Monday, February 15, 2010

TX - RELEASED SEX OFFENDERS – A GROWING UNDERCLASS

Original Article

02/15/2010

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair (Email)

In 1994 the United States Congress passed the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act which required all states to create programs mandating that certain kinds of sex offenders register with state or local authorities. Congress added teeth to the Act by threatening the states with a ten percent loss of federal anti-crime funding for failure to comply.

Child protection advocates like Marc Klaas, whose daughter (Polly) was brutally raped and murdered in the 1990s by a released sex offender who is currently on California’s death row, offer these reasons for sex offender registration laws:

  • Sex offenders pose a high risk of re-offending after release from custody;
  • Protecting the public from sex offenders is a primary governmental interest;
  • The privacy interests of persons convicted of sex offenses are less important than the government’s interest in public safety; and
  • Release of certain information about offenders to public agencies and the general public will assist in protecting the public safety.

Two years later, in 1996, Congress amended the Jacob Wetterling Act with Megan’s Law which mandated “community notification” when a sex offender moves into a given neighborhood. The notification laws make public virtually all private information about sex offenders. Klaas defends “notification” laws on these grounds:

  • Assists law enforcement in investigations;
  • Establishes legal grounds to hold known offenders;
  • Deters sex offenders from committing new offenses;
  • Offers citizens information they can use to protect children from victimization.

Then in 2006 President George W. Bush signed into law the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. This Act requires the U.S. Justice Department to create a national sex offender database accessible to the public through the Internet allowing nationwide searches about registered sex offenders.

There are currently 700,000 registered sex offenders in the United States. Today more than twenty states have gone far beyond the Jacob Wetterling Act and Megan’s law by enacting “residency restriction laws” which prohibit sex offenders from living within 1,000 to 2,000 feet from schools, parks or child care facilities. Legal challenges to these laws have met with mix results but at least one federal court of appeals rejected a challenge to these laws saying there is no constitutional right “to live where you want.” The end result is that sex offenders in many communities are forced to live in limited neighborhoods—and this practice has prompted some communities to enact city ordinances making these neighborhoods virtually “off limits” to sex offenders.

The city council in New Richmond City, Wisconsin is currently considering what it calls a “safety zone ordinance” which would place a buffer around all the city’s parks, schools, and day care centers thereby practically eliminating any neighborhood for sex offenders to live. With 10,000 registered sex offenders in Pennsylvania, communities all over that state have done or are considering doing precisely what New Richmond City is trying to do. This prompted one federal judge in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania to overturn a local ordinance which prohibited convicted sex offenders from living within 2500 feet of schools, playgrounds, and child-care facilities.

While all of these restrictive “residency laws” and ordinances are being enacted across the country, the American Association of Correctional and Forensic Psychology released a study last year that said these restrictions have absolutely no effect on whether a sex offender is arrested again. These laws are playing particular legal havoc in California where there are more than 100,000 registered sex offenders. California’s Proposition 83, which prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools and parks, is currently under constitutional challenge before the California Supreme Court, according to the San Jose Mercury News.

Reeling from the mass murders allegedly committed by a convicted sex offender named Anthony Sowell who was arrested in Cleveland last year, Ohio officials have reacted by proposing legislation that would increase monitoring for the worst sex offenders. The classification system in place at the time of Sowell’s arrest involved the following three tier system:

  • Tier I is the lowest classification system, Offenders in this tier must register annually for 15 years.
  • Tier II offenders are required to register every 180 days for 25 years. This level sometimes requires notification postcards being sent to neighbors.
  • Tier III offenders must register every 90 days for life. Notification postcards must be sent to neighbors informing them of the offender’s address.

New legislation being proposed by State Sen. Nina Turner (Email) would impose the following key changes in Ohio’s sex offender monitoring laws:

  • Tier III offenders would have to register their address every 30 days with local law enforcement being required to confirm the address every 90 days.
  • All sex offenders would have to show proof of residency similar to that used in voter registration: photo ID, utility bill, or government check showing address.
  • Notification postcards would have to be sent to neighbors once a year on the anniversary date of registration.

The problem with Sen. Turner’s “get tough” legislation is that it does not fund the costs associated with implementing the changes. This will have serious fiscal repercussions at the local level. For example, the Logan County, Ohio, sheriff’s department has seen its budget cut by $2 million and has lost 40 positions since early 2008, forcing deputies off serious investigations to make “spot checks” on registered sex offenders in the county.

Ohio’s current official backlash against sex offenders has even reached into the state’s nursing homes. The Columbus Dispatch reported recently that there are more than 100 registered sex offenders living in Ohio’s nursing homes “without other residents and their families knowing about their offenses.” State Sen. Capri Cafaro (Email) has introduced legislation that would require nursing home administrators to notify residents, their family members and guardians when a Tier III offender intends to move into the facility.

The Dispatch last year compared “state records of long-term-care facilities with the existing notification list [and] found that 110 nursing-home residents and six employees were registered sex offenders. Fifty-one were concentrated at four nursing homes, including 26 in one facility in Washington Court House.”

Ohio’s number of offenders in nursing home facilities nearly tripled in the past five years, according to Perfect Cause, an Oklahoma-based nonprofit group. Perfect Cause documented at least 60 murders, rapes and serious assaults nationwide in nursing home by residents who are sex offenders, including the rape of a mentally disabled woman in Cincinnati.

These numbers at first glance seem shocking until they are viewed under the light of objectivity. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 16,100 nursing homes in the United States in 2004 which housed more than 1.5 million residents. Those figures are consistent with U.S. News & World Report findings last month. Sixty “murders, rapes and serious” assaults by sex offenders in this group population is not “shocking” particularly when compared to the 725 complaints of “suspicious deaths” reported in 2007 to South Carolina’s new State Law Enforcement Divisions Vulnerable Adults Investigative Unit which was set up to “investigate abuse, neglect, exploitation and deaths in government nursing homes.” At least 231 of these deaths remain unsolved. Nursing home residents, therefore, face far greater risks of murder, rape and assault from nursing home employees than resident sex offenders.

Faced with harsher “residency” and “notification” pressures, sex offenders are increasingly joining the ranks of the transient and homeless (and here). Dr. Richard Kreuger, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, specializes in the treatment and management of sex offenders. He has observed that these offenders “are almost labeled as nuclear waste; nobody wants them in their backyard.” DuWayne Gregory (Email), a New York legislator, underscored this point recently by opposing sex offender homeless shelters in Suffolk County: “We have enough homeless emergency housing shelters, Section 8 housing, sober homes, etc.,” the lawmaker wrote in a letter to 300 civil and religious leaders. “We do not need an entire homeless sex offender shelter dumped in our community, too.”

In the wake of the Jacob Wetterling Act and Megan’s Law, the State of Texas enacted its Sex Offender Registration Program (“SORP”) codified in Chapter 62 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. SORP applies to adult and juvenile sex offenders convicted or adjudicated on or after September 1, 1970 (an ex post facto law). The following personal information is collected by the Texas Department of Public Safety for its database:

  • Full name (including each alias)
  • Date of birth
  • Sex
  • Race
  • Height
  • Weight
  • Eye color
  • Social security number
  • Driver’s license number
  • Shoe size
  • Home address
  • Photograph
  • Fingerprints
  • Type of offense committed
  • Age of victim
  • Date of conviction
  • Punishment received
  • Supervision status
  • Each occupational license held or sought
  • Notification if individual is employed
  • Pursuing a vocation or attending institution of higher education
  • Online identifiers
  • Risk level

That’s a lot of personal information collected for a law enforcement database to which the public has access. And the convicted sex offender must register not later than 7 days after his/her arrival in a municipality or county of residence—and most sex offenses in Texas require lifetime registration. The few offenses which do not require lifetime registration require registration until the 10th anniversary of the date of discharge from supervision. Juveniles register for the post-10 years. All sex offenders must register annually while those offenders with two or more convictions for violent sexual offenses must register every 90 days. These requirements apply to the more than 57,000 registered sex offenders in the state of Texas—2.5% of whom through May of last year were identified as “absconded” by state and local law enforcement agencies.

As states continue to impose stricter “residency” and “notification” requirements on sex offenders in response to high profile sex-related offenses, the likelihood of sex offenders absconding will increase. The pressures of living as a perpetual underclass (lifetime registration) simply become too great to bear. But we must point out the fact that many will abscond does not mean they will re-offend as most child protection advocates contend. As we reported last year, a 2008 National Geographic Channel documentary titled “Prison Nation” reported that 60% of all prison inmates released nationwide will recidivate within three years while the U.S. Justice Department says that 43% of them recidivate with less than 15% of those being for sex offenses. (For another related crime? More studies here and here, which show LOW recidivism rates, not high!)

The State of Washington, which highlights its penal sex offender treatment programs, offers impressive data concerning sex offender recidivism. State officials report that 2.7% of the offenders who do not receive treatment during imprisonment will re-offend within six years while 1.8% of those who receive treatment will re-offend during the same period. Prisons like those in Washington, along with some in Canada and other Western countries which offer serious sex offender treatment programs, report that 9.9% of sex offenders who receive treatment re-offend with new crimes as compared to 17.4% of those who do not receive treatment.

Most reputable studies on inmate recidivism have found that sex offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism than any other class of criminal offenders. But it is high-profile and sensationalized cases like Anthony Sowell in Ohio and Philip Garrido in California that shape public policy when it comes to sex offenders. And any time public policy is shaped on the exception rather than the rule, there will be extreme consequences. For example, there are 17,000 registered sex offenders in Georgia but, according to the state’s Sex Offender Registration Review Board, just over 100 of them are deemed “predators” who pose a risk to society yet all 17,000 must bear the “dangerous predator” cross. And last year the California Attorney General’s Office found that only 9% of its registered sex offenders pose a “high risk” for re-offending while 29% posed a “moderate” to “high risk” of re-offending. Translated, that means that two-thirds of the state’s 100,000 registered sex offenders pose very little risk of re-offending yet all 100,000 are treated in the same “high risk” manner.

Clearly the facts do not match the public fears, but, unfortunately, these public fears (which are shaped by misinformation) have painted society into a corner when it comes to handling sex offenders. The latest findings (Feb. 2010) of the National Incidence of Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, a congressionally mandated study conducted by the U.S. Department of Health of Services, found a 38 percent decrease in the number of sexually abused children in this country since 1993. The number of sexually abused children in 1993 was 217,700, and that number decreased to 135,300 in 2005-2006.

It’s the first time since we started collecting data about these things that we’ve seen substantial declines over a long period, and that’s tremendously encouraging,” said Professor David Finkelhor of the University of New Hampshire in an AP interview. “It does suggest that the mobilization around this issue is helping and it’s a problem that is amenable to solutions.”

Nonetheless, while law enforcement agencies nationwide are faced with tighter budgets and shrinking personnel, state and local governments are increasing pressure on them to monitor a social underclass that does not really pose the level of threat perceived by those in society. We do not have a solution for public fears; we can only present the facts and try to place sensitive issues like this one in proper perspective. Our soap box is not nearly big enough to allay public fears when it comes to dealing with sex offenders.

SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOR SOURCES


"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln


GA - KKK Plans Georgia Rally (Just your average redneck get together!)

Original Article

02/15/2010

NAHUNTA - A Ku Klux Klan rally is planned for this small southeast Georgia city, and the mayor is urging people to go about their business.

The Knight Riders of the Ku Klux Klan has a permit for a rally in Nahunta, about 35 miles east of Brunswick in Brantley County, from noon to 2 p.m. on Saturday.

City officials say the Klan group says it will focus its rally on illegal immigration and sex offenders.

City clerk Angela Wirth told The Associated Press the Klan organization's grand dragon says he's expecting a turnout of about 100. She says she's expecting the Klan to make its presentation and leave.

Wirth says that until now there has never been a Klan rally in the city.


ID - Boise Police Officers Taser Man on Buttocks, Threaten to Rape Him With Taser, and Then Claim No Fault in Modest Settlement

Original Article

02/15/2010

We previously followed the case of _____, who sued the Boise police department for allegedly threatening to sodomize him with a taser and using excessive force in his arrest, including tasering him on the buttocks. He has now settled for only $150,000 and, despite a highly disturbing tape of the incident, the police department is able to claim no fault as part of the settlement.

While against policy, the police insisted that the officer (who also threatened to shock his genitalia) merely failed to follow guidelines — the name of the officer has not been released despite the release of the audio tape below. The officer actually states on the tape that he had already sodomized _____ with the taser when he threatened to deliver a second shock first to his anus and then to his genitalia.

_____ stated that on February 14th he did not realize that the men forcing their way into his apartment were officers. He tried to block the door — resulting in three officers throwing him to the ground. After tasering him, the officer threatened to sodomize the man and deliver an anal shocking with his taser.

Here is the exchange:

Officer #3: Do you feel this?
Complainant: Yes, sir.
Officer #3: Do you feel that? That’s my -
Complainant: Okay
Officer #3: -Taser up your a--.
Complainant: Okay
Officer #3: So don’t move.
Complainant: I’m trying not to. I can’t breathe.

Officer #3: Now do you feel this in your balls?
Complainant: I do, sir. I’m not going to move. I’m not gonna move.
Officer #3 Now I’m gonna tase your balls if you move again.
A minute later, this exchange occurred:
Officer #3: Okay, I’m gonna take this Taser out of your asshole now. Are you going to fight with me?
Complainant: No, not at all, sir.

A supervisor later erased an audio recording of an interview with the man at the jail and did not write a report on the use of force in the arrest. While the officers have been “disciplined,” they were not removed from the force.

Boise Community Ombudsman Pierce Murphy found that the actions of the officer were not illegal but found abuse, here. You have an officer who says that he just sodomized a suspect and threatened to torture him. That is not unlawful in Boise?

In the internal investigation , here. Murphy found that there was no threat at the time of the incident:

At the time that he was Tased on the buttocks, the Complainant was handcuffed and lying face-down on the floor. Officer #1 was holding the Complainant’s head and upper torso down with a knee across his shoulders. Officer #4 was positioned near the Complainant’s waist preparing to search the Complainant, and Officer #3 was situated near the Complainant’s legs and feet … Based on what he observed, Officer #2 saw no need to assist Officer #1, Officer #3, and Officer #4 in controlling the Complainant. According to Officer #1, the Complainant “mellowed out” after being handcuffed.”

He filed a complaint detailing the abuse and asked for $500,000 in punitive damages.

Here is the original complaint

The reported settlement of $150,000 seems a bit low given the egregious conduct and lack of admission of fault. Of course, we are not the “boots on the ground” in the case and the legal team was probably discounting for the avoidance of trial costs and appeals. However, given the response of the Police Department, I was hoping to see a more punitive element to the liability to guarantee a greater deterrent effect. If it was not for this tape, this case would never have seen the light of day.

It was the result of mediation with the judge in the federal court. It also contained a reported confidentiality agreement barring public comment.

Video Link



"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln


VA - Bill protects employers of sex offenders

Original Article

02/15/2010

By Veronica Garabelli

RICHMOND – A bill making headway in the General Assembly seeks to protect employers of sex offenders by not listing the name of the offender’s workplace on Virginia’s Sex Offender Registry.

Senate Bill 635 (PDF), sponsored by Sen. Dave Marsden (Email) (D-Burke), would still list a sex offender’s work address. The bill passed the Senate unanimously this month and now will be considered by the House of Delegates.

Marsden said the bill is meant to help sex offenders integrate back into society.

Currently, the Virginia Sex Offender Registry’s displays a photograph and description of each offender; lists the offender’s crime; and shows the offender’s home address and the name and location of the offender’s employer.

As a result, some sex offenders lose their jobs, because a customer complains or because the employer fears the stigma of being associated with the sex offender registry.
- Even if they are not listed on the registry, the fact the registry is public makes it almost impossible for an offender to get a job and to keep it.

It’s the address and the location that is still important, not the name of the business,” Marsden said. “We don’t want businesses to be harmed, and we don’t want the offender, if they’re doing everything they’re supposed to do, being harmed.”

A group called Reform Sex Offender Laws of Virginia approached the senator about filing the bill.

Mary Devoy, organizer for the group, said employers who are willing to give sex offenders a second chance despite the negative publicity should not be punished. Devoy said that when sex offenders are unemployed, they can’t meet their parole requirements.

We want the folks on the registry to be able to survive,” Devoy said. “Let them live their lives, have a job and raise their children. This bill is one step toward that.”

Several people have posted comments about the bill on the Richmond Sunlight Web site. One said that by listing the employer’s name, the sex offender registry has “effectively applied the ‘social pariah’ label to responsible businesses.”


"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln


UK - Woman (Sarah-Jane Hilliard) who cried rape after sex in public toilet walks free from court

Original Article

02/15/2010

A 21-year-old woman who made a false accusation of rape in a bid to claim thousands of pounds in compensation escaped a jail term today.

Sarah-Jane Hilliard claimed Grant Bowers, 19, attacked her following a night out.

Just over a week after making the allegations, she contacted the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, hoping to be awarded up to £7,500.

A jury found her guilty of perverting the course of justice in May last year and she was today given a 12-month jail sentence, suspended for two years.
- So what is the point of sentencing someone to jail, then suspending it all?  I've never figured that out.

Sentencing her at Basildon Crown Court in Essex, Judge Christopher Mitchell said: 'The fact is that false allegations of rape have a terrible knock-on effect.'

'When women who have actually been raped make complaints there is always the background of people like you who have made false allegations and that's why it's considered so serious.'

During the trial, the jury heard how Hilliard told police she met Mr Bowers at Liquid nightclub in Basildon on July 26, 2008.

She claimed he shared a taxi with her and a friend, before stopping at Basildon railway station so she could visit the toilet.

Hilliard told police she locked herself in a cubicle door and that the next thing she remembered was waking up with her underwear and trousers around her ankles.

She told officers that Mr Bowers had sent her a text message the next day saying they had 'gone all the way', and it was then she realised she had been raped.

Mr Bowers was arrested two days later at his father's house and taken to a police station, where he was held for four hours in a cell before being interviewed by detectives for a further two hours. He had DNA swabs taken, as well as fingerprints and mug shots.

The student, from Basildon, had to wait a week before police told him he wouldn't be charged.

During the trial, prosecutor Andrew Jackson read extracts from Mr Bower's victim impact statement, which said the teenager sat crying in police custody fearing he was going to prison.

He told the court: 'This incident has changed him. He speaks of his lack of confidence approaching young women, not trusting them and having trouble sleeping.'

'He was physically sick through worry, constantly teary and feeling like he wanted to cry.'

Giving evidence during the trial, Mr Bowers told the court how he had met Hilliard at a nightclub and they the walked to the railway station.

He said once they reached the station toilets, she dragged him into a cubicle and had sex with him. She told Mr Bowers he 'better be there for the baby' if she fell pregnant.

But police were unable to find CCTV of the pair in Liquid nightclub, as Hilliard had claimed. Her friend told police she had lied and that they had actually been in the nearby Colors club.

Detectives then trawled through CCTV from that nightspot and found footage of Hilliard and Mr Bowers kissing and holding hands before leaving.

As soon as they saw the footage, officers contacted Mr Bowers and told him he would not be charged and instead they arrested Hilliard for perverting the course of justice.

A charge of wasting police time was dropped after she was found guilty of the more serious crime.

Jacqueline Carey, mitigating for Hilliard, said her client had since been assaulted by two men on her way to work, suffering scratches, and had the word 'bitch' scratched onto her car.

Miss Carey said she had also suffered 'extremely unpleasant' comments on Facebook following her conviction last August, saying: 'One wished Miss Hilliard had been raped then she would understand what rape victims went through.'

Describing her client as 'hard working', she added that she had a number of 'deeply personal issues'.

'Since her conviction, her relationship with her partner has ceased and a number of friends, due to the publicity, are no longer friends with her.'

Hilliard, from Basilson, was sentenced to 300 hours of community service and ordered to pay £2,000 in costs.

Judge Mitchell acknowledged that Hilliard had problems: 'I have come to the conclusion that the doctor is right in saying you ought not to go to prison.'

But he warned: 'This case is no precedent at all for future cases of women who make up false allegations of rape.'

'You alleged that you had been raped and as a consequence of that allegation, a young man was arrested, held in custody for four hours, interviewed and subsequently bailed.'

'But for six or seven days thereafter he had the concern, the worry, the fear that he was going to be charged with rape when he knew perfectly well that you had consented to the intercourse and that you, on his account, had frankly initiated it.'

Speaking outside court, Mr Bowers said he had been subjected to verbal abuse and had his house attacked as a result of the fake claims.

He said: 'The last 11 months have been horrendous. I've lost all my self-confidence and I can't speak to women any more.'

'I don't know why she did it but her lies have ruined my life.'

His father, Tony Bowers, said he was 'dumbfounded' by the sentence and that his son had had to move out of Basildon.

He said: 'I'm disappointed because my son was facing up to ten years in prison for rape on the strength of her lies.'
- 10 years, and she walks?  She should be in prison for 10 years, IMO!

'She has been found guilty of making false allegations and the least I expected was for her to have been given a prison sentence.'

'My son has lost his freedom as a result of this. He cannot come and visit his parents unless it's under the cover of darkness, he's lost his flat and we cannot even know where he is living for his own protection.'

'He is the victim and he has lost his freedom yet she has still got hers.'

'I think she's a very sad girl who needs help. She could have got the professional help she so desperately needs during a stretch behind bars.'

Detective Sergeant Steve Simmons from British Transport Police said: 'It is such a nasty, life-changing allegation against a young man.'

'Rape is a heinous offence and perpetrators should be brought to justice with the full weight of the justice system.'

'However false allegations of rape are equally heinous. It is not only devastating to the victim but severely damages the credibility of women who are genuine victims of sex offences.'
- And yet she walks while he could've been in prison for 10 years and his life ruined!


"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln


AL - Attorney General Troy King states his mission and purpose regarding sex offenders

"My priority, is putting each and every sex offender behind bars!"

video


OH - Ohio to pay $1.1 million to man wrongly convicted of rape, cleared by DNA testing

Original Article

He should get $18 million, IMO. The injustice system is corrupt, and you need to make it hurt, so maybe they will learn something from their mistakes. And most people think the system is perfect, far from it.

02/14/2010

COLUMBUS - Ohio has agreed to give $1.1 million to a man who spent nearly 18 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit.

Fifty-four-year-old _____ was released in August 2008 after he was cleared by DNA testing. _____ says he's grateful for the settlement, but it doesn't make up for the time spent in prison.

_____ has been living in an apartment in Columbus with his son. He says he plans to buy a house, a car and invest the rest of the money.

The settlement still needs to be approved by the Ohio Court of Claims.

_____ was convicted in 1991 of abducting and raping a female relative. A private lab agreed to conduct DNA tests after he and other inmates were profiled by The Columbus Dispatch in a series that exposed flaws in the state's DNA testing system.


"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln


NE - Low-Risk Sex Offender Harassed

Original Article

More proof the public cannot handle the registry info without vigilantism, which is breaking the law!

02/14/2010

By Justin Joseph

This is just more than any person can take

A man says his neighbors have turned on him after Nebraska's state law changed. The new law requires information about all sex offenders to be made public online, not just those considered high-risk to re-offend.

Has he ever thought about suicide? “Yes, several times and I'll be honest, if it wasn't for my supportive family I wouldn't be talking to you right now. This is just more than any person can take."

From the darkness of a shadow, it's easier for _____ to talk about his past. He'll own up to a time when he traded porn with other men, but he denies that a handful of images containing child pornography found in his possession in 1997 were images he ever wanted.

Somebody sent me some garbage. That doesn't mean I wanted the garbage. I had the garbage, yes.”

_____'s past includes two convictions for possessing child porn, both of which he says stem from the same time in the early 1990s. Last year, he says he successfully completed 10 years of probation and doctors consider him a low risk to re-offend.

All of that is a distant memory and that's how _____ hoped it would stay. “I completely turned my life around and now this law comes out to destroy me.”

A change in Nebraska law January 4th put _____'s face on a Web site and it didn't take long for neighbors to notice. “I have a friendly neighbor in the neighborhood and she calls me up and says people are passing your picture around the neighborhood.”

That was just the beginning. In the 45 days since the law has changed, _____ has come home and found threatening notes taped to his front door. The message was move or suffer.

A couple of other ones were really vulgar, talking about what people would like to do to me, removing body parts.”

His teenage children have also found them. “There's my picture off the Internet with a message that's too vulgar to say on TV of what this person wants to do to me because I'm a pedophile in their mind and it's taped to my son's truck."

His situation sums up arguments on both sides of the debate. Some say exposing people like _____ makes neighborhoods safer. _____ says the law just makes it difficult to find the most dangerous and he is not one of them.

_____ has notified the police. He does not know who made the threats and so at this point no charges have been filed. It's illegal to retaliate against individuals on the registry, their family members or employers. The law is very clear about that. Vandalism or threats are illegal and will be prosecuted.
- Well, when the police do nothing about those threats, then people continue to get a way with it.


"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln