Thursday, October 28, 2010

OH - Ohio v. Williams - Amicus Curaie


MO - The media (year after year) continues to help the sex offender Halloween urban legend grow!

Every single year, instead of the media dispelling the lies, myths and moral panic over a non-issue, they continue to help it propagate. This is how urban legends are born, like the old poisoned candy scare, which continues to worry parents to this day, when in fact, there has not been a single case of a child being poisoned on Halloween, ever! Click the "Halloween" label (link) above, for more hysteria!



CA - Should Arnold Schwarzenegger be on the sex offender registry? He was 28 when he had sex with a 16 year old Gigi Goyette

Original Article

Arnold met secretly with Ken Lay on May 24th, 2001, shortly before the Enron price gouging of California. At the meeting Ken Lay handed out plans that included an end to "countless investigations into allegations that suppliers manipulated power prices."

Arnold had a tabloid publisher pay $20,000 to Gigi Goyette to keep quiet about the fact that Arnold had sex with her when she was 16 and he was 28.

Arnold discussed the ethnicity of Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, the sole Latina Republican in the state legislature in the folowing language: "I mean, they are all very hot. They have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them that together makes it." Source: Robert Salladay. "Gov.'s Candid Moments Caught on Audiotape: Schwarzenegger's Banter With Aides Offers Glimpse of Bull Session Behind Closed Doors." Los Angeles Times. September 8, 2007. Article On September 8, 2004, Arnold apologized for the comments.

During the only debate he partipated in during the 2003 recall election, Arnold promised he wouldn't cut education. He promtly cut the UC budget upon taking office.

Arnold had crews dig up a pothole at taxpayer expense just so that he could fill it in for a photo op.

Arnold campaigned in Ohio, the critical swing state, for Bush right before the 2004 election.

Arnold accepted $8 million for "consulting" from a magazine while governor.

Arnold had been driving with a motercycle license for years. He was in an accident in January 2006, where he wasn't charged, even though he had no license. He didn't get a license until July 2006.

Arnold used taxpayer money to spy on liberal groups.

Arnold vetoed the gay marriage bill passed by activist legislators trying to legislate from the legislature, and said that gay marriage should be up to the courts.

Arnold is running as a moderate but he withdrew 4 of his own nominees to the CalSTRS board after they voted against his plan to privatize teachers pension plans. One of the appointees, Republican Jim Grey, said, "If you have to be in lock step, I guess I shouldn’t be one of his appointees."


MA - Internet predator statute blocked

Original Article

10/28/2010

By Peter Schworm

Federal judge says state’s new obscenity law is too broad

A federal judge blocked yesterday a new state Internet obscenity law meant to shield children from sexually explicit material, ruling that the statute was written so broadly that it would criminalize legitimate websites and general electronic communication.

The decision was celebrated by civil rights advocates, but it frustrated prosecutors who have encountered difficulty in convicting Internet predators under outdated laws that fail to cover new technologies.

Due to this preliminary injunction, we are unable to enforce this much needed law,’’ said Plymouth District Attorney Timothy J. Cruz, whose office prosecuted the online predator case that led to yesterday’s ruling.

In that case, a Beverly man was convicted of sending sexually explicit instant messages to a deputy sheriff posing as a 13-year-old girl. But the convictions were overturned in February by the Supreme Judicial Court, which said Massachusetts law did not cover Internet communication and urged the Legislature to update the statute.

After lawmakers hastily passed new language, a coalition of booksellers and website publishers sued, arguing that the new law would hold criminally liable anyone who operates a website with nudity or sexual material, potentially including a vast range of subjects, from art to health information on pregnancy. They said the law failed to distinguish between open websites and obscene material sent knowingly to a child.

In granting a preliminary injunction against the law yesterday, US District Judge Rya W. Zobel said the plaintiffs demonstrated “without question’’ that the law violated the First Amendment by inhibiting free speech, which civil rights advocates called a clear victory.

This resolves the cloud that was hanging over Internet communication,’’ said John Reinstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, one of the plaintiffs in the case. “This lifts a substantial burden of self-censorship on Internet users.’’

Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office, which helped draft the new obscenity law earlier this year, said it was undecided on whether to appeal the judge’s order or change the law. In a statement, Coakley said her office’s goal is “to ensure that our laws keep up with modern technology in order to protect kids from sexual predators on the Internet.’’

The office “will examine whether a legislative change is necessary to ensure that law enforcement has the necessary tools to protect children online,’’ Coakley said.

Through a spokesman, Coakley declined further comment.

In its case before Zobel, the state argued that the language it added to the obscenity law did not need to specify that it applied only to those who intentionally target minors because a previous SJC ruling had made that clear.

Both sides agreed the statute would otherwise be unconstitutional,’’ Zobel said.’’

The case dates to February, when the state’s highest court ruled that state law banning people from showing pornography to children and banning bookstores from selling sexually explicit books and magazines to children did not cover “electronically transmitted text’’ or “online conversations.’’

That ruling vacated the convictions of the Beverly man who sent the series of instant messages to the deputy sheriff and said it was the Legislature’s responsibility to update the law.

The resulting law included new passages that barred “any electronic communication’’ including “electronic mail, instant messages, text messages, and any other communication created by means of use of the Internet or wireless network.’’ The changes went into effect in July. The suit challenging the law was filed days later.

The injunction was necessary to ensure that all Internet communications were not reduced to the level of what’s appropriate for children,’’ said Michael Bamberger, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, which included the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the Association of American Publishers, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, and the Harvard Book Store.