Monday, November 11, 2013

AZ - Mental health registry a step in the right direction

Mental health will drive you mad!Original Article

Like we've said many times, eventually everybody will be on an online sinners registry! Bang your head, Mental Health will drive you mad!


It seems almost inevitable that whenever there has been a mass shooting or other public emergency, the person involved in it is found to have been dealing with mental issues that were either ignored or not reported properly.
- Of course, it's not rocket science.  You'd have to be crazy to do something like that!

There has been much discussion of this weakness in our social system and what to do about it, but there seldom seems to be an effective public response to the problem.

We are pleased to see Arizona may soon be an exception to that lack of response.

It was recently reported by Arizona Capitol Times that there is an effort underway to establish a Mental Health Registry in our state that could have positive consequences, including alerting law enforcement officers to persons they encounter who are under court supervision or found mentally incompetent by a court.

It would also help better identify those with mental conditions who are prohibited from buying or possessing firearms and ensure they are included in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which is checked when people buy firearms.

Currently, only a small percentage of those who are mentally ill are actually put into the system in our state due to reporting failures, according to the Capitol Times report. The new registry is intended to greatly increase inclusion of those who should be in the system.
- So when are we going to have an online registry of corrupt politicians?

It is supported by the State Bar of Arizona and the state’s Criminal Justice Commission. The database would be created and managed by the Arizona Supreme Court, but first would require approval from the commission which is scheduled to meet in mid-November.

Plans for the registry are currently being drawn up, and mental health advocates are rightly insisting that protections be included for those who are mentally ill and who are successfully treated so they are removed from the reporting system when they should no longer be there.

The creation of the Mental Health Registry and improved reporting could be very positive steps. The fact that the Arizona Supreme Court would be overseeing it also gives us confidence it would include proper protections. We hope it is implemented quickly.

The latest technology in child tracking devices

GPS for your child
Original Article (Video Available)

Well the media is always saying how "cunning" and "smart" those who wear the "sex offender" label are, but now I guess they think they are stupid and won't think to cut off the tracking device if they decide to kidnap a child?

Just another way for some company to exploit fear to make a quick buck, just like the Brinks home alarm systems.


By Kori Chambers

Avonte Oquendo has been missing since October 4th. Brianna Council since November 3rd and Gloria Gonzalez-Sanchez since September 2nd.

They are just three missing children in our area. However, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, roughly 800,000 kids are reported missing each year in the U.S.
- Most by their own parents or close family, so it wouldn't be of much help!

Perhaps if parents were able to track their children that number would be lower. It’s a radical thought, but some companies are developing technology to do just that.
- Sure they are, exploiting your fear to make money, nothing new here.

Todd Morris of Brick House Security stopped by the PIX11 morning news to show us how one particular child tracking device works.

See Also:

UK - Former senior police officer Ian Paterson jailed for indecency

Ian Paterson
Ian Paterson
Original Article


A retired senior police officer has been jailed for 18 months for sexually assaulting three women.
- 18 months for abusing three women?  The average citizen would get a lot more than 1 1/2 years.  It's good to be a cop!

Former chief superintendent Ian Paterson made inappropriate remarks to the women and touched them on the body while working as a charity boss.

Paterson had started working at the Aberdeen Council of Voluntary Organisations after he retired from Grampian Police.

Last month he was found guilty of three charges after a six-day trial.

At his sentencing, Andrew McIntyre, procurator fiscal for sheriff and jury cases in the north of Scotland, said: "Prosecutors take crimes of sexual offences extremely seriously and are committed to ensuring that all such cases are investigated thoroughly and prosecuted appropriately."
- Really?  Your kidding, right?

"Victims can have confidence that their cases will be handled by specialists, who are committed wherever possible to bringing those who commit sexual offences of any kind to justice."
- Except if the accused is a cop, politician or works for the government!

Feeling vulnerable
Paterson, from Tarves in Aberdeenshire, went on trial in October facing nine charges of indecent and sexual assaults against seven women.

But the charity boss, who was suspended from his role, denied the offences and insisted that he was just a "tactile" person.
- Protecting the "Good Ole' Boys?"

However, the women he assaulted described incidents where he had touched them inappropriately leaving them feeling vulnerable and uncomfortable.

He put his arms around two of the woman and touched their bottoms in city centre offices.

And he rubbed his clothed body against one of the two women and attempted to touch her breasts between July and October last year.

His third victim was touched on the leg and arm while she was travelling in his car on the way to Edinburgh on 29 August 2012.

Sheriff Annella Cowan said it was clear from social inquiry reports that Paterson did not understand and did not perceive that what he did was wrong.

She said: "The trial was very carefully constructed to make as little reference as possible to your career as a policeman."

"As a senior police officer, you must have been aware that the way you behaved was not appropriate."

UK - I'm ashamed, says woman (Natasha Foster) who made false rape claim

Natasha Foster
Natasha Foster
Original Article


A young Ballymena woman who falsely cried rape two years ago then spilled the truth to police said she is "ashamed" of herself.

Young mum Natasha Foster (23) told police in November 2011 that she had been raped but two days later the liar came clean.

However, before she told police the truth they had arrested, questioned and put the man falsely accused of her rape in a cell.

Later this month she will be sentenced for perverting the course of justice by knowingly providing a false statement.

The mum-of-one said police didn't believe her at first when she came clean and thought she was just trying to protect the man she falsely accused of raping her.

"They thought I was making it up. They thought I was lying to get him out of trouble," she said.

Foster claims she now wishes the whole thing had never happened. She said: "I really regret it, if I could turn back time and change it I would."

"It's taken two years for the court case to come about so it's just sort of hit me all at once now."

She has also realised the repercussions her actions may have on genuine rape victims.

"At the end of the day there are rape victims out there and it has effectively messed their whole lives up. I can understand how angry they would be at me."

Foster also revealed that friends of hers have been the victims of genuine serious sexual assaults.

"I have seen what they have went through. They will never be right in their life again," she said.

Commenting on her remorse, she said: "It was just selfishness, stupidity. I am ashamed of myself to be quite honest."

Natasha said she will take whatever sentence is handed down to her "on the chin" but is worried about the impact it will have on her family.

"I am not even worried about going to jail for myself, it's my child that I am worried for," she told the Sunday Life.

Foster was due to be sentenced at Antrim Crown Court last week but the case was adjourned to determine whether her victim, who remains anonymous to protect his identity, could appear in court.

Judge Desmond Marrinan said he was worried about the possibility the man could suffer "added damage" if he appears in court.

See Also:

Static 99 developers attempting to deflect criticism of their program admit the obvious

Original Article


In a recent article posted here, the static-99 (an actuarial assessment instrument) developers are embracing retention and have posted a new report that sex offender risk plunges over time and the community. This is something that has been widely recognized for a long period of time, with many studies pointing this out. It would appear that the Static 99 developers are trying to deflect criticism of their program by admitting things that studies have been proving for the past decade. It seems a little late on their part to admit the obvious.

The Static 99 evaluation has played a key part in the sentencing phase of the criminal justice system. Not to mention that it is also played a large role in deciding rather somebody should be committed after their prison time is up to a mental institution. Now they are saying “whoops, sorry we made a few mistakes”.

It seems to me that the clinicians are still trying to get across that people convicted of sex crimes have a high re-offense rate which just is not the case. In fact in a recent study done for the Nebraska Legislature (Nebraska sex offender registry study) that looked at all the people who had been convicted of sex crimes in Nebraska they found a real offense rate of 6/10 of one percent per year. Most of you will remember the Department of Justice study that was done in 1997 looking at prisoners released in 1994, they came up with the re-offense rate of 3.5% for the worst of the worst. But there was a table missing (Missing Table From Report NCJ 198251 (Exhibit 6F) Exhibit 4) that showed the percentage that sex offenders were involved in new sex crimes during that time in those states in the study that showed that the general public (or non-sex offenders) was responsible for 187,132 new cases, or 99.973% of the new sex crimes reported in that time period. So to say that “risk of committing a new sexual crime may become indistinguishable from the risk presented by non-sexual offenders”, this is actually so far off base it isn’t even funny. The general public is way more likely to be involved in the new sex crime then a person on the registry.