away from cities means there are fewer treatment options, less oversight and less support,” say Miai Christopher, executive director of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. “And stability is the most important element in keeping sex offenders from committing further crimes.”

In neighborhoods near the clusters,” according to Levenson, “there is increased fear, people feel unsafe and they worry about whether they are more likely to be the victims of an offense.”

It is not where they aren’t living that is the problem, it is where they are,” says Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. “If you put these guys together it will lead to a higher incidence of sex abuse as they talk about this stuff. I see it as a dangerous trend.”
- Ernie, you are a total retard!  That is just false and your own personal feeling.  Rarely do sex offenders living together talk about this stuff, but your fear-mongering is expected.  By listening to you, you make it sound like they are planning some MASS MOLESTATION or something.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


FL - Man exonerated by DNA to be released

View the article here

More injustice in the state of Florida. If he was found not guilty by DNA, then why do they need to evaluate him as a sex offender before release? He's not a sex offender, since he was exonerated by DNA!

09/09/2009

FORT LAUDERDALE - A Broward County man exonerated by DNA for a 1983 rape and murder will soon be freed, but not after spending one more night behind bars.

Authorities say DNA results released last week excluded 41-year-old _____ as the source of forensic evidence found on the victim. A Broward County judge ordered him freed immediately.

But _____ had to spend another night in jail.

Since he was a convicted sex offender, state officials have to evaluate him under a law used to monitor released sex offenders. By the time the release order was handed over late Tuesday, _____ couldn't be released because no one was available to see him after office hours.
- If he was found innocent by DNA, then he is NOT a sex offender!

_____ was 15 when he was arrested and has served nearly 26 years in prison.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


CT - Homeless Sex Offender: There's No Address to Register

View the article here

09/09/2009

A convicted sex offender says he can't register his address with the state because he doesn't have one. He's homeless.

_____, 49, told a Superior Court judge on Tuesday that he simply cannot comply with state law because he has been living in a tent in the woods, the Waterbury Republican-American reports.

_____ was convicted in 1984 of first-degree sexual assault for the rape of a college student. He was arrested in Wolcott over the weekend and was released on a written promise to appear, which he did on Tuesday.

According to his listing on the sex offender registry, he's listed as homeless and he last verified that with the state in August 2008.

The judge said a non-compliant sex offender couldn't be left "wandering around in the woods." He was placed in handcuffs and brought to a prison cell.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


Sex, Lies & Children

View the article here

09/09/2009

By Lawrence G. Walters, Esq., XBIZ.com

A favorite trick of the censors in this country is to blur the lines between protected speech, in the form of adult erotica on the one hand, with patently illegal material, in the form of child pornography on the other, by mixing the two at every opportunity. Family Values groups and other opponents of free speech routinely use the terms "pornography," "obscenity" and "child pornography," interchangeably, in the attempt to cause confusion in the mind of the public, and intentionally link perfectly legal content with evidence of a horrific crime. The media often plays along, whether through ignorance or complicity, and refers to the new child porn arrest as a "Pornography Bust."

All of this helps convince the public through confusion, that pornography has something to do with abuse of children, and that all of it is probably illegal somehow. In some jurisdictions, law enforcement investigators seize every chance to mix these concepts in a blender, by charging defendants with obscenity as well as child pornography, no matter how remote the connection, or how strong the evidence. Some evidence of this can be found in a couple recent cases initiated by the Polk County, Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd. This is the same Sheriff made famous by declaring that he had jurisdiction to regulate anything online, so long as it was available for download in Polk County, Florida. According to Judd:

"But it makes no difference, because if you fed that server or you could receive information off that server in this county, then it gives us jurisdiction. ... Technically I could charge someone in Kansas, if I received child pornography here, obtained a warrant and had him extradited from Kansas and tried here."

Note the stray reference to "child pornography" there. That particular case had nothing to do with children, but was an adult obscenity case against Chris Wilson, arising from his operation of a user-generated content site. This quote provides a unique glimpse into the strategy of many law enforcement agencies and anti-porn groups, who constantly mention child pornography whenever discussing adult erotica.

Judd's office recently investigated an antique store owner by the name of John Denitto, who engaged in some adult content production on the side. Sheriff's Deputies raided the business based on the claim of a "confidential informant" that a teenager was being photographed there. Leaving aside the fact that a teenager can be 18 or 19 and still legally participate in adult photography, this unconfirmed statement gave law enforcement the hook they needed to raid the modeling studio, under the guise of a child pornography investigation. However, no evidence of child pornography was ever found, and the "confidential informant" turned out to be a former "model" herself, who was trying to buy her way out of her own criminal problems by turning informant for the state. Not the most reliable informant, to put things mildly.

But what does a good Deputy do when his information results in the seizure of nothing more than a bunch of video tapes of adults having sex? File obscenity charges, of course! Not much is required to arrest someone for alleged obscenity. A charging document needs to be filed saying that a prosecutor believes in good faith that there is probable cause that the material is obscene. Polk County usually goes the extra step of getting a local judge to sign off on a confirmation that such probable cause exists, but that is all smoke and mirrors. Any erotic work might be obscene, simply based on its sexually-explicit nature. The question of obscenity is left for the judge or jury. Until that ultimate determination is made, it is presumed to be non-obscene under the First Amendment.

Nonetheless, despite such a presumption, just about anybody involved in the commercial production or distribution of adult material can be prosecuted for obscenity. That is one of the (many) reasons the obscenity laws are unfair, unconstitutional and inhumane in modern society. There is no fair warning as to what material might result in serious felony charges, with implications and innuendo of child pornography to boot. Denitto's felony obscenity case remains pending, and no proof of child pornography ever came to light.

Law enforcement and prosecutors know that as soon as the specter of child pornography is raised, the defendant loses public sympathy, support of friends, and jury appeal. So they try to throw it in any time they can.

In another recent case from Polk County, Sheriff Deputies arrested Timothy Keck for numerous counts of obscenity depicting a minor. This sounds like a valid offense, until the facts get in the way. Keck was a former Sheriff's Deputy himself, until he had a falling out with the agency. Oddly enough, he found himself targeted for some Internet surveillance by that same agency, and a warrant was issued for offenses involving child pornography. Keck allegedly used Limewire, a popular file sharing service, to download various images, including numerous drawings of underage individuals engaged in sexual activity. That's right, drawings. Oh, and the investigators apparently also dug up a single image from a temporary cache file allegedly depicting only the genitals of an underage couple in the act of intercourse. It has not been explained how one divines the age of models based solely on a depiction of their genitals engaged in a sex act. But Keck faces one count of possession of child pornography (for the temp file) and 26 counts of distribution of obscenity, for the drawings. This arrest has been described by Judd as the "largest roundup in the county," and "horrific."

Given that Keck was lumped in with 45 other suspects, all of whom are referred to as a group despite the lack of any apparent connection; some of the other images involved in the other cases may well have been horrifying. Child pornography is a heinous, inexcusable crime, and legitimate cases should be vigorously prosecuted. But when politicians or special interest groups start mixing in allegations of child porn with adult pornography, both children and adults become the losers. Trying to force a tenuous charge of child pornography just to tarnish the reputation of a suspect in an adult obscenity case dilutes and reduces the importance — and indeed the 'horror' — of real child pornography cases. Future child pornography investigations will not be taken as seriously by prosecutors, judges and juries, as a result. Adults also lose, when important constitutional safeguards are dismissed or glossed over as a result of the forced connection with child pornography allegations in these cases. Sexually-oriented media is entitled to full First Amendment protection and protecting the most controversial and indecent speech is essential so that all other speech remains securely within the coverage of the First Amendment.

The tactic of mixing child pornography with adult obscenity has been used in countless other cases in the past, including the highly-publicized obscenity case against Mike Jones in Chicago, and the federal obscenity case against certain written stories involving children by Karen Fletcher, a/k/a Red Rose. Child pornography was not the focus of either of these cases, but the concepts were thrown around by the prosecutors in court and in the public, in an effort to tarnish the reputation of the defendant, and make the obscenity charge more likely to stick.

Nowhere is the misuse of child pornography charges more apparent than in the case of 'sexting.' Countless articles, blogs and Op-Ed pieces have come out recently, decrying the use of harsh child pornography statutes against teenagers accused of sending racy photos of themselves. Several states are currently considering legislation to decriminalize the behavior, or reduce its severity to nothing more than a misdemeanor. This is a step in the right direction. Children convicted of child pornography are forced by a federal law, the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, to register as sex offenders — a label that can deal damage for the rest of their lives. Teens impacted by this registration requirement cannot go to school, find jobs, or lead normal lives. Oddly, this is the only instance where the child porn victim is also the perpetrator.

The end game for the activists and politicians here is to cause the public to immediately associate any incident involving pornography with the rape and abuse of children. If they can somehow work the word "child" into any sentence referencing "pornography" they have achieved a victory. But the misuse, and overuse, of child pornography statutes to prosecute these tangential cases involving cache files, young-looking adults, and sexting behavior, undermines the core policies of the child pornography laws for a cheap political purpose. Children will suffer when these cases are passed over by prosecutors, or dismissed by judges flooded with dubious claims of child exploitation. The censors may gain minor ground with these tactics, but the voices opposing distortion of constitutional freedoms under the guise of protecting children are getting louder.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


FL - Former Congressman Mark Foley Begins Talk Radio Career In West Palm Beach

View the article here

09/07/2009

"Inside the Mind of Mark Foley" will expose the inner workings of Washington D.C.

West Palm Beach (PRWEB) -- Former Congressman and member of the Ways and Means committee, overseeing healthcare, will tape his first Talk Radio show on WSVU 960am, Tuesday September 8th, 2009. Congressman Foley will give a real Washington D.C. insiders view into the healthcare issue as well as the inner workings of how public policy is made in Washington D.C.

WSVU's general manager Chet Tart says, "During these incredibly changing times, it's important that we hear the voice of a true Washington D.C. insider."

Beginning September 22nd at 6pm, "Inside the Mind of Mark Foley" will premiere on 960am in North Palm Beach, Florida. You can listen worldwide by going to www.seaviewam960.com

WSVU 960am is an Adult Standards music station catering to an older audience that is concerned with the current healthcare issue. 960am plays your favorites from Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Barry Manilow and Barbara Streisand. The station covers the Palm Beaches and Treasure Coast of Florida and also has the rights to the Boston Red Sox and Dallas Cowboys.


"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


VT - Vermont Court Rules In Favor Of Sex Offender

View the article here

Why can't all other states rule the same?  I am sure they fall under the same guidelines.

09/09/2009

Barre Not Allowed To Limit Residency

MONTPELIER - A Vermont court has ruled that a convicted sex offender cannot be barred from living in areas near where children are often found.

Twenty-nine-year-old _____ had been ordered by Barre officials to move under a new ordinance passed last year that blocks convicted sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools or other places children gather.

_____, who is represented by American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont (Contact) Staff Attorney Dan Barrett, alleged that the ordinance barring him from living with his wife and children in a Barre apartment was null and void under Vermont law because the city lacked the legal authority to control where individuals may live. In late June, the Washington Superior Court issued a preliminary injunction forbidding Barre from enforcing the ordinance against _____ and ruled in _____'s favor Sept. 4.

"We are very pleased by the ruling," said ACLU of Vermont Executive Director Allen Gilbert, noting that "Vermont municipalities cannot just take it upon themselves to decide who gets to move in to town or to dictate where people can and can't live."

Barrett praised the court's ruling as a victory for the rule of law: "If a Vermonter is convicted of a crime, his or her punishment is determined by a court of law - not by a city council or a town selectboard. Vermont municipalities can't simply decide to evict individuals who have paid their dues to society and are free."

The ACLU believes this case could have a wide-reaching impact on other towns and cities if it's appealed to the Supreme Court.

"Based on the strength of the ruling so far, in this case, it seems pretty clear cut that municipalities in Vermont simply don't have the authority to adopt and enforce these kinds of ordinances," Gilbert said in a previous interview with WPTZ.com.

Previous Stories:

Video Link



"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved


ARC RADIO - Jessicas Law Audio from Radio Program "This is Hell"

Hosted by: RealityUSA

Title: Jessicas Law Audio from Radio Program "This is Hell"

Time: 09/06/2009 06:43 PM EDT

Episode Notes: Jeff Stein, a criminal defense attorney and co-chair of the legislative committee for California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (http://www.cacj.org/). Mr. Stein will tell us about California's recently passed "Jessica's Law." Jeff is a managing partner with Stein & Casciola (http://www.steinandcasciola.com) which specializes in sexual offenses. He was quoted this week saying, "the reality is the vast majority of registrants are not predatory, and don't pose danger to strangers."




"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 (United States Constitution)

© 2006-2009 Sex Offender Issues , All Rights Reserved