Monday, February 17, 2014

WI - Sex offender who can't find a home told to sleep in jail

Homeless man
Original Article

Since when did homelessness due to draconian and unconstitutional laws become a crime? If this man is not on probation / parole we do not think they can force him to stay at the jail.


By Ashley Luthern

_____, a registered sex offender, has nowhere to live because of local sex offender laws so the Wisconsin Department of Corrections is requiring him to report to the Racine County jail every night, according to the Journal Times.

_____, who is applying for jobs to save money for rent, told the Journal Times that he would rather stay in the jail at night than be homeless. Some attorneys have questioned the legality of the statewide practice of holding homeless sex offenders in jail.

Mount Pleasant, Racine, Sturtevant and Caledonia have ordinances that limit how close offenders can live to schools, day cares, churches, parks and playgrounds.

See Also:

DE - Milton may reduce sex offender restrictions

Original Article


By Jon Bleiweis


MILTON - The town's sex offender residency restriction laws state that a sex offender cannot reside within 3,000 feet of a school, park or child care center.

But because of the town's size and the proliferation of schools, parks and child care centers in town, there is no place a sex offender could legally reside in the 1.2-square mile town.

Town Solicitor Seth Thompson said two attorneys have clients who intend to challenge the town's rules, should they remain as is.

As a result, a proposed ordinance would lower the 3,000-foot radius to have areas of town where a sex offenders could live legally.

The public will be able to discuss the proposal in a Feb. 27 public hearing, scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Milton Public Library.
- Of course it's a place ex-offenders cannot go to voice their opinions!

"We want to make sure that the town ordinance can withstand any sort of constitutional challenge," Thompson said. "The difficulty is there as at least one federal case fairly recently that said a town ordinance cannot just completely exclude a class of people from that municipality because that would lead to a domino effect where the next municipality would do the same."

Thompson said Milton's policy differs from the Delaware state code, which uses a 500-foot radius, which does not apply to parks or day care facilities.

"It's not that we're loosening things, so much as making sure we're complying with the law and that this will be enforced so the town's children can be protected," he said.

Mayor Marion Jones said many council members have received emails from constituents concerned about the issue.

"I have found in trying to explain it as being a question of constitutionality that that explanation falls on deaf ears," she said.

Thompson said it would be practical for Town Council to take a proactive approach and change the laws.

"If the ordinance is thrown out, then the argument is you only have the 500 feet from schools that the state code provides for," he said. "So anybody can move in anywhere other than the offenders that are within that state limitation."

The Public Flaw in Megan's Law

Sex offender laws are flawed
Original Article


By Rob McKenzie

What illegal behavior is part of your past? Speeding? Underage drinking? Leaving a store with an item you didn't pay for?

If you got caught, were you punished by a state-run website listing your offense and notifying others where you lived?

Probably not.

But what if those were your punishments? Would they have stopped your objectionable behavior in the future?

Probably not.

Because public humiliation generally doesn't work as a method of behavior modification.

And that's why Megan's Law, which requires authorities to notify communities of the whereabouts of sex offenders, is a bad idea.

In fact, a 2011 study in the Journal of Law and Economics by J.J. Prescott of the University of Michigan and Jonah E. Rockoff of Columbia University, finds that Megan's Law actually increases the possibility that sex offenders will offend again.

The researchers explain that when sex offenders are publicly identified, they're convinced they have no chance of getting back gainful employment, decent housing and normal social relations.

As a result, they spiral into depression, loneliness and ultimately that which is at the crux of their subsequent actions: desperation.

In general, when people are publicly humiliated, they tend to seek revenge by secretly (even more than before) continuing the offending behavior.

The argument here isn't that sexual offenders should be forgiven or excused from punishment. Sexual abuse is obviously a heinous behavior that irrevocably harms other human beings.

Rather, the argument is that with Megan's Law, the public ends up gloating over the eternal punishment of an offender and then "feeling" safer.

But even that assumption is upside down. Because if you search through one of the many publicly available databases of convicted sexual offenders and find an offender who lives near you, it only leads you to be wary of walking past their residence or even to avoid their side of the street completely.

That's not feeling safer.

Nor should you feel safer since Megan's Law makes it more likely for a sex offender to repeat an offense.

The line of thinking in this column won't be popular. But if we are going to let sex offenders out of prison — and maybe we shouldn't — we should give them a legitimate chance to normalize their lives.

What we learned all those years ago from reading "The Scarlet Letter" still stands:

Public humiliation is a shame.

UK - Children as young as 10 arrested for rape as 10 cautions given out for child sex crimes in Cambridgeshire

Juvenile sex offenders
Original Article



Ten offenders have been given a ‘slap on the wrist’ by Cambridgeshire police over sex crimes involving children, as tough new rules are brought in over cautions for serious offences.

New data has also revealed children as young as 10 have been arrested on suspicion of rape.

A total of 52 under 16 year- olds have been arrested over alleged rape since 2009 and of those, 36 saw no further action taken, including two 11-year-old boys and a boy aged 10.

A dozen were charged including two aged 13, two aged 14 and 10 aged 15 – the rest were bailed.

Police Minister Damian Green has told the News the Government is “tightening up the rules” on cautions for serious offences.

The police data revealed three cautions for causing or inciting a female child to engage in sexual activity were issued. Three cautions were handed out for sexual activity with a female child and two involving a boy.

Two cautions were issued for sexual assault on a child in the last two years and two for creating indecent images of children.

Mr Green said: “We have already changed the rules on simple cautions so they can’t be used for persistent repeat offenders or for very serious offences.”

There have been examples of, say, a 16-year-old boy and a 15-year-old girl where you may not want to have a criminal record for that.”

Any sex with anyone under 16 is rape so there are very small numbers of examples for that but obviously in general, any kind of hugely serious offence like that shouldn’t result in a caution, and we are tightening up the rules on that.”

Police have now been banned from handing out cautions to serial offenders after Justice Secretary Chris Grayling introduced new legislation on February 5. In future, a ‘slap on the wrist’ will be banned except in exceptional circumstances.

A police spokeswoman said the “decision to caution is not made lightly” and a raft of facts are taken into account.

She added: “It should also be noted that a caution is not a soft option. It has to be accepted by the alleged offender, is a matter of permanent record and can result in the offender being placed on the Sex Offenders Register.”

The decision to caution is also made or approved by the Crown Prosecution Service in sexual offence cases of a serious nature. If young people are involved, the Youth Offending Service become involved and, if appropriate, the cautions are conditional to the young people taking part in a suitable programme with support services.”

MT - Former Malta police officer (Taylon Bain) sentenced for child sex abuse

Taylon Bain
Taylon Bain
Original Article


By Emilie Boyles

GLENDIVE - Former Glendive and Malta police officer Taylon Bain was sentenced to 32 years prison in the Montana State Prison with 24 of the years suspended on four counts of sexual intercourse without consent and one count of sexual abuse of a child.

The sentence was significantly longer and more than agreed to in a plea agreement signed last summer because since that time Bain violated the terms of therapy.

The charging documents identified four female victims between the ages of 13 and 16 beginning in 2004 through December 2009.

Prior to sentencing, Bain apologized to the court. He said he accepted responsibility for the crimes he has committed and said he was taking steps to become a better person and realize the problems he has.

Therapist Michael Sullivan from the South Central Treatment Associates in Billings testified that Bain has been diagnosed with multiple deviancies or compulsive predatory sexual interests which each manifested through grooming victims utilizing good works and positions of power, including his tenure as a police officer with the Glendive police department.

One victim said that she thought what she was being asked to do sexually was okay because Bain was a police officer.

The prosecution said that the community's inability to see that his charisma was part of the way he groomed his victims which he selected from a dance class, 4-H, and Special Olympics where he volunteered showed that the community would not support his treatment and he needed to be removed.

One letter said, "There have been many times I have left my children with Mr. Bain, including my daughter, in full confidence that they were in safe hands and I would do the same today without hesitation."

Bain is a former Glendive and Malta police officer who served as an officer during some of the time period during which his crimes occurred.

Since leaving law enforcement several years ago Bain has worked as DJ/sound man and for oilfield service companies. He also owns a trucking company. Sullivan testified that Bain should not be allowed to own his own business as that would not allow for the type of supervision necessary for his crime and type of diagnosis.

Bain will not be eligible for release or parole until he has completed at least phase one of sex offender treatment. He will also be required to take annual HIV tests, and throughout the duration of his supervision he will be required to have a trained chaperone when he is around anyone under the age of 18, never be in a position of power or authority over children, be registered for life as a sex offender, and pay for any counseling needs of his victims.

Judge Simonton noted "Even though you pleaded guilty to the four instances of sexual intercourse without consent it appears that there were many more... Your lawyer indicated you have a deviant sexual condition. I agree. Unfortunately that condition is uncontrolled." He went on to add that there were likely additional victims and that in incidents like this it is generally "not the whole story."