Tuesday, June 21, 2011

FL - Sex offenders lived in Fort Lauderdale motel; city law left few other options

Original Article


By Sofia Santana and Dana Williams

FORT LAUDERDALE - A motel known for touting its heart-shaped Jacuzzi for years quietly housed dozens of registered sex offenders and predators.

The Budget Inn on North Federal Highway was one of the few housing options for sex offenders in the city. That is, until the motel's owner learned of the tenants' criminal records this past week and evicted them.

On Friday, 24 offenders were listed on the state's sex offender registry as living at the 50-room motel just south of Oakland Park Boulevard.

Now, most of the offenders who had been staying there are struggling to find a new place to live. They may wind up homeless, highlighting a growing problem in South Florida: Municipal laws have so restricted where offenders can live that many have become homeless or drifters — which makes it harder for law enforcement to keep an eye on them.

"The laws have created this quandary that undermines their very purpose," said Jill Levenson, a clinical social worker studying sex offender issues at Lynn University. "The laws really have to be re-considered."

The motel's owner, Glen Patel, said Monday he was shocked to learn some of his tenants were sex offenders when informed by the Sun Sentinel.

"For the safety of my [other] guests, I can't keep them there," he said.
- He's just bowing to media pressure.  He will be losing a lot of money.

On a recent night at the motel, several guests said they, too, were alarmed to learn their neighbors were sex offenders. Among the guests staying there last week was a family with two young children.
- Thus proving the registry is a waste of money.

Patel said state probation officers asked him over the weekend to reconsider evicting the sex offenders because, at least at the motel, the officers knew where they were.

Not to mention, at the motel, the offenders were living in a commercial district, alongside a Best Buy and across the street from a McDonald's — as opposed to being smack in the middle of a residential neighborhood.

State records show at least 36 other offenders have reported staying at the motel since 2007. The offenders' crimes ranged from attempting to solicit a child over the Internet to child pornography, child molestation, kidnapping and sexual battery of a child. Some were repeat offenders.
- And what about the sex crimes not against children?  How many were there of those?

Fort Lauderdale and other cities enacted stringent sex offender residency laws after 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford was raped and murdered in 2005 by a sex offender who lived in her Central Florida neighborhood.

Under state law, people convicted of certain sex crimes involving children can't reside within 1,000 feet of schools, parks, playgrounds, day-care centers and public school bus stops.
- And there is several studies that prove these residency laws do not work, and where someone lives has nothing to do with if they will re-offend of not.  Most sex crimes are committed by someone known to the victim, not some stranger.

Many cities in South Florida extended the zones even farther, up to 2,500 feet. Fort Lauderdale has a 1,400-foot radius.
- Thanks to idiots like Ron Book.

Fort Lauderdale's ordinance leaves only about 10 percent of the city open for sex offenders, offering few rentals.
- And this forces them into clusters, and then, when the public finds out about that, out comes the mobs complaining about that as well.

When offenders find a rare landlord or motel manager willing to take them, they move in by the drove, forming what authorities term a sex offender "cluster," which is what happened at the Budget Inn.

Probation officers can't order the sex offenders to split up and move, said Thomas Sharrard, a state probation supervisor for Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Monroe counties.

"We can only enforce what is in their [court-ordered] conditions, and if there is not a condition that says you cannot live with another sex offender, we can't do anything," Sharrard said. "And if you were to kick them out, then the problem becomes: where do you send them?"
- Well, the DOC at one time, was sending them to live like trolls under a bridge, over 100 at one time.

In Palm Beach County, about 50 offenders are registered in the Miracle Park community outside of Pahokee. That location, operated by a ministry, was developed to house offenders.

In many cases, though, public outcry has caused clusters to be broken up.
- Exactly!

In Miami-Dade County last year, dozens of offenders lived in the Homestead Studio Suites hotel near Miami International Airport before being kicked out. Many were former residents of the sex offender colony that lived under the Julia Tuttle Causeway, where more than 100 were registered until the county evicted them in April 2010.
- Yeah, lobbyist Ron Book helped created the draconian laws, and thus the leper colony under the bridge, and when the fire got hot by the media, he forced them to leave, and used tax payer dollars to move them into the hotels and motels mentioned above.  A couple weeks later, they are once again homeless and now many are living in the DOC parking lot.

The offenders at the Fort Lauderdale Budget Inn, paid their own way — $49 to $69 per night, or up to $350 per week. They learned about the motel from probation officers or fellow offenders, according to state probation logs.
- Yep, that is about $8,500 the motel owner will be out per month.  So I am sure he knew they were living there.  He just doesn't want bad publicity, now that it's front page news, so he kicks them out.

[name withheld], 50, lived in one of the motel rooms for about a year.

He was convicted of a sex offense involving a child while living in North Carolina in 1997.

He moved to Broward and in both 2007 and 2008 was arrested on charges he failed to comply with local sex offender laws. A judge gave him five years' probation.

[name withheld] lives with a GPS-monitoring device strapped to his hip, for which he pays the state $60 a month. He pays another $50 a month to cover the cost of his probation. His monthly rent at the motel was $1,200.
- Yeah, more extortion fees.  Pay for it, or go to jail!

He says he can't get a job because of his criminal record, so he hauls junk trash in his pickup truck to make money.

If he falls behind on his payments to the state, he could be charged with violating probation, Wallace said.

"They put you in a failing situation," he said as he stood outside his room Thursday night. "I'm burned out. Sometimes you want to give up."

In a 2009 report, members of the Broward Sexual Offender and Predator Residence Task Force raised concerns about the housing hardships faced by many sex offenders.

"Not due to sympathy for sex offenders but because research indicates that housing instability is the consistent and robust predictor for absconding, probation violation and recidivism for criminal offenders … and sex offenders specifically," the report reads.

While cases such as the Lunsford murder command national attention, law enforcement and probation officials are quick to point out most sex offenders do not fit the stereotype of a peeping tom, stalker in the park or stranger hiding in the bushes. Most were convicted of crimes involving relatives, friends, or children left in their care.

And it didn't matter what the offender's address was; what mattered was the access to his or her victim, Levenson said.

For that reason, she says anti-loitering laws provide a more effective and realistic approach to keeping sex offenders away from children.

The state passed such a law in 2010, making it illegal for offenders to loiter or prowl within 300 feet of a place where children gather, including schools and parks.

The residency restrictions, meanwhile, carry a little-known caveat: they apply only to where an offender sleeps from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.

"For the rest of the day," Levenson said, "they're out in the community."

NY - Startling new statistics on sex offender recidivism

Courtesy of "Sex Offenders - A Reality Based Discussion "


I just ran across an article in the Albany Times Union, Did the government fail to protect victim from predator? The article described the case of [name withheld], who was recently convicted of a repeat sex offense. The article shared some statistics which which were related by Peter Cutler, a spokesman for the state prison system:

Cutler said statistics suggest [name withheld]'s case is an anomaly. Of the 663 inmates who were released in 2006 after serving prison time for sex offenses, only 49 -- or 7.3 percent -- returned to prison over the next three years, Cutler said. And of those 49, he said, only three returned for sexual offenses.

I discovered that the Department of Corrections report on 2006 releases was available online (PDF).

Mr. Cutler's figures were a little off. The recidivism rate is actually lower.

A total of 990 sex offenders (not 663 as indicated by Mr. Cutler ) were released from state prisons in 2006. Mr. Cutler was correct in stating that 49 of these were returned to prison within 3 years for a new crime, making a recidivism rate for any new crime of 4.9% (not 7.3% as the article indicates).

The article was correct that only 3 of these were returned for new sex offenses. This indicates a recidivism rate of 0.3% for sex offenders released in 2006 in terms of committing new sex crimes.

You can check these figures for yourself by looking at the charts on pages 10, 45, & 46.

This is notable in that the NY legislature keeps passing new sex offender legislation which includes such language as "The rate of recidivism among sex offenders is very high."

OH - Preteen's family forever changed by call that led to rape case

Original Article

Update: Sex case involving boys to be appealed


By Catherine Candisky

A father's desperate call to find help for his 12-year-old son triggered consequences for his family that he never imagined - his only son's charge of rape, the breakup of his marriage and a costly, four-year legal battle for justice that went all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court.

"I feel responsible for it, because I made that phone call," the father said, his eyes welling with tears. "It was the worst phone call I made in my entire life. I should have never called."

"We didn't know," his ex-wife said, "that our son could be taken from us and put away (as) this major criminal."

In a unanimous decision this month, the high court overturned the son's conviction, declaring what the parents and their attorneys had told police and prosecutors all along: There was no crime. The victory was a relief, but the guilt and pain of their ordeal still run deep.

In an interview with The Dispatch, the parents, who have since divorced because of the strain of the case, asked that their names not be used in order to protect their son, now 16. They moved from Licking County to give him a fresh start but hope their experience might help other families in similar situations.

"I'm in a good place right now," the teen said. "I have great friends. I have a girlfriend. I'm in a great school, and no one knows. I'm just this normal 16-year-old, high-school-enjoying-life junior. But it worries me that they could find out. ... That fear is always in the back of my mind."

When his dad called to tell him they'd won their appeal and the conviction was overturned, the teen resisted the urge to pump his fist or yell out. He was with a friend and didn't want to prompt any questions.

"I just said, 'That's awesome. I'll talk with you about it later.'"

What do we do now?

It was in summer 2007 when a next-door neighbor told the couple that their son and two other boys, 11 and 12, were having sex.

"I was just floored," the father said. "Surely it's not my kid. But I asked him, and he said, 'Yeah.' He told me right up, and I'm like, what do you do? You just want to crawl in a hole and shut your doors."

His mother didn't know what to think. Her son had never been in trouble and was a good student. "We didn't bring our child up to ever do anything like this, and I'm thinking, is he gay? I confronted him, and he said, 'No.'"

Unsure what to do, the father called Licking County Children Services. He didn't know that the agency is required by law to report allegations of child abuse to authorities. The family was referred to the sheriff's office, which sent a detective to the house.

"We were devastated and had no idea we were setting our son up for the worst thing that could have ever happened to him," his mother said.

The detective "comes and she is our friend and it's going to be OK, this kind of thing happens all the time and we'll just write some things down and talk with (your son) and the other boys, it just sounds like boys experimenting. ... The (other boys') parents show up on our porch and give their side, and she comes back in and says it all sounds consensual."
- This is why you should NEVER talk to the police without a lawyer present!

They allowed the detective to talk with their son privately and agreed to come to the sheriff's office the next day to give a statement and discuss counseling. "We went to bed feeling a little better; it was going to be OK," the mother said.

But it wasn't.

A 12-year-old in shackles

Shortly after they got to the sheriff's office, both parents felt uneasy. The caseworker seemed rude. Still, when a detective asked to speak again with their son privately, they agreed.

"Then they come and get us and sat us down and said, 'Well, we just want to let you know that we are charging (your son) with 10 counts of felony first-degree rape and he's under arrest,'" the mother said, her voice cracking with emotion. "They come in and put him in handcuffs right in front of us."

The 12-year-old was whisked away from his parents. When they next saw their son, he was shuffling into a courtroom, handcuffed and shackled to leg irons.

The father said he later learned from his neighbor that the detective told him the night before that they were going to file criminal charges against his son.

They wondered, why was their son charged and not the other boys? After talking to a lawyer, they asked why they were not told that their son faced criminal prosecution, or that neither he nor they had to speak to authorities.

Although deputies' failure to notify them of the so-called Miranda rights was not an issue in the appeal, "the interrogation methods used in this case are troubling," Justice Judith Lanzinger wrote in the 7-0 ruling.

'These are kids'

Their son spent eight days in a detention facility before being released and put on house arrest to await trial. His parents home-schooled him and adjusted their work schedules so one of them was always home.

Eighteen months later, he was convicted of statutory rape for relations with the 11-year-old boy (a single count involving the other boy was dropped) and ordered to undergo counseling. According to testimony, their son gave the boy video games to have anal sex.

A Juvenile Court magistrate found that the sexual acts took place, but there was no evidence of force. The conviction was upheld by the 5th District Court of Appeals.

Prosecutors said they charged him and not the others because he initiated the conduct and bribed his friends. He also was larger, and one boy at times refused to participate but relented, they said.

But the Supreme Court found those claims irrelevant. The conviction was based solely on an Ohio law banning sexual relations with anyone younger than 13 - consensual or not.

The high court found that the law is "unconstitutionally vague and violates the right to equal protection" when applied to one child and not others involved if all are younger than 13.

"When an adult engages in sexual conduct with a child under the age of 13, it is clear which party is the offender and which is the victim. But when two children under the age of 13 engage in sexual conduct with each other, each child is both an offender and a victim," Lanzinger wrote.

During court arguments, justices told Assistant County Prosecutor Christopher A. Reamer that his office never should have filed charges. "These are kids," Justice Yvette McGee Brown said.

Noting that the boy's father had brought the matter to the attention of authorities, Justice Terrence O'Donnell asked, "Why wasn't there some other social intervention rather than prosecution in this case?"

And Justice Paul E. Pfeifer said prosecutors should make sure their sheriff's office isn't mistreating children during interviews. "It's a 12-year-old," he said.

No apologies

Licking County Prosecutor Ken Oswalt makes no apologies, noting that sexual contact involving children is not as rare as some may think.

Since 2006, 54 children, some as young as 11, have been adjudicated in Licking County Probate-Juvenile Court in rape cases. Nearly a third of them were younger than 13, according to statistics provided by court administrator David K. Edelblute. However, the numbers have been decreasing in recent years, and last year, there were only two cases.

Statewide, 562 juveniles have been committed to the Ohio Department of Youth Services for rape and other sex offenses since 2008, according to state officials.

Oswalt said his office files criminal charges because it's the only way under the law to ensure that those involved get counseling or other help. In such cases, prosecutors use their best judgment to determine who is culpable and what charges to file.

Charging all three boys "is a ridiculous suggestion," he said. "Who are you going to put on to testify against the other? We sometimes need help from one to get the other."

He said the ruling will make it impossible to charge children younger than 13 with statutory rape even in blatant instances such as when the other child involved is 2, as in a case currently under investigation.

Sallynda Rothchild Dennison, the boy's attorney, said prosecutors were "unreasonable" from the beginning and rejected her efforts to get counseling for her client and the other boys. "This isn't a bad parenting issue; this isn't a bad anything issue. This could happen to anyone's son or daughter."

IL - All sex offenders are not equal

Original Article


By Eric Zorn

I wish I could tell [name withheld] not to worry, that common sense will surely prevail in the sad, scary story of his son.

But I would be lying. His son is a sex offender, and when it comes to sex offenders, hysteria and superstition trump common sense every time.

In December 2008, [name withheld], then 27, had sex with a 16-year-old girl in a Downers Grove motel room. The girl was a willing participant, and [name withheld], who suffers from Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, has the judgment and social skills of a 10-year-old.

But the girl was legally underage, and authorities contended [name withheld] knew right from wrong when he had sex with her. So he ended up pleading guilty but mentally ill to aggravated criminal sexual abuse and received a five-year prison sentence.

Flash ahead to today: [name withheld] is scheduled to be paroled from Taylorville Correctional Center on July 23. His parents, [name withheld], 60, and [name withheld], 58, want him to move back into their Elmhurst home where they can supervise his transition to freedom.

Unfortunately, there is a part-time preschool program operating in a church around the corner from the [name withheld] residence. It's roughly 400 feet from lot line to lot line, and the rigid, one-size-fits-all legal restrictions in Illinois prohibit sex offenders from living within 500 feet of schools, parks, day-care centers and other places where children gather.

Nothing in the record suggests [name withheld] is a pedophile with a deviant interest in the 2- to 5-year-old clientele of a preschool or that he has any predatory tendencies.

But even if he were a pedophile, the vast weight of research on residential restrictions — now in roughly 30 states and expanding, in places, to quarter-mile buffer zones — suggests this geographic limitation would do nothing to protect children.

"There was no significant relationship between reoffending and proximity to schools or day cares," concluded an academic study of such restrictions published last year in Criminal Justice and Behavior, the journal of The American Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology. "The belief that keeping sex offenders far from schools and other child-friendly locations will protect children from sexual abuse appears to be a well-intentioned but flawed premise."

That premise will keep [name withheld] locked up past his parole date. The Illinois Department of Corrections refuses to allow sex offenders without legal places to live to enter supervised release (parole) programs, and a DOC spokeswoman said roughly 1,000 such inmates a year are "violated at the door," as the expression goes, and reincarcerated until their full sentences are up.

Some of you, I know, are saying, "So what? Sex offenders are the lowest of the low and the longer they're locked up, the better."

The flaw in this thinking is that it ultimately short-circuits the safeguards — such as mandatory therapy, electronic monitoring and tight supervision — that help offenders successfully re-enter society. When [name withheld]'s sentence is up in July 2012, for instance, he'll walk free even if he has nowhere to live.

"One of the unintended consequence of these draconian residency-restrictions is that they increase homelessness and transience among ex-offenders," said Lynn University psychology professor Jill S. Levenson, one of the authors of the article in Criminal Justice and Behavior. "And those," she said, "are known risk factors for the resumption of criminal behavior."

Last year, my colleagues Megan Twohey and Joe Mahr chronicled in this newspaper a series of horror stories of sex criminals who served their parole periods behind bars, then reoffended after vanishing unsupervised into the community. Nearly 1 in 3 was not up to date with the state's sex-offender registry.

Walt and [name withheld] are unemployed and say they can't move or afford a separate dwelling for [name withheld], their only child.

The compassionate and sensible solution would be for state officials to consider the circumstances here — including substantial expert opinion that it would be best for [name withheld] and for society for him to live at home — and issue a waiver.

But there is no provision in the law for such consideration or the issuance of such a waiver, according to the Department of Corrections. And given the invertebrate skittishness with which our lawmakers approach the issue of sex crimes, there's little chance we'll ever add such a provision or relax the restrictions and introduce common sense when it comes to nonviolent offenders.

All I can tell [name withheld] is, if I were him, I'd worry, too. And good luck.

NEW ZEALAND - Girl kicks sex predator in groin

Original Article


A 12-year-old girl kicked a man in the groin to escape his sexual advances in the Auckland suburb of Ponsonby today.

The man approached the girl as she walked to school along Douglas Street before 8am.

Sergeant Paul Black, of Ponsonby police, said the man allegedly grabbed the student by the arm and made a lewd suggestion before she kicked him in the groin and ran to school.

Police were called by the school deputy principal and searched in vain for the man.

He was described as of unknown ethnicity, scrawny, possibly in his 40s, about 165cm tall with long grey or silver hair and with an orange hue to his complexion.

He was wearing a grey sweatshirt with large pockets on the front.

Mr Black appealed to anyone who knew the man or had information about someone fitting the description to contact police or phone Crimestoppers.

CO - Ex-offenders forced into homelessness due to draconian laws

Original Article

It's a statewide problem because you have people in office who are not sticking to their oath of office to defend the constitution and rights of ALL people. Why are they homeless in the first place? Because of the draconian laws that do nothing to prevent crime or protect anybody, except turn people into desperate homeless people.


By Kelly Werthmann

PUEBLO - By law, sex offenders are required to register where they live with local police. But what happens if they are homeless?

That has been an issue for authorities across the state, most recently in Pueblo where 27-year-old [name withheld] recently moved. [name withheld] is a registered sexually violent predator, but also claims he is homeless.

During the past few years, Colorado police have had a difficult time tracking sex offenders that do not have a home address.

"It is a statewide issue," Pueblo Police Detective Jeff Shay of the Criminal Investigations Division said. "Some are on probation or parole, so they can be tracked through GPS in their ankle monitors. However, individuals like [name withheld], he has no restrictions at all. He doesn't have probation or parole, so he basically can go anywhere you and I can go, and there is nothing that can be done. Homeless sex offenders have found a loophole in the system. There is no legal way to track them."
- A loophole? No, the state has found a way to make people homeless, by exiling them!

It is an issue that is frustrating for both police and the public.

"I don't really know what to think about it, it concerns me," Pueblo resident and mother Jessica Busch said. "They have houses for mental illness people, they should have houses for homeless sex offenders so they can keep in contact with them."
- That has been tried, and when homeless offenders move into a home/trailer created by the state, the mob comes out and protests it.  So that won't work either. You need to eradicate the residency restrictions, then they can live in a normal home.

Authorities have attempted to change the laws in Colorado regarding homeless sex offenders, but their efforts have been unsuccessful.

"We tried this year," Shay said. "Law enforcement tried to get the legislature to change the laws to make the homeless registered sex offenders come in every 30 days. That didn't go through, it didn't sell well to the government."
- Well, you could always repeal the residency restrictions!

Though police are doing what they can to keep the public informed about registered sex offenders in local neighborhoods, some people believe keeping track of such crimes is unrealistic.

"I think the responsibility lies with the caregivers of children to make sure they know at all times that their children are safe," Colorado Springs resident and elementary school teacher Ana Alfonso said.

Police agree that citizens do need to be aware of their surroundings.

"There is no cause for alarm, it is just nice to know what these guys look like and where they live so you can put that in your safety plan with your family and try to avoid those places," Shay said. "But when you don't know where they are at, it makes people a little uneasy. It's just something we have to deal with until the laws change."

OH - Wayne County family posts warning signs after claiming neighbor attacked their child

Original Article


By Joe Pagonakis

Some residents want the signs removed

RITTMAN - They are warning signs that have caused quite a stir in the usually quiet town of Rittman.

The signs read, "Beware, a sex offender lives close." Some residents are extremely upset about the signs, urging city officials to have them taken down.

Mike Sayre
The signs were made out of large pieces of plywood and spray paint by concerned father Mike Sayre.

Sayre made the signs six weeks ago, after he claimed his 8-year-old daughter was sexually assaulted by a neighbor. But some residents living near Sayre's home said the signs are creating a panic and are damaging to property values.

"I'm just trying to protect my kids, and other children in the neighborhood," said Sayre. "My signs are 100 percent legal. I don't name anybody, it's a public warning."

Still, some neighbors have turned to the Chippewa Township Trustees, who are now trying to determine if the warning signs are a violation of any township regulations.

Rachelle Sayre
Rachelle Sayre supports her husband and the signs posted in all parts of their front and backyard.

"We're trying to warn them, we don't want this to happen to their children," said Sayre. "He could do this to any child in this neighborhood."
- So could you or your own husband.  It's a known fact that most kids are sexually abused by their own families.

5 On Your Side contacted the Wayne County Prosecutor's office, and it has pledged to increase the number of resources committed to the ongoing investigation.

The neighbor involved in this case has been questioned by the Wayne County Sheriff's Department, but has not been charged.

Wayne County Children Services is also looking into the case, and is helping the Sayre family with counseling.

The Chippewa Township Trustees still aren't sure if the signs will need to come down.

"It's no different than going to the Wayne County sex offender website and searching for somebody," said Sayre. "I have no plans to take them out of my yard."

WV - New Internet predator law takes effect Wednesday

Original Article


By Mannix Porterfield

CHARLESTON - Beginning Wednesday (06/08/2011), sexual predators using the Internet to prey on unsuspecting minors, or to download child pornography, won't be able to use a fake name to shield themselves from police in West Virginia.

Under provisions of SB186 (PDF), law enforcement agencies will be able to use an administrative subpoena to get a real address and telephone number from an Internet provider or telephone company, cutting the time for tracking potential predators from days, or even weeks, to a matter of hours.

"We're on the eve of a powerful new tool for the State Police," said Sen. Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, one of the more outspoken advocates of the new law, which officially goes on the books Wednesday.

"This has been something we've been working for and fighting for now over a year and half. As a parent, as a lawmaker, you like being able to play a role in providing a tool, especially a tool that will protect our children."

In reaching those suspected of contacting minors on the Internet for a sexual rendezvous, police have been restrained by the time it takes to track them down through ordinary channels, since all they see is an online alias.

"They have been frustrated in the past with the slow process to be able to identify who these online predators are," Jenkins said.

"These predators are slick operators. They think they're anonymous, hiding behind their IP addresses, and the State Police have had a patchwork, literally, of 55 different county prosecutors and local court systems. There's not a one-stop shop and a standard format to be able to get the IP address identified."

The new law covers any law enforcement agency, and all will be using a standard subpoena form drafted by the West Virginia Supreme Court.

"Police believe this will improve their investigations," Jenkins said.

"It will speed them up. I've got to think it could save the life of a young child now that we are able to identify quicker than before who the online predator is."

Fourteen senators signed on as sponsors, among them Sen. Bill Laird, D-Fayette, a four-term sheriff in Fayette County, Richard Browning, D-Wyoming, and Ron Miller, D-Greenbrier.

With the current, slow process of hunting the suspected predators, Jenkins said it is conceivable that many are getting away their crimes.

"We would be naive to think that law enforcement is catching every predator," he said.

Jenkins once sat in on a sting operation run by State Police Sgt. Christopher Casto, head of the special Crimes Against Children Unit, and said he was aghast at the number of adults trying to set up a meeting with a child for sex.
- If you don't know their real names until you get IP information, etc, how do you know they are indeed adults?

"I'm a realist to recognize there's a lot of sick individuals we're not catching," he said.

Two key components are embedded in the law. One streamlines the process for getting real names and addresses. The other is the time element.

"Cutting the time to identify where these IP addresses are registered and in what name and what address can cut a process that sometimes takes weeks to now a process that can take potentially just hours is part of the magic to this," he said.

"And time can save a life."

Based on his observations at the sting operation, and his conversations with police, Jenkins suggested law enforcement agencies will have their hands full.

"Unfortunately, I think we are probably just getting the tip of the iceberg," he said.