Sunday, June 22, 2008

UK - College girls banned from whistling at builders

View the article here

Now whisting at people can land you on the sex offender registry, for something that is not even sexually motivated. Yep, this world has totally gone insane. This is in the UK and not the US, but, it's still insane and just plain stupid, IMO.

06/22/2008

A further education college is having to protect builders from wolf-whistling girls, in a reversal of traditional gender stereotypes.

Officials at West Kent College in Tonbridge, Kent, sent an email to all pupils warning that the behaviour was "totally unacceptable", and saying any students caught harassing contractors would face disciplinary action.

The email was sent after a demolition team started work on a £94 million, three-year building project at the campus.

The email read: "It has come to the attention of the college that some female students have been making comments to, or whistling at, the builders both whilst on site and as they walk around the campus.

"Although we are sure no offence is meant, this constitutes harassment and is wholly unacceptable.

"We have asked the contractors' representative to pass on all instances of harassment to the college and we will take appropriate action which may include disciplinary action."

A spokeswoman for the contractors, Galliford Try, said: "We have no registered complaints on this issue. However we do not condone inappropriate behaviour from any parties on our sites."

Meanwhile new laws could see wolf-whistling builders placed on the sex offenders register. The Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill will create a new offence of "communicating indecently", punishable by up to 10 years in jail.

The legislation is intended to punish sexual harassment by text, emails and letters, but ministers also aim to include sexually explicit comments to strangers. It is expected that the law would only apply to persistent offenders.

At the moment, workmen who repeatedly make obscene comments to passers-by can be convicted of a breach of the peace.


NV - New Nevada law reclassifies sex offenders by crime

View the article here

06/22/2008

A new law set to take effect in Nevada next month is being challenged in court by sex offenders who say the state’s new classification system to track them makes some people seem more dangerous than they really are.

The law would classify offenders by the crime they committed instead of their assessed risk of re-offending. That means that some offenders could face stricter rules even if authorities believe they have a low risk of committing another sexual crime.

The law puts Nevada in accord with federal legislation passed in 2006 that called on states to categorize sex offenders in the same way.

Randall Roske, a lawyer who has filed suit on behalf of an offender who would face tough new restrictions once the law takes effect, said the new law is unconstitutional.

This new law will do nothing better to protect the public,” Roske said. “It’s a waste of resources and will demonize a group of people who are trying to put the past behind them and are not a risk to society.”
- Hell, they are already demonized by the media and politicians.

The lawsuit does not name the offender, but he is identified as a man who was convicted as a 20-year-old Marine in 1984 for raping a 20-year-old female soldier in the barracks while he was drunk.

Under the current laws, Roske’s client is considered by authorities as a low risk to re-offend, meaning his information is only shared with law enforcement, courts and prosecutors. His information is not posted on the state’s Web database of sex offenders.

The new law would force him to report to authorities every three months, give fingerprints and make his photo and personal information available on the Web.

Lt. Adam Page of the Division of Parole and Probation in the Department of Public Safety said the law helps keep information among each state consistent, but could be tough on offenders who have been staying out of trouble.

“These offenders know how to keep their nose clean, and all of a sudden they’re pulling the rug out from under them,” said Page. “They have to move or possibly be put on GPS. It’s changing overnight for these sex offenders and it’s through no fault of their own. I can see how they’d be upset about it.”

Democratic Assemblyman Bernie Anderson of Sparks says people have a right to know if sex offenders are living in their neighborhood.
- Where does it say in the law books people have this right? It doesn't exist... It's like the IRS laws, they don't exist either.

“Sex offenders, especially pedophiles, are not changing their behavior,” he said.

David Parks, a Democratic assemblyman who was chairman of the committee that introduced Nevada’s bill, said the state would have lost about $3 million in federal grant money if it didn’t fall in line with the federal law within three years.
- Yeah, and this GREED of money is why these draconian, unconstitutional laws are being passed, MONEY!!!!!!!! Every US citizen has constitutional rights, regardless of their past, or that is the way it has been, until recently when Bush became president... The above is basically EXTORTION!

Two other sex offenders in Nevada have filed suit to challenge the new law. Their lawyer, Richard Schonfeld, said the law was unconstitutional.


ARE YOU LOOKING FOR A JOB? CHECK THIS OUT

Are you looking for a job? Having a hard time getting someone to hire you? Check out these links so you can tell your prospective employer that he can get a special bond to hire a high risk employee!

http://www.bonds4jobs.com/index.html home page
http://www.bonds4jobs.com/index.html bond seekers
http://www.bonds4jobs.com/state-coordinators.html state directory


PA - Lebanon Juvenile Charged for Sex Act

View the article here

This is insane, the 12 or 13 year old should not be in jail, but punished by their parents. Neither one of these kids probably know what is wrong with what they did. INSANE!!! Also, why wasn't the 18 year old charged with creating and distributing child porn for taping it and sending it to friends?

06/20/2008

Lebanon County authorities are investigating a sex act case involving two juveniles - one of whom faces criminal charges.

The case involves a 13-year-old and 12-year-old. Both are young, but investigators said that even if the act seemed consensual, a 12-year-old cannot legally consent regardless of the other child's age.

On Wednesday, Lebanon County detectives arrested the 13-year-old boy for the March incident. They said that he engaged in a sex act with the 12-year-old girl at a Weidman Street playground.

The boy has been charged with involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child, indecent assault and sexual abuse.
- Ruined for life, before he even has a life.. This makes me so angry!!!!!!

According to investigators, other juveniles watched the sex act. An 18-year-old male recorded the act on a cell phone and showed the video to others.

The Lebanon County District Attorney's Office explained that, even though the children were just one year apart in age, the act is a crime.

"Any child who is 12 years of age or younger is incapable of consenting under Pennsylvania law," said Deputy District Attorney Megan Ryland Tanner. "So it's not one of those situations where you can say it was consensual, because the victim in this case was 12 years old."

The adult who is accused of recording the incident has not been charged. The district attorney's office said it is still investigating.


NH - Sister who lied about sex abuse is freed

View the article here

06/20/2008

A YOUNG girl who tore apart the lives of her brother and a teenage pal with false allegations of sexual abuse has been freed by the Court of Appeal.

The boy and his friend were forced to register as sex offenders following their wrongful convictions for indecent assault.

The girl's brother was even thrown out of the family home and forced into care, where he lived in misery for more than two years.

Last year, the girl's whole story was exposed as lies and in March at Southampton Crown Court she was jailed for 18 months for perverting the course of justice.
- So now she's out, and they are still labeled sex offenders for nothing!

But top judges showed mercy to the beleaguered family, who cannot be identified for legal reasons but who live in Hampshire, when they quashed her sentence and freed her to return home to her mother - and the brother whose teenage years she ruined.

Judge Gabriel Moss QC, sitting with Mr Justice Andrew Smith, substituted an 18- month supervision order in place of her custodial term.

He said: "The trial judge was right to be condemnatory of her conduct. However, this was a child whose situation, as well as that of her family, required support, rather than the punishment visited upon her."

The court heard how the girl's lies spiralled out of control after she first made allegations against her 15-year-old brother and his 14-year-old friend.

Aged just 11, the girl told police that the boys had assaulted her in 2003 when she was nine years old. Court proceedings were instigated and they were convicted of indecent assault and handed ninemonth supervision orders.

But the boy's mother also kicked him out of the family home, condemning him to two years in care.

It was not until last summer when the girl's story began to unravel and she admitted that she made up the story to get her brother into trouble.

At the Crown Court, she admitted perverting the course of justice and was sentenced to 18 months' detention.

The now 14-year-old girl appeared in court and was flanked by two security guards as her barrister, Jeremy Barton, who appealed against the detention order, on the grounds that it was "wrong in principle".
- OK, so this whole story is about a girl who lied and got jail time. So what about the boys falsely accused? Why are they still sex offenders for nothing?


PA - Streaker’s legal fight bringing notoriety

View the article here

Sorry, the law is the law, we cannot have laws that are ok for some, but not others. She and the others broke the law, so they should be punished like everyone else, period!!

06/16/2008



Elizabeth Burke never wanted her 15 minutes of fame like this.

But since the 20-year-old English major from Jamison decided last week to fight the open lewdness charge filed against her by Penn State police stemming from the annual “Mifflin Streak,” she has been fielding interview requests from the press and answering a long list of text messages and telephone calls offering support.

Burke was arrested along with seven male students during this year’s edition of the “Mifflin Streak,” which takes place late at night the weekend before spring finals. It’s a tradition that goes back decades.

“I’m not trying to make too much of a statement with this,” Burke said. “I’m fighting this because I believe the charge is wrong.”

Burke was charged with the misdemeanor criminal offense of open lewdness, which would not look good when future employers check her background. To be convicted of open lewdness, the commonwealth would have to prove her behavior, in this case, streaking, “affronted or alarmed” someone.

Burke and her attorney, Stacy Parks Miller, argue that no one was affronted or alarmed by her naked run that night. It happened just after midnight May 5, through a 50-foot human tunnel of male and female students on Mifflin Road packed together specifically to see the streakers, they argue.

So, they ask, who was affronted or alarmed?

“It was just a harmless bit of fun and the charge doesn’t apply to the situation,” Burke said. “It just doesn’t apply.”

She was at the “Mifflin Streak” after a spur-of-the-moment conversation with a friend. She wound up a participant the same way, in a spur-of- the-moment, once-in-a-lifetime moment of youthful exuberance.

And she got arrested. When Burke first broke the news to her parents, they laughed about it and chalked it up to a youthful misadventure. They told her she’d have to pay whatever fines she received and do community service.

But then she got the official charges, a misdemeanor criminal offense of open lewdness and a summary disorderly conduct.

They were stunned to learn she would need a criminal defense attorney for what she thought was nothing more than a couple of seconds of silliness to blow off steam before finals.

That’s when they started to lose their sense of humor,” Burke said of her parents.

She also had to have her mugshot and fingerprints taken for police databases.

Burke now fears her dreams of studying abroad in Rome in the fall are dashed, because a criminal record may prompt Italian authorities “to say, ‘No, we don’t want you here,’ ” she said. So Burke retained the services of Parks Miller, who has a reputation for courtroom tenacity, and the two began their battle last week.

The charge against Burke was bound over for trial after District Judge Thomas Jordan found enough evidence that a crime may have been committed for her to stand trial. But in a rare move at the preliminary hearing level, Jordan had to deliberate for a time before ruling.

Next, Parks Miller said she will file motions in Centre County Court asking a judge to dismiss the charge. Parks Miller said the Centre County District Attorney’s Office cannot offer anyone to say they were “affronted or alarmed” by Burke’s streak and therefore, it must be dismissed.

Parks Miller stressed that she is not arguing that all streaking is acceptable and, if this had happened in downtown State College in broad daylight, she would not be making this argument. But Burke’s incident is unique and the charge against her does not apply, Parks Miller said.

Until a ruling is handed down, Burke is dealing with her accidental celebrity that began after her case was reported in the Centre Daily Times.

“I had absolutely no idea it was going to cause such a ruckus,” she said. “There was a TV news crew outside my house when I got home. I gave an interview in the drive. I’m getting texts from people I haven’t heard from since high school.”

She’s also taken solace in the groundswell of support she’s received from the Penn State, Centre County and her hometown communities. She has read the more than 15 pages of comments that piled up below her story on CentreDaily. com and even posted a “thank you” to well wishers.

“I love that I have so much support from people,” Burke said. “I’m pretty excited the community has come out and supported me and said this was just a bit of harmless fun. We didn’t hurt anyone or offend anyone.”

But if she had to do again, Burke said she would have kept her clothes on that night. A friend told her the police were there only to make sure streakers did not leave that tightly contained area.

“I guess I should have checked my sources. Knowing the ruckus it would cause, and I meant no disrespect to the community or Penn State, but if I had known the police were quite serious about coming down on this and arresting people, I wouldn’t have done it,” she said.

Burke’s prosecutor, Assistant District Attorney Steve Sloane, was not in the office Friday afternoon and his cell phone went to voice mail, which was full.

But last week, he and District Attorney Michael Madeira said that youthful indiscretion or not, the law is the law and they are sworn to uphold it.

It does not matter that perhaps no one at the Mifflin Streak that night was offended, Sloane said. The chance was there that someone may have happened upon the scene and been affronted by the conduct, Sloane said.

Authorities cannot simply surrender a section of public street to lawlessness once a year before spring finals, Madeira said.

Of the eight people arrested at this year’s streak, Burke is the only one so far to fight the open lewdness charge.

The others have accepted plea bargains or sought entry into a first-time offenders program that will eventually see the charges dismissed and expunged from their records. One other has not yet had a preliminary hearing.