Sunday, July 24, 2011
We do not condone publicly shaming anybody, nor do we agree with this site, but it was only a matter of time before it popped up, and I'm surprised many others like it haven't yet. Give it time though, they will.
Studies of crime statistics from across the western world point to the fact that women are becoming more violent, both physically and sexually; with children and with other adults. Women now constitute the majority of those who kill and intentionally cause physical harm to children in the home. They are also responsible for the lions share of elderly abuse and now even match men, blow for blow, in the realm of intimate partner violence.
Unfortunately, our society has reacted to this by failing to adequately address this criminal conduct in the justice system. Quite the contrary, some countries seem to be enabling criminality in women as a matter of policy. In the United States, the sentencing disparity for female criminals, compared to men, is greater than that between whites and other ethnic minorities. In the U.K., the government has issued advisories to magistrates instructing them to give women lighter sentences than men. The Ministry of Justice is also considering a proposal to abolish women's prisons altogether.
In Australia, it is now common for media sources to avoid printing the names of female pedophiles, even after their conviction for molesting children.
All this creates an environment of undue tolerance for female criminality that puts the general public, including our children, at increased risk.
Register-her.com is a needed first step to begin the amelioration of this problem.
By posting public profiles of these offenders, we offer an important "on the record" service aimed at keeping the public informed of threats in their community. We also include in our listings, individuals who, while not criminals themselves, have proven to be a significant part of the apparatus for fostering, enabling and exacerbating this particular set of social ills.
Well, when police do not tell ex-sex offenders they can do this, what do you expect? Most offenders do not check the local legislature web site, so they are not aware of this capability. Read about it here.
ATLANTA -- More than a year after Georgia legislators scaled back tough sex offender restrictions, only a handful of convicts have taken advantage of new rules that allow some to petition to get off the statewide sex offender registry.
State officials have removed a total of 107 sex offenders from the list at the order of the courts, said GBI spokesman John Bankhead. The Sex Offender Registration Review Board is reviewing another 42 applications, said director Tracy Alvord.
"So far it hasn't opened any floodgates," Alvord said. "But it will be interesting to see what happens down the road."
In all, there are more than 20,000 sex offenders registered in Georgia.
The legislation was quietly signed into law in May 2010 by Gov. Sonny Perdue, and much of it focuses on easing restrictions that banned most sex offenders from living and working near schools, parks and places where children gather.
But another provision was designed to give some offenders what supporters called an "escape hatch" to get their names off the registry.
The law allows sex offenders who are disabled or living in a nursing home to petition for release from the registry after they finish their sentences. It also lets those convicted of kidnapping or false imprisonment of a minor that didn't involve any sexual contact ask for release. Another part allows those whose sentences and probation ended more than 10 years ago to ask a court for removal.
Alvord said the sex offender review board has received 50 court-ordered requests from offenders to take their names off the list, and eight people have so far been removed.
The other 99 sex offenders who were removed from the list after the law took effect didn't have to go through the review board. Those figures include applicants whose probation or parole ended at least a decade ago.
There's no definitive figure on how many sex offenders would be able to apply for removal, but lawyers say hundreds, if not thousands, could be eligible.
Some sex offenders and their advocates aren't surprised by the slow trickle of applications.
"There's not a lot of people that know or understand what's happened," said Kelly Piercy, a sex offender who was convicted of child pornography charges in 1999. "There just hasn't been publicity about it."
Piercy, who is blind, has petitioned his east Georgia court to remove his name from the registry. But he said some offenders don't want their case to be dragged up in court again. And others don't have the time or money to hire an attorney and go through the process.
"The people on the registry are often unemployed or underemployed," Piercy said. "They're barely making it. And they don't have the $3,000 to $5,000 needed to pay for the petition."
The process can be surprisingly smooth, though, defense lawyers said. Atlanta attorney B.J. Bernstein represented a sex offender whose sentence and probation had ended more than a decade ago. She said prosecutors cooperated when she came to the court seeking to remove his name.
"It was painless," she said. "He just wanted to be able to go fish where he wanted to fish."
Alvord said she expects the number of applications to jump as more attorneys learn about the law.
"People might just not be aware that this is an option," she said. "And district attorneys, judges and defense attorneys are getting more familiar with the process. And we're getting more familiar with the process, too. I really anticipate the numbers to increase."
The law passed overwhelmingly in both the House and Senate, and even supporters of stricter sex offender laws supported the measure.
Advocates of the new law say they're not disappointed by the relative trickle of applicants so far. The Southern Center for Human Rights, an Atlanta-based group that helped push the legislation, has filed six petitions to remove offenders from the registry. Five of those have been granted, said staff attorney Sarah Geraghty.
"The Legislature did the right thing by creating this exemption process because some people who've ended up on Georgia's sex offender registry aren't really sex offenders in the way most people think of that term," she said.
By John Cook
Remember ‘To Catch a Predator’, the awful festival of horror and shame from Dateline NBC that briefly captured America’s heart in the mid-aughts? We thought we’d check in with the creepy internet vigilantes behind it, and guess what? They’re broke.
“To Catch a Predator” was a series of Dateline internet stings where fake 13-year-old girls and boys would lure would-be statutory rapists to fake houses set up by NBC News. Instead of the promised pre-teens, they’d encounter NBC News correspondent Chris Hansen, who would explore their awfulness and berate them in an interview before sending them out the door and into the arms of awaiting cops.
For a while, it was the best thing NBC had going, beating The Office and matching The Apprentice in ratings in 2006. Then one of the caught predators shot himself in the head while NBC News cameras waited outside his home, and people started to wonder whether reveling in the sickness and criminality of damaged people whose crimes were hypothetical and who wouldn’t have even been there if NBC hadn’t lured them there was really such a good idea. The network pulled the plug in 2008.
The stings were conducted by Perverted Justice, a loosely organized online vigilante outfit founded by a Portland man named Phillip John Eide in 2003. Eide – who changed his name to Xavier von Erck in 2006 – and his volunteers initially just documented the predators they caught and exposed them online, but soon they started working with law enforcement and local TV stations. When NBC News took them national, the network paid Perverted Justice more than $US100,000 per sting. “Von Erck” was an odd partner for a national news organization – he looked like Kevin Smith, called the civilian victims of al Qaeda “shameless and pathetic” on his blog, and once pretended to be a woman to seduce an online enemy in an attempt to ruin him. All told, NBC News paid him somewhere in the neighbourhood of $US1.2 million between 2006 and 2009.
Where did the money go? Back in 2006, “Von Erck” had big plans for his franchise. He founded a nonprofit called Perverted Justice Foundation Inc. to receive NBC’s funds, and hoped to apply them to the tax-exempt goal of “promot[ing] internet safety” and helping cops “apprehend internet based sexual predators”.
In 2006, according to PJFI’s application for tax-exempt status, he predicted that NBC would pay the foundation $US2 million in consulting fees by 2008, and that it would soon be raising hundreds of thousands of dollars from major corporate donors like Wal-Mart and Microsoft. It planned to develop special software to help parents monitor their kids’ internet usage. It hoped to send its members on speaking tours to spread the word about predators and to publish guides and brochures for parents and kids. PJFI set up a web site and started paying “Von Erck,” treasurer Dennis Kerr, and secretary Allison Shea $US120,000 annual salaries. Shea and Kerr were active volunteers for Perverted Justice prior to the NBC deal; Shea, who also goes by the name Del Harvey, is now Twitter’s “director of trust and safety.”
The NBC money dried up sooner than expected, and corporate donors never emerged. In 2009, according to PJFI’s tax return, the group had a whopping $US2148 in income and $US10,368 in cash on hand at the end of the year. While Perverted Justice as a group still conducts untelevised stings and claims convictions of predators—their 542nd, they say, was convicted on Tuesday—the foundation is obviously nonfunctional. Its “programs” are little more than apparently defunct web sites—howtodealwithcreepypeople.com, for instance, purports to help teens deal with abuse and hasn’t been updated since 2008. The Perverted Justice Academy, which supposedly trains law enforcement in how to conduct stings on its own, is “conducted online in our own private law enforcement training chat rooms.” Each course lasts an hour.
All told, the Perverted Justice Foundation spent more than $US1,202,739 in from 2006 to 2009 in pursuit of its tax-exempt goals. Of that, an astonishing 82% – $984,233 – went to salaries. Almost all of it – $783,000 – went to “Von Erck”, Kerr and Shea.
Over the course of four years, the foundation spent just $US218,506 on things other than employees. More than $US50,000 of that went to “travel and entertainment”. Another $US13,766 went to “equipment”, and nearly $US29,000 went to “website”. In other words, “Von Erck” basically set up a nonprofit to accept NBC News’ money and spent it on himself, his friends, and his web site. Rather than use the money to build a long-lasting institution that might help people – or at least spark more paedophile suicides – he blew through it, and now he’s got about ten grand left.
“Von Erck” didn’t return an email seeking comment. A message left on the foundation’s voicemail wasn’t returned.
Read the Perverted Justice Foundation’s 2006 application for tax exempt status and its 2007, 2008, and 2009 tax returns here.
See Also: Penn and Teller - Bulls--t - Teen Sex
From Publishers Weekly:
"In America today, it is nearly impossible to publish a book that says children and teenagers can have sexual pleasure and be safe too," writes journalist Levine (My Enemy, My Love). Levine has somehow pulled that off. Western European countries assume that "sexual expression is a healthy and happy part of growing up"; thus Levine argues that sex is not necessarily bad for minors, and that puritanical attitudes often backfire. According to her, as the age of sexual initiation drops in America, the age of consent is rising. She observes that most so-called pedophiles are attracted to teenagers rather than kids an important subtlety recently aired in the media. (Still, her call for common sense on pedophilia is marred by an inadequate acknowledgment of the extent of online child porn, as documented in Philip Jenkins's recent Beyond Tolerance.) She notes the disturbing trend toward pathologizing young children's eroticized play and criticizes mainstream America for letting the Christian right steer sex education toward an emphasis on abstinence. Compounding that, she says, the right wing has expunged abortion discussions. A Ms. and Nerve.com contributor, Levine argues, contra Mary Pipher (Reviving Ophelia), that love may ruin teenage girls more than sex. At one point, Levine cogently contends that the term "normal" is "subjective and protean"; she prefers "normative," which means "what most people do." It's a good start to confronting some vital questions.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
From Library Journal:
Journalist and free-speech activist Levine (My Enemy, My Love: Women, Men, and the Dilemmas of Gender) here argues that trying to protect young people from sex can actually exacerbate or even create the much-feared sexual danger. Her well-documented horror stories of zealotry and incompetence are chilling; Levine is particularly good at showing that abstinence-based sex education leaves many teens without the information they need to make intelligent choices. Misrepresentations of fact, unfounded assumptions, the runaway media hype offered by so-called experts, conservative agendas, and simple conformity, she writes, largely determine our approaches to censorship, "the pedophile panic," youthful sexual behavior, sex education, abortion, and the suppression of information about sexual pleasure. These factors, she holds, predispose young people to have bad sex with unwanted outcomes. Instead of overreaction and overprotection, adults need to saturate their children's world with accurate, realistic information and images of love and sex, including sexual pleasure. Her book, which provoked considerable controversy even before its publication, provides no easy answers to a complex question but is highly recommended as a wake-up call. Martha Cornog, Philadelphia
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.