Thursday, October 20, 2011

MO - State lawmaker looks at break with federal sex offender guidlines

Original Article


By Dick Aldrich

JEFFERSON CITY - Major changes could be on the horizon for Missouri’s sex offender registry.

The state representative leading a committee that is looking into ways of cutting down the size of the state’s sex offender registry says it may make sense for the state to detach itself from federal sex registry rules.

Rep. Rodney Schad, R-Versailles, said Wednesday that large numbers of people on the state sex offenders registry are there due to federal rules that are more stringent than state laws. Schad said the result is hundreds, maybe thousands, of people on the sex registry do not have to be on that list. Schad said people on the list for less serious crimes aren’t able to find jobs and wind up costing the state through public assistance.

We have some people that are absolutely no risk to society, to children, or to anyone else that are burdened with this label of ‘sex offender’”, Schad said.

Schad thinks that by allowing certain sex offenders to have a route off the official registry, the state will be able to save money — enough to overcome federal grant money that would be cut off if the state bucks federal sex offender statute mandates.

During testimony before Schad’s committee this week, Highway Patrol Captain Tim McGrail, who oversees the state’s sex offender registry, said the state would stand to lose $500,000 a year in federal money if the laws are changed the way Schad is proposing.
- Just like the "50,000 online predators" statistic, I think this is just another goldilock number, one that is not too large and not too small.  I wonder if he can back that up with facts?  I doubt it.  And I wonder, since another article has a person stating the grant money is for the "War on drugs," and not the sex offender registry, if they are wanting the money for the same reason?

Schad thinks it’s possible the state could recoup that money in savings on state programs for offenders who could come off the list.

There are currently more than 12,000 people on Missouri’s sex offenders’ list. Schad said that list has grown dramatically in the last four years as the state tries to stay in line with increasingly stringent federal guidelines.

We’ve grown in the last four years, about 4,000 offenders on the registry,” said Schad. “That’s just unacceptable. We may have ruined another 4,000 lives.”
- Wow, and here he admits they have ruined lives!

Schad’s committee may hold more hearings in other areas of the state as it prepares to draft legislation for the upcoming legislation session. Last year, Schad sponsored a bill that would have made changes to state rules on who must register for the sex offenders list and for how long. The bill received overwhelming support in the House of Representatives, but died without a committee hearing in the State Senate.

CANADA - Oxford voters approve sex offender residency restriction

Original Article

Notice that they held the conference at a middle school, a place ex-sex offenders, in most cases, cannot attend, so basically they cannot voice their opinions on the laws they are faced with.


OXFORD - Voters at last night’s 43-minute special town meeting zipped through all 10 articles, unanimously voting to accept a new bylaw limiting residency for convicted sex offenders and to expand the tax break already given to IPG Photonics Corp.

The meeting, held at Oxford Middle School for the first time since the new high school opened in 2002, started on time at 7 p.m. when a quorum of 100 voters was reached.

Voters easily reached consensus on a proposal by Selectman Michael Voas that the town accept a new bylaw prohibiting Level 2 and 3 sex offenders from “establishing a permanent residence within 1,000 feet of any school, daycare center, park or elderly housing facility” in town. The vote was taken shortly after Mr. Voas detailed a list of crimes, including rape of a child, committed by convicted sex offenders living in town.

These are clearly not the kind of people we want living next to our schools or day care centers,” he said.

There was no discussion before the vote to grant IPG a seven-year tax incremental financing agreement on a proposed 101,500-square-foot, $18.1 million expansion of its world headquarters at 50 Old Webster Road.

Voters also unanimously agreed to transfer $25,000 to the stabilization account; to create a new stabilization fund for the high school debt and to transfer $1.4 million into the new fund; to transfer $339,058 from the health insurance budget to the police, fire and school operating budgets; and to transfer $39,570 to the police salary adjustment account as part of a collective bargaining agreement ratified with the Oxford Police Association, as ordered by the state Joint Labor-Management Committee.

Voters also authorized the purchase of seven acres of land abutting the Oxford Industrial Park East for $3,500; accepted a drainage easement at 25 Whiting Road; and changed the zoning of a parcel of land west of Federal Hill Road from industrial to residential.

Comparing the situation of Soviet Jews in USSR with sex offenders in the U.S.

Original Article


By Y Estrin

As a former Soviet citizen and Soviet Jew, I experienced a huge discrimination in the USSR. All Soviet citizens had passports with a record of nationality in them. Some people had Russian nationality, some Ukranian nationality, and some, like me, had a Jewish record on the first page. We needed to show a passport when applying for jobs, getting housing, or entering university. And when you had a Jewish record it was like being a registered sex offender in the US today.

Jews were pariahs in the USSR. You should not tell anybody you were a Jew. Some Russian people would beat you. Silently, the Soviet government supported this. When I was a child, some neighbors knew we were Jews, so they sent their kids to fight with me. I was beaten many times, just because of the Jewish scarlet letter. The Soviet Police were responsible for maintaining the passport system, and putting the Scarlett Jewish ID there. This looks just like the situation for sex offenders in many states today. When their neighbors learn a sex offender family has moved next door, the sex offenders and their families are hassled, possibly their houses attacked, and some sex offenders have even been killed.

After graduating from high school I was going to Leningrad university. A university worker asked for my passport. He made a note about nationality, and told me there are too many Jews here. As a result I got an F on my first test, and could not enter university. I was an A+ student in high school. When I tried to go to a technical college, they again noted my Jewish record.

As a result I got C's and B's on tests, but they allowed me in. I was all A student in college. Jewish people were not allowed to go for PhD, so after graduation I was going to try to work in a military industry plant. When I came to human resources, the first thing they asked me was, 'Are you a Jew?' And then they did not want to give me a job, but finally had to give me the worst position. Each time I was looking for job, HR asked for a passport, and looked for the Jewish record.

This is very similar to the employment situation for sex offenders in the USA. Human resources will look for a sex offender record, and then you will not be hired, or you will be kicked out if you already have been hired. Last year I got a a low level job repairing some hardware. I worked just one day and then was kicked out when HR got the background investigation result.

What is the difference between my past Jewish pariah status and now my sex offender pariah status? I am unemployed for 6 years, since 2002.

In 1996 I thought I had enough in the former USSR. I had relatives in the US, and sent them an application for entering the US. The US embassy invited my family for an interview in Moscow. I explained to them all the discrimination I had experienced. I remembered that one of the US officers interviewing me asked me if I could practice my religion. My answer was: ¨Synagogue¨ here is a very bad, illegal word, so what are you talking about?

I got refugee status based on human rights´ violations in the former USSR. My family moved to the US. But in the US I did not escape the scarlet letter, I got another one! I was branded ¨sex offender.¨ There is an article about how this happened to me. You can find it here.

As you can see from this article, the situation for Jews in the USSR was exactly the same as the situation for sex offenders in the year 2008 in the USA!

All governments in all ages need enemies! They try to create a class of pariahs to blame for everything, and divert people attention from the real problems.

I should clarify some terms. Some people told me that Jews were hated for what they were, and "sex offenders" are hated for what they did. This is not true. Here is article "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

You can read 'The libels that the Jews used blood of Christian children for the Feast of Passover, poisoned the wells and spread the plague were pretexts for the wholesale destruction of Jewish communities throughout Europe. Tales were circulated among the masses of secret rabbinical conferences whose aim was to subjugate and exterminate the Christians, and motifs like these are found in early antisemitic literature.'

Jews were accused with the same thing as modern America sex offenders - harming kids.

What ordinary US citizen can think when he hear these 2 terrible words: Sex Offender.

He may only think about child murder, as our press and TV report every day.

In fact most American sex offenders never did such terrible crimes, and I think are a victims of social order to create a group similar with Jews to blame, because there are no more group to do such thing in US.

I consider my situation in the democratic USA much worse and even more dangerous than my situation had been in the former USSR. More dangerous, because, although I suffered discrimination, the Soviet government never used their criminal justice system as an instrument of repression against me.

TX - Past concerns revealed for former officer (Bobby Beasley) accused in sexual assault

Bobby Beasley
Original Article



A former police officer accused of sexual assault has faced accusations involving other women in the past.

Bobby Beasley worked for Dalworthington Gardens and resigned after a woman accused him of sexually assaulting her. Prosecutors charged Beasley in September. That case continues.

Now documents obtained by News 8 show Beasley's prior employer also investigated concerns about Beasley — questions Dalworthington Gardens says it knew nothing about.

In 1998, Sgt. Bobby Beasley worked for the Bedford Police Department. That year, a female officer reported Beasley after he allegedly questioned her sexual activities. She quoted him as saying, "So who are you [expletive]?"

That officer also told internal investigators "...ever since she began the Police Academy, that Sgt. Beasley appeared to have shown a greater interest in her than others."

Beasley said he had been misinterpreted, but was given a three-day suspension, 90 days probation, and sensitivity training.

Three years later, more questions arose.

Euless police Cpl. Scott Axton learned he would be teaching a field sobriety testing school with Beasley at Tarrant County College. As detailed later in a report to Bedford’s police chief, Axton said a state coordinator for the sobriety testing school ”...did warn me to 'be careful,” adding "...he had received several complaints about the manner in which Sgt. Beasley conducted himself..." during the schools.

Axton contacted an officer who had taught with Beasley. Axton said he was told that in another class, "Beasley was 'flirting' with one of the female volunteers and dosed her to a level that caused her to pass out and have to be transported to the hospital by ambulance."

Axton went forward with his appointment to teach the class with Beasley. During that class, on June 1, 2001, a female volunteer who worked for the Euless Police Department accused Beasley of trying to kiss her after she had been given alcohol. Axton reported it.

According to Euless Police Department spokesman Lt. Eric Starnes,”He was supported in passing along what he knew.”

Beasley said he did not do it, and passed a polygraph. The Bedford Police Department could not prove or disprove the accusation.

The sobriety school, however, removed Beasley from its pool of instructors saying that, "By attempting to kiss [the volunteer], Mr. Beasley clearly created an environment that was threatening and uncomfortable."

News 8 asked Dalworthington Gardens Chief Bill Waybourne whether the department had known about the records we found. “We did not check those things," he said. "We knew him by reputation, knew his family, and thought this would be a good fit. That's what we went on. We also knew he had been honorably retired from the Bedford Police Department.”

Beasley's attorney Terri Moore defended the veteran officer. "In his 24 years with the Bedford Police Department, he received numerous commendations and was twice recognized as Officer of the Year," she said.

"I just know he's innocent," Beasley's wife said. "We have an army of people praying with us, and the truth is going to come out."

Bobby Beasley resigned from Dalworthington Gardens this year after that department began investigating the sexual assault accusations of a Fort Worth woman, Nikki Baker, against Beasley.

"There wasn't any kind of hesitation when he did that to me,” Baker said. “And I figured, you know what? If you done me like that, he's probably did this to somebody else.”

According to Bedford Police Department records, in 2001 Beasley did admit to "sexual relations with various people, while on his lunch breaks,” saying he "might have had sexual relations with between 10-20 females, over the past 13 years."

Beasley, however, said the incidents did not occur on or in city property or vehicles, and were unrelated to assignments and official duties.

The department concluded it could not substantiate any departmental violations related to that activity.

The Tarrant County District Attorney's office has filed a sexual assault charge against Beasley. While that case focuses soley on Baker's claims, his past personnel records could come out in court.

"Ethically, I cannot comment on the details of any specific case prior to its resolution," said District Attorney Joe Shannon. "I can tell you as a general rule, in all criminal cases, prior bad acts can be used in punishment and be given whatever weight the jury or judge wants to give it."

Beasley's attorney released the following statement to News 8:

Anyone can be falsely accused of misconduct or of a crime. Police officers are especially vulnerable to these types of accusations due to the nature of their work.

During Mr. Beasley’s tenure at Bedford Police Department, he was falsely accused of attempting to kiss a volunteer. The police department did a thorough investigation which included interviewing many witnesses and requiring officer Beasley to take a polygraph test which he passed as you can see from the documents you requested. The allegation of attempting to kiss the volunteer was NOT SUSTAINED.

You allege that Mr. Beasley had sex during lunch breaks while working for the Bedford Police Department. Once again the Bedford P.D. completed a thorough investigation of this allegation and made a finding of NOT SUSTAINED while on duty. Again, this shows how easily a police officer can be wrongfully accused of misconduct.

In 1998 there was an incident among three Bedford Officers. Mr. Beasley used some foul language and was required to take a sensitivity course. He continued to work for the department for an additional 10 years.

In his 24 years with the Bedford P.D., he received numerous commendations and was twice recognized as officer of the year .

Please remember that in this country the law says that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in court. Mr. Beasley looks forward to his day in court to clear his name.

MO - House Committee Hearing

Posted with permission from the author.

Well I'm back.

Here is a run down.

First speaker was a Criminal Defense Attorney. He pointed out some problems with the registry, then got off track and talked about sting operations.

Then there were three personal stories. These brought tears to many eyes.

One of these was a victim who was abused by he brother. This was many years ago. She stated that he has changed and should not be on the registry, she said that his inclusion on the registry is a violation of her right to privacy as those who know her brother know what he did to her because the charges are listed on-line.

Next was a Dr. Wells Hively. He spoke on the ill effects of registering juveniles.

I should note that the committee members were attentive and asking all the right questions.

Next was a representative for the highway patrol. He brought boxes of stuff for the committee. He began to explain the registry and why it was set up in the first place. It didn't take long to realize he didn't know much about the laws involved, in fact on many occasions when he was being questioned he said he didn't know.

It came down to one committee member asking him if it was all about the money. WOW! What a moment. He stuttered and said in kind of a backing up way, well it's about safety, but the money is needed (get this) for the war on drugs. Yes he said it, the lost Byrne grant money goes to the war on drugs, not the sex offender registry (SOR).

The committee was not pleased and this questioning went on for a while, revolving around the money.

There was also a good deal of questioning as to whether or not the registry is punitive. The highway patrol representative was hesitant to answer, but said it was not his place to answer on that question.

The next person to testify was an officer from the county level. She stated that her county only had 22 Registered Sex Offenders (RSO's). Many were not able to get work, some were homeless. You could tell she really cared about them. She said that the county didn't receive any funds for the work of registering. So the highway patrol wants the money and is not passing it on to the county level. She also stated that the time spent on registering offenders could be better spent on other, more important things.

In the afternoon there where more personal stories. Durring one of these stories the representative for the state patrol interjected and the committee invited him back for more questions.

At this point the highway patrol representative stated that it did not matter what laws the state of Missouri passes, if they remove any offender from the registry they are putting them (the RSO's) in danger of being prosecuted on the federal level for failure to register. It looked bad after this. The committee felt like they could do nothing to fix the registry.

When asked how this all works the highway patrol representative said he did not know how it worked.

Next was Amy Borror, public defender, state of Ohio spoke. She talked about the effects of the Adam Walsh Act (AWA) in Ohio. How the AWA turned the registry upside down. She stated that "we really don't know how deregistration will effect RSO's who are removed from the registry. To date no one has been prosecuted for such an offence as failure to register after a state has removed a person from the registry." (As long as they stay in that state)

A mother told her story. It was so sad. Her son was mistreated by the system and ended up committing suicide. We all cried. The representatives asked her many questions. She gave very good answers.

One of the last people to speak was a wrongful conviction. He told his story and presented legal documents proving his innocents.

After the meeting I spoke with one of the representatives . This man is the real deal. He is sick of the Feds, sick of the highway patrol. I told him how the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) works; listings on the national registry come from the state registries. And if a person is removed from the state registry, they are also removed from he national registry. He took notes.

I told him that if the feds were going to prosecute for failure to register they would have gone after those in Maine and Ohio who have been removed, but they have not.

He said, "Good! So if we want to shut the thing down, we can." I said under the 10th amendment, yes you can. It may take a court battle but I pointed out that the AWA is not a law, it is a mandate. A representative who was standing near by pointed out the Missouri was the very last state the enact the federal DUI mandate of .08% and the feds never caused anyone any problems over it.

All this left me with the feeling that these state representatives are sick of being lied to and are ready to get tough on those who are pushing the SOR.

The battle lines are drawn. Let's see what happens.