Tuesday, October 16, 2007

NY - Sex offender legislation in Binghamton may get second chance

View the article here

10/16/2007

BINGHAMTON -- As his tenure as a city council member comes to a close, Tony Massar, D-1st District, is trying again to push through legislation that would put signs on the front of buildings where registered sex offenders live.

Massar proposed the sign law in December. Following a wave of opposition from constituents, six of the nine council members voted against the plan. Council members Pat Russo, D-7th, and John Cordisco, D-9th, joined Massar in favor of the law. Corporation Counsel Kenneth Frank did not sign it, saying he did not believe it was "legal or enforceable."

Massar has asked that similar legislation be reintroduced at the council's work session meeting scheduled for 7:15 p.m. Wednesday.

Massar could not be reached for comment.

The law would allow the city to erect signs on private property alerting passersby that a sex offender lived on the premises. The law, Massar said, coincides with notification efforts currently on the books. State law allows targeted mailings identifying the homes of registered offenders. And the state keeps an accessible registry of those considered at the highest risk to re-offend.

In March, the state also passed legislation allowing civil confinement of sex offenders beyond their prison-release dates.

Nowhere in the state or the country are signs used as a means of notification.

Also during the work session meeting Wednesday night, council members are expected to discuss a draft of the contract between the city and the Binghamton Firefighters Union.

The council Monday approved a contract with the city's 167 Teamsters Union members. The contract increased pay for the members by 3.5 percent and upped their health insurance contribution to 12 percent in 2008, compared to 10 percent in 2007.

A contract with members of the Police Benevolent Association is still in negotiation.


GA - Two Cobb County Joggers Assaulted

View the article here

Every American citizen, for now, has a right to own a gun. If I was a women, in this day and age, I would by a small 22 gun (one that is very small, but efficient) and get a license to carry it. Then when someone grabs you like this, shut the bastard in the knee caps. If people had guns, crime, IMO, would go WAY down.

10/16/2007

COBB COUNTY -- Cobb County officials are investigating two assaults on joggers in recent months.

Authorities said the first incident occurred on August 10 at 7:30 a.m. when a woman was jogging on Wenlock Trail near Blackwell Road. The woman said a black male driving an older model white full size van attempted to grab her.

Officials said Tuesday another female jogger reported a man attempted to grab her while she was jogging on Trickum Road near Kemp Road. That victim could not describe the man or the vehicle.

Neither victim was hurt.

Cobb County officials said they do not have a motive and they are not sure if the two incidents are related. Police are asking residents to be aware and to contact them if they have any information at (770) 499-3945.


CA - San Jose to demolish hotel used for sex offender home

View the article here

Scumbags!!

10/16/2007

SAN JOSE - A home for ex-cons and sex offenders in downtown San Jose will soon be demolished to make way for an eight-story parking garage and shops.

The Plaza Hotel is where parole officers traditionally send ex-cons to live after prison.

It is home to almost 20 registered sex offenders -- the highest concentration in the city.

City officials want to tear down the Plaza Hotel and replace it with an eight-story parking garage, offices and shops.

Information from: San Jose Mercury News, http://www.sjmercury.com


CA - Moving in on sex offenders

View the article here

10/12/2007

Sweep targets those too close to parks, schools; many seek legal help.

An untold number of sex offenders sought legal protection Thursday as state parole agents laid out a dragnet to put hundreds of them back in prison for violating the residency provisions of Jessica's Law.

Inmate-rights lawyers said they were bombarded with phone calls from recently paroled sex offenders facing a deadline to either move if they lived within 2,000 feet of a school or park, or face more prison time. The California Supreme Court already has issued a stay order to stop the state from revoking the parole of four of the offenders.
- So why did they not issue a temporary restraining order for ALL sex offenders?

Parole agents started their sweep of the first contingent of paroled sex offenders who in late August were given 45 days to move but so far have not. Some 855 sex offenders up and down the state are facing reincarceration over the next two weeks if they don't find a new place to live, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

"We'll be validating their residences, and if they're still out of compliance, we'll move them toward the parole board for parole violation consideration," said corrections Secretary Jim Tilton.

Inmate-rights lawyers infuriated supporters of the voter-backed Jessica's Law initiative by blocking parole agents from arresting the four suspected parole violators. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he was disappointed.

In turn, the attorneys criticized the Schwarzenegger administration Thursday for going ahead with the sex offender sweep before the state Supreme Court rules on the merits of the residency rule contained in Jessica's Law.

"There's no rational reason for the governor not to give the court time to work on these questions," said San Francisco lawyer Ernie Galvan, who is working on the case in conjunction with the Prison Law Office of San Rafael. "It's politics over public safety and respect for the courts."

The residency restriction was one of the key provisions of the Jessica's Law initiative that California voters overwhelmingly approved last November. Over the summer, parole officials ran a computerized map scan on sex offenders released since the law went into effect and determined that 2,800 of them were living within 2,000 feet of the restricted locations.
- Half the public has no clue what they are voting for. They see "sex offender" and "Jessica's law" and pass it without even reading what it does to thousands of people. We are so screwed in this country if this is how stuff becomes law. The media and politicians blow the statistics out of proportion, and that is all the public hears, so they've been misinformed, and the Government should be at fault for LYING to the public.

Subsequent inspections of the addresses found that 855 of the offenders in fact were living in residences too close to schools and parks, prompting parole agents in late August to begin delivering the 45-day notices.

George Bernard, who owns a halfway house near Broadway and 26th streets in Sacramento, said more than two dozen paroled sex offenders who had been living at his facility have since been forced to move.

"Most are finding places to live elsewhere," Bernard said, adding that most of the 25 have relocated to Sacramento's single-room occupancy hotels downtown. "The Marshall, the Sequoia, the Ridgeway. A lot of guys found trailer parks and apartments."

Lawyers for the paroled sex offenders filed their petition with the state Supreme Court on Oct. 4 to stop the state from enforcing the residency rules. They said the initiative will force sex offenders "to make an unlawful and unconscionable choice between leaving their home or residence, becoming homeless or violating a newly added condition of parole that will result in their imprisonment."

Of the four petitioners identified only by their initials and county of residence, the attorneys said in their court papers, one was a San Francisco man required by his parole conditions to live in the city but at the same time to not take up residence within 2,000 feet of a park or school. The petition said the only place available to him under those terms is an "an expensive area" near AT&T Park.

In granting the stay order, the state's high court gave attorneys until Oct. 31 to file briefs in the case before it makes a final determination.

State Sen. George Runner and his wife, Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, both Republicans from Lancaster and two of the most visible supporters of the Jessica's Law initiative during last fall's campaign, put out a joint statement ripping the Supreme Court's action.

"It's outrageous that we would allow sex offenders -- even one -- to live across the street from a school or park," they said. "In interpreting this law, the presumption should favor the safety of California's children, not the inconvenience of sex offenders."
- When 90% or more of sex crimes occur in the home, how is banishing someone into the netherworld do anything, except punish? You people are totally blind and filled with BS up to your eyeballs! How many sex crimes have occurred at a school, or playground? Huh? How come we don't see those statistics?

Schwarzenegger also issued a statement that his administration "will vigorously defend against challenges to Jessica's Law and protect the will of the people." He said he was "disappointed" with the court's order.
- I think sex offenders are "people" as well. And the general public has been filled with lies and myths, so of course they are going to be for it. If they knew the FACTS they might change their minds. You fear-mongers need to get a damn life. You are all corrupt and evil, IMO! The SHEEPLE will follow and do anything you say. Who is next? Blacks? Mexicans? Latinos? Gays? Christians? Muslims? Jews? Who?

In the meantime, the governor said he ordered the corrections agency Thursday to "move forward with a major effort to begin arresting offenders who are out of compliance."
- Mr. Schwarzenegger needs to go back to Nazi Germany where his Nazi father is from. As well as all the other Nazi jerks in office. They will be coming after the guns next, then you watch what happens!!! By then, it will be too late folks!!

Galvan said the action will force the inmate-rights lawyers to file more petitions to block reincarceration of sex offenders in the short term.
- They need to file one for ALL sex offenders, like what was done in Georgia last year.

"If the governor would just respect what the court is doing and hold off for three weeks, there is no reason for the court to be distracted by more petitions on the same subject," Galvan said. "It's a waste of the court's time, a waste of the governor's time and a waste of the attorney general's time."
- I'm sure he's running for Governor again, so he's got to "look good" to the SHEEPLE!


FL - Sex offender news roundup

View the article here

Praise the Lord!!!!!

10/16/2007

Florida court strikes down residency restrictions

In a surprising decision, an appellate court in Florida has struck down the city of Jacksonville's residency restrictions for convicted sex offenders. After the state passed a law preventing offenders from living within 1,000 feet of parks, schools, libraries, or day care centers, the city of Jacksonville expanded the distance to 2,500 feet. In striking down that municipal ordinance, the court said it lacked any "rational basis" and thus violated the due process rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution.

For an analysis and a link to the ruling, see the Sex Crimes blog.

California police dragnet closing in

Who came up with the myth that sex offenses primarily happen in parks or at schools, as opposed to behind the closed doors of someone’s home? Whatever its origin, it sure is popular these days.

With the state's Supreme Court poised to hear a desperate appeal from four sex offenders who are being threatened with prison because they live too close to parks or schools, parole agents are fanning out across the state and making arrests. Some 855 sex offenders up and down the state are facing reincarceration over the next two weeks if they don't find a new place to live, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Andy Furillo of the Sacramento Bee has the full story.

Appellate court overturns deportation

An adult who engages in a sexual act with a minor has not necessarily committed a crime of "moral turpitude" meriting automatic deportation, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.

The decision reversed an immigration court's order deporting Alberto Rene Quintero-Salazar, a Mexican national who came to the United States in 1990 and became a lawful permanent resident four years later. His wife, three children and two stepchildren are all U.S. citizens and he argued that his deportation would create an undue hardship for them.

According to the court, a crime of moral turpitude meriting automatic deportation requires willfulness or "evil intent" involving some level of depravity or baseness so far contrary to the moral law that it gives rise to moral outrage. In contrast, the sexual conduct criminalized by the California statute under which Quintero-Salazar was convicted could include consensual sex between two high school students, conduct that is legal in other states, and conduct that would be legal in California if the adult and minor were married.


SD - Bill would help keep sex offenders off networking sites

View the article here

Why don't these idiots just get SO's mac addresses, or have the ISP's assign static IP addresses and use that to identify someone? Why not do that for ALL Internet users? If it's for security, I'm sure everyone is willing to wipe out all their privacy rights.

10/16/2007

A state legislator is considering a bill to discourage registered sex offenders from contacting minors through social networking Web sites.

Sen. Jason Gant of Sioux Falls plans to introduce a bill next session that would provide offenders’ e-mail addresses to sites such as MySpace and Facebook, and make it a separate crime for anyone to lie about his age with intent to solicit a child online.
- As long as these email addresses are not published online, that is fine, IMO. But posting them online for everyone to see, is a total invasion of privacy. If we do this, why not expose EVERYONE's email addresses regardless of who they are? Just make sure it's a crime for children or anybody else to lie about their age as well. Why don't these sites use credit card verification or something else? Like access to a drivers license database or something? If you are not old enough to drive, then you should not be on these sites, IMO.

“We’re just seeing so much more of this Internet stuff where children are being taken advantage of,” Gant said.
- So why don't these sites have a way for another user to report the MySpace pages to authorities? If they had this, and there was NO WAY of removing it, then people would think twice about doing stuff like this. Use your brains people! What you are proposing will not work, watch and see.

Gant said the model legislation he and the attorney general’s office are looking at comes from MySpace, which deleted tens of thousands of sex offenders’ profiles after drawing criticism for allowing sex criminals to connect with children.
- They deleted all these account just because they were on the registry. That doesn't mean they were using the web site to solicit children online. Some study I read, can't remember where, but said out of all the people they kicked off, only ONE was a sex offender. Oh, it was here on the right side of the page in red entitled "All Registered Sex Offenders and their family members and supporters."

South Dakota already collects a wide range of information from sex offenders, including any identifying information about Internet accounts, user and screen names and aliases. Attorney General Larry Long said Gant’s bill would require even more disclosures.
- Why don't you just tell everyone their SSN#, license #, # of warts on their a$$e$, how many people in their family, etc, etc.

Unlike home address and the date and description of criminal conviction, online identifiers are not published on state or national registries.
- Good!!!

What the proposed law would do is make that information available for the first time to certain online entities, which could check it against their client lists.

Gant said the law he’s looking at has provided the model for nine other states.

A Kansas law that went into effect in May required the state for the first time to collect online identifiers from sex offenders.
- I have not seen any studies about this, but what about all the people who target children who are NOT sex offenders? Why don't you just require every American citizen to register their online identifiers as well? A little too much Big Brother for you? Hell, if it's good for sex offenders, then everyone should be made to do it. If you have nothing to hide, right?

Eric Wood, manager of the Kansas Bureau of Investigation’s offender registration unit, said anyone will be able to submit a known e-mail address to a Web site and find out if it belongs to a sex offender.

The address itself will not be listed next to each offender’s name and other information. Wood said posting e-mail addresses on registries would discourage sex offenders from complying with registration laws.
- You darn straight it would, it's an invasion of privacy and opens them up for unsolicited emails, as if we don't get enough BS spam, and harassment from the American public.

The Department of Justice “strongly advised us not to” publish e-mail addresses and screen names, Wood said. “The general fear is that ... all they’re gonna get is a lot of junk mail and then they’re gonna change their e-mail address and not tell us.”
- Yep, exactly. If these emails were public, what is to stop someone from sending them child porn when they did not ask for it, just to get them into trouble? "Junk mail" he says, what a nice way of saying internet harassment, internet stalking, and death threats!

Long said publishing that information probably will be considered for South Dakota.
- And I would sue the crap out of the state for endangering peoples lives.

“We’re always looking for ways to improve our Web site. It’s certainly worth a look,” he said.


IN - Sex offender housing program continues

View the article here

Finally some people with a heart! Video is available at the site.

10/16/2007

A sex offender housing program with a controversial past, will apparently have a future.

A grant application will be submitted, to continue “Project Roots” in St. Joseph County.

Project Roots pays the rent of recently released sex offenders who would otherwise be homeless.

Where the program has gone, controversy has followed.

In the beginning ten offenders were discovered living in the same house on Lincolnway East in South Bend.

Some in the neighborhood were outraged.

The same thing happened in May, when it was discovered that a couple of apartment houses, a couple of blocks apart, housed seven offenders in the Dunham Street Neighborhood.

“We have now limited the sex offenders to no more than two offenders can be in any one apartment,” said Michael Gotsch. Gotsch is on St. Joseph County Community Corrections Board Executive Committee.

At a meeting on Tuesday, the St. Joseph County Commissioners agreed to apply for a grant that would provide another year of funding for Project Roots.

“It’s an infant program so to speak,” said County Commissioner Steve Ross: ”In infancy, errors can be made and were made.”

But Ross and others still feel the bigger error would be to go back to the way things were before Project Roots.

“The monitoring is exceptional, I mean when we talk about having eyes on sex offenders all the time, where previously they were living under bridges and in parks, this is a much better solution.”

The same officials who advocated continuing Project Roots, also feel it should be taken completely out of residential neighborhoods.

Plans were being made to place the offenders in a part of town where their only neighbors would be planes and factories.

The construction of a new community corrections facility off Lathrop Road was set to begin next spring.

“It’s in a light industrial area,” said Gotsch: “there would be no homes around for miles, no churches, no schools, no playgrounds, there’s no danger of any kind.”

The plans fell through when the State of Indiana withdrew a previous commitment to contribute money to the project.


UT - Halloween trick-or-trauma

View the article here

Click the image for a larger view.

This is just so stupid. If people are being RESPONSIBLE parents, then they would go along with their children. In this day and age, who wouldn't go along with their kids on Halloween? If you are going along with your kids and go to the door with them, then what is the problem? This is just fear for nothing. Like JFK once said "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself!"

10/15/2007

To be blunt, the combination of pint-sized trick-or-treaters and sexual predators with candy in their hands sounds like a marriage made in hell. The ghouls and goblins of Halloween are not always wearing a costume.

To their credit, parents have made great strides in recent years to minimize the risk of sexual abuse. Supervised "trunk-or-treat" events in church parking lots are now the norm. And when tots do take to the streets for treats, they are almost always accompanied by parents or a responsible adult.

On the other side of things, cities such as Baltimore are now asking sex offenders to post lawn signs that read "No candy at this residence." Other cities have had success with the program. In Maryland last year, no sex offender violated parole after the signs went up. It's also not uncommon for law-enforcement officers to drop by a predator's residence on Oct. 31 just to make sure things are kosher. And most sex offenders are required to keep a good distance from youngsters.
- There is no part of the laws that says someone has to post these signs. I personally would not do it. You can kiss my a$$. Use the registry, if you know someone is a sex offender, don't go to their house. Be a damn responsible parent! I don't celebrate Halloween anyway, it's an evil holiday, IMO.

So, should Utah try the "no candy here" signs?

There are concerns. For some people, it feels a bit draconian — like putting a scarlet letter on the front of a pinafore or binding people in the public square. But then sex offenders are a special case. Some of them re-offend, so perhaps such desperate people do require desperate measures.
- Amen! This is exactly what it is. What about having a "I'm a murderer" or "I'm a DUI offender" or "I'm a child abuser" in your yard? Why don't you quit discriminating and do this for ALL CRIMINALS!!!

Still, the important thing is parents should keep in mind that the chances of a tot in costume being sexually abused after they get home from from trick-or-treating is greater than being abused along the way. The spooky old stranger up the street is still not as dangerous as that spooky old family member. What's more, there is a danger that "no candy here" signs and other measures give a false sense of security. Halloween mishaps are few because of the vigilance of parents, the police and neighbors each year. More than a sign on a lawn, the real way to curb predators is to take the watchful eye people cast on their children during the Halloween holiday and expand it to include all the nights, all the year round.


FL - Women May Sue Millionaire in Sex Case

View the article here | The Smoking Gun

10/16/2007

Lawyers for Jeffrey Epstein May Try to Settle Expected Lawsuits

A number of young women who say they went to the Palm Beach, Fla., mansion of Jeffrey Epstein, the multimillionaire investor charged with soliciting prostitutes, are threatening to file civil lawsuits against Epstein, sources familiar with the case told ABC News.

Epstein's lawyers may try to settle with all the women at once, a person familiar with the negotiations confirmed to ABC News. The story was first reported by the New York Post.

Epstein is said to be negotiating a plea deal with Florida prosecutors that is expected to land him in prison for about 18 months. He was charged last year with one count of solicitation of prostitution, a felony that carries up to five years in prison, for allegedly paying underage girls to give him erotic massages. He has pleaded not guilty and has said he didn't know any of the girls were underage.

Lead attorney Gerald Lefcourt, the former president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, did not return a call for comment Monday. He has previously declined to comment on the case.

Guy Fronstin, another of Epstein's lawyers, declined to comment.

It was not immediately clear how many women had contacted Epstein's attorneys, threatening to sue, but people familiar with the case said it was more than the five alleged victims described in police documents. A source told ABC News that most of the women who had threatened to sue were over 18.

An unnamed source told the Post, "You are a girl who is broke and who uses drugs. Here's your shot at getting some money."
- Yeah, make the victims looks bad, typical excuse. Does sound kind of fishy though. What's next, crack whores suing the crack dealer or Johns?

A Palm Beach police report alleges that Epstein paid girls as young as 14 to give him massages, usually in their underwear. The report claims that Epstein had sexual contact with some of the girls.

Epstein, who owns what is reported to be the largest house in Manhattan, has assembled a team of top lawyers to fight the criminal charges. His attorneys have included Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr, who investigated Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Epstein's plea negotiations are ongoing, and his lawyers, spokesman and the local prosecutor's office declined to comment on them. But there's one possible sticking point — two sources told ABC News that federal prosecutors, who are expected to drop their investigation of Epstein if he pleads guilty, still want him to register as a sex offender.

No federal charges have been filed.


CA - Supe aims to close sex-offender loophole

View the article here

Cold hearted bastards! If these very laws make you homeless, what the hell are you suppose to do? Get a life folks!

10/16/2007

SAN FRANCISCO - A supervisor is condemning the application of a new state sex-offender law that is allowing those on parole to register as homeless, making it more difficult for law enforcement to monitor them.

Jessica’s Law was approved by California voters on Nov. 8, 2006, creating tougher penalties for sex offenders and tougher restrictions for released sex offenders, including prohibiting them from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children gather.

The new residency requirement severely limits possible locations where a sex offender can take up residency in San Francisco. When released on parole, a person must return to the jurisdiction where the crime was committed. The residency regulations have apparently resulted in a number of parolees registering as “transient,” or homeless.
- These very laws are doing this, making it impossible to find any affordable place to stay. Not everyone is rich like all you corrupt idiots in politics!

Supervisor Jake McGoldrick is expected to introduce at today’s Board of Supervisors meeting a resolution condemning the policy and requesting that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation rescind it.

When they start being homeless, where are they going to live, on buses?” McGoldrick said. “Are they going to go to shelters? You are making them more desperate than you want them to be.”
- You can't go to shelters either.

Since the law was adopted, about 60 sex offenders have been released on parole in San Francisco and about 15 are registered as transient, according to Phil Torda, a district administrator with the state’s adult parole operations. Torda added that those numbers are “fluid.”

If a residence for the parolee is found not to be in compliance, then “the parolee shall be required to immediately provide a compliant residence or declare themselves transient,” said an Oct. 11 memo from Scott Kernan, chief deputy secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, to regional parole administrators.

The San Francisco Police Department says the policy impedes the ability of law enforcement to closely monitor sex offenders by limiting them from conducting regular compliance checks, according to the resolution.
- Then if they are homeless, and you are having a problem, fork out some tax payer money to provide a place for them to stay, and if the public doesn't like it, too bad. They are the idiots who voted for these insane laws, just because it has some childs name attached to it, doesn't mean it will work and is for the good. It's all feel good BS that won't work. I think the time these laws have been on the books has proven that.

According to Torda, sex offenders out on parole who register as “transient” must check in with their parole agent daily and reregister with the Police Department every 30 days as a transient. A violation would result in an arrest, he said.
- Why daily? More harassment! If they had a home, they would not have to report in to the gestapo every day, so why does being homeless make that any different?

Under the law, all sex offenders are supposed to wear a device with a Global Positioning System, which can pinpoint the location of an offender within minutes. Currently, only high-risk offenders are being given the devices. “It’s possible” some sex offenders registered as “transients” are not wearing such devices, Torda said.

“You’re getting kind of the reverse effect of what the law is intended to do. I think it was not thought out for a city like San Francisco. It was for other counties that have more expansive land areas,” McGoldrick said.

Seth Unger, deputy press secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, acknowledged that “by definition, it is much harder to monitor someone who doesn’t have a residence. It’s certainly a concern,” he said.

“We’re not telling them to be homeless,” Torda said.
- No, these laws are. When you cannot find a job because of being on the registry, nor find a home because nobody wants you around, what do you expect?


OH - Child porn sting nets ex-Butler police chief

View the article here

10/16/2007

BUTLER -- After knowing Fred Horne for nearly 40 years, Joan Thompson said she couldn't imagine the former Butler police chief and village council member being involved with online child pornography.

Mansfield police arrested Horne, 72, on Friday on behalf of the U.S. Marshals Service. He was charged with pandering obscenities involving a minor, and was released on bond.

According to the affidavit issued by the U.S. District Court in Akron, on Aug. 15, Agent Andrew Chaulk posed online as a 13-year-old female from Vermont. Horne indicated he was a "male, Ohio, 59, widower ... dad and granddad."

Horne joined the Butler police force in 1968 and served as chief from 1969 to 1976.

Thompson, a Butler resident, said, "I worked at the Butler Police Department from 1985 to 1997 and everyone that worked there just used to rave about him and say what a great police chief he was.

"A lot of the residents here always had nice things to say about him, too."

"He was always helping kids, I just could never have imagined that he would ever be involved in something like this."

About 10 minutes into the online conversation, Chaulk reported Horne, under the screen name daddyderf_2282, told him he had some "naughty" pictures and asked if the agent wanted to see them.

According to Chaulk, Horne sent 12 images depicting prepubescent children engaged in sexually explicit conduct. He also asked Chaulk to send a picture of himself, thinking the agent was a teen girl.

Chaulk sent a non-pornographic photo of a girl to Horne's America Online e-mail address.

Chaulk reported that Horne responded, "Yes, it's a good picture ... and you are sexy."

According to authorities, two days later, a subpoena was sent to America Online seeking all account information for Horne's address. AOL's account records, along with law enforcement records from the Ohio Department of Motor Vehicles, confirmed Horne's online profile matched that of the former Butler police chief.

Horne was arrested Friday. A News Journal reporter knocked on Horne's door Monday, but Horne refused to comment.

Merle Jarvis, Horne's brother-in-law, said he has never known Horne to show interest in child pornography.

"I can hardly believe this," said Jarvis, a Butler resident. "I guess you just never know about people. He was always a pretty good guy. He was never in trouble. Everyone used to think the world of him."

Horne requested a preliminary hearing. His case will be transferred to the Vermont Superior Court on Thursday.


CA - 'Mom' and 'Dad' banished by California

View the article here | Austrian Archives

Oh, this man is a total moron. This is asking for trouble. You will have women saying they feel like a man and going into the mens room, or a man saying he feels like a women and going into the womens room. HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND? Maybe all that WEED you been smoking! His dad was a Nazi and he apparently doesn't have much of an education, which shows, plus he had sexual issues of his own, see here.

Now how many more children are going to be slammed with the sex offender label because of this idiot? I don't even know what to say here, so I'll let the text speak for itself....

10/13/2007

Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to 'gays'

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.

"We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.

"With this decision, Gov. Schwarzenegger has told parents that their values are irrelevant. Many parents will have no choice but to pull their children out of the public schools that have now become sexualized indoctrination centers."

"Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles," said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which worked to defeat the plans. "This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.

"Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center," he said.

Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.

The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777 (PDF), which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.

There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.

"SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. "These students have lost their voice as the direct result of Gov. Schwarzenegger's unbelievable decision. The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife' could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured.

"Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic – not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles. Now that SB777 is law, schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation," she said.

England told WND that the law is not a list of banned words, including "mom" and "dad." But she said the requirement is that the law bans discriminatory bias.

"Having 'mom' and 'dad' promotes a dicsriminatory bias. You have to either get rid of 'mom' and 'dad' or include everything when talking about [parental issues]," she said. "They [promoters of sexual alternative lifestyles] do consider that discriminatory."

Also signed was AB394 (PDF), which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through "anti-harassment" training, CCF said.

Schwarzenegger had vetoed almost identical provisions a year ago, saying existing state law already provided for penalties for discrimination.

"We had hoped that the governor would once again veto this outrageous legislation but he obviously decided to side with the out-of-touch extremists that control the legislature. This law does not reflect the true values of the average Californian," said England. "True leadership means standing up for what is true and right."
- AMEN TO THAT, SAME WITH SEX OFFENDERS!!! OR ARE YOU GOING TO BE A HYPOCRITE???

Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" – the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as "sexual orientation."

"Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school," CCF noted.

Offenders will face the wrath of the state Department of Education, up to and including lawsuits.

CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.

Further, homecoming kings now can be either male or female – as can homecoming queens, and students, whether male or female, must be allowed to use the restroom and locker room corresponding to the sex with which they choose to identify.

AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers.

It also creates the circumstances where a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of "harassment," and a student who believes people are born either male or female could be reported as a "harasser" by a male teacher who wears women's clothes, CCF said.

Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14 (PDF), which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.

Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.

Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California – even private, religious hospitals – to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.

"It's the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses, and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles," said Thomasson, in response to the signing of AB14. "This is another insensitive law that violates people's moral boundaries."

The vitriol over the issue rose to new levels in its latest campaign.

As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.

The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.

"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," said England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools."

She also cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center that already is lobbying for special treatment in the school system.

"If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity … you should be allowed to do so," it advises. "Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible."

Further, the groups advise, "If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you." The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students.

WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators, including leaders in California, have taken it upon themselves to promote a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.

WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a "gay" pride event used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.

That drew vehement objections from several educators, including Priscilla Schreiber, the president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.

"I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities," she said.

If you would like to sound off on this issue, participate in today's WND Poll.


SC - Cayce may restrict sex offenders’ residency

View the article here

These laws will be picking up because elections are coming up. Watch how many politicians have this on their plate, and campaign with their children or around kids. You will be surprised. You can pass anything with a childs name on it, and "for the children" and anybody would pass it. Read what is at the top of my blog!!

10/16/2007

Plan would create 2,500-foot buffer around schools, churches

An ordinance limiting where sex offenders can live in Cayce is being considered by city officials.

If it is approved, sex offenders could not live or loiter within 2,500 feet — about a half-mile — of any school, child care facility, church, park or place children gather.

Cayce would become the first S.C. municipality to have such an ordinance.

Public safety chief Charley McNair asked Cayce City Council to consider the law, which would affect 12 registered offenders living in the city as of Sept. 10, according to the registry.

“I feel we needed something on the books,” McNair told City Council at its Oct. 9 meeting. “If it gets challenged, it gets challenged. I’m looking at the safety of our residents.”
- You needed to get it on the books, so if passed, you get tons of grant money, that is why you put this "on the books!" It's called bribery. You do this, we will pay you for it, sort of like prostitution! And anytime something is challenged, it costs tax payers tons of money. So I'd suggest every sex offender in this state, to take it to court.

Although council approved first reading, some members had questions.

“I’m not opposed to it, but is it enforceable?” Councilman Rick Myers asked. “You basically are saying that they can’t live anywhere.”
- So then are you against it or not? Quit the double talk!

The proposed ordinance follows a trend of other cities and states that are restricting where convicted child molesters, rapists and other sex offenders can live.
- A trend because of knee-jerk reactions to a few high-profile cases, and because grant money is involved. That is like telling someone, "if you paint your car puke green we will pay your a ton of money!" Who wouldn't do it? It just fattens their wallets.

As of November 2006, 19 states have restrictions on residency, activity and/or employment for sex offenders, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Although South Carolina is not listed, a provision in the state’s sexual-offender registry law prohibits anyone required to register from living in campus student housing at a public college or university that receives money from the state.

No S.C. municipalities restrict where sex offenders can live, although Aiken County has looked into it. There, the proposed law would prohibit offenders from living or loitering within a 1,000-foot buffer zone of any school, child care facility, church or park. It’s similar to a law Georgia passed last year.
- Telling people where they can and cannot live violates the United States Constitution. How would you feel if someone came along and said you cannot live where you are at now, and you have 72 hours to move? I'm sure you'd not like it very much.

“What we are trying to do is a delicate balance between civil liberties and public safety,” Cayce attorney Danny Crowe said.
- Bulls**t! It's about punishment, plain and simple!!! A damn 100 mile buffer zone would not stop a predator like John Couey from committing another crime, so how is this about public safety?

Civil-liberties groups say they will be watching.
- This is BS as well. The ACLU and other groups have their fingers in their a$$e$. Where the hell are they? Where are the good lawyers defending the Constitution of the USA? If this document means nothing, then why have it? Shred it, along with the Bill of Rights and lets go communist. Might as well! Also, where are the damn lawyers with balls?

“It is going to make it impossible for anyone to live anywhere,” said Greenwood attorney Rauch Wise, general counsel for the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
- We are just creating and increasing the homeless community. Eventually they will come for your rights, then what will you do? WE NEED ANOTHER CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT!

There are 25 sex offenders registered in Cayce. Thirteen of them either are in jail or have moved out of state.
- And I'm sure everyone is so proud!

Cayce’s ban would cover most of the city. However, city officials have not investigated what areas sex offenders would be able to live in.
- So how can they pass a law then if they have not investigated it and got all the facts? God help us!!!!!!!!!

“When people feel that they can’t live anywhere, they wind up living under bridges and other places,” said Laura Hudson, executive director of the S.C. Crime Victims’ Council. “Then, the cure is not as powerful as it first appears if we are not going to have a place for them to be.”
- And I'm sure everyone would be happy with this as well. But eventually, when you keep treating people like you are, someone is going to snap. But I'm sure you will use that to say "see, this is why we must have these laws!" Instead of seeing the TRUTH!!!

Still, Hudson and other state crime-victim advocates support restrictive legislation — with caution.
- With caution? What caution? That has been thrown out the window a long time ago. This is about pure banishment and cruel & unusual punishment, pure and simple. Everyone you ask says it's punishment, and you know that is what it's about. Don't you?

“People have a right to be protected, but some laws may not be capturing everyone, which might give people a false sense of security,” Hudson said.
- ALL PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS! IT'S CALLED THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AND IT DOESN'T DISCRIMINATE LIKE YOU ARE DOING!!!

“The intent is good, but in reality, I am not sure how much (restrictive laws) protect children,” said Vicki Bourus,executive director of the South Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. “The vast majority of offenders are unprosecuted, leaving children unprotected.”


NH - Teen charged in underage sex incident

View the article here

Another child caught in the net and will be ruined for life. I thought we were to protect children not ruin their lives! Remember back when you were a child? Remove the statute of limitations so you can be charged as a sex offender from having sex with your young girlfriend.

10/16/2007

WEARE – A 17-year-old boy who admitted to having sex with his underage girlfriend has been charged with misdemeanor sexual assault.

Damon C. Hadley, 17, of Henniker was arrested on Oct. 9 and released on $5,000 personal recognizance bail, according to Weare police.

His trial is scheduled for Nov. 27 in Goffstown District Court.

If convicted of the Class A misdemeanor, Hadley could face up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine.
- What? You are not considered an adult until 18, why are we punishing children like this? What about Genarlow Wilson? He was 17 and had consensual sex with his girlfriend, and he got 10 years in prison.

In addition to the criminal charge, Hadley is recovering from a beating by the girl's father. On Sept. 10, the father stormed the high school parking lot and hit the 17-year-old, leaving him with cuts, bruises and two stitches to his face.
- I hope the girls father is in jail right along with him for assault. He took the law into his own hands, becoming a vigilante, so he needs to pay for the crime and be put in jail for a year or so.

"We are a society of laws, not of vigilantism," said Skip Campbell, Hadley's attorney. "I hope that people will take the opportunity to look at the facts in this case as they come out and reserve their harsh judgment."
- It was consensual sex among teens, which does happen, and the father became a vigilante. So the way I see it, the father should be in jail for at least a year, and pay for the childs medical bills, the child should be sent home to let his mother or father whoop his a$$ like in the old days. Think back to when you were growing up. Would you be a sex offender today?

He described his client as a nice and thoughtful young man, who works hard in school and has a part-time job fixing motorcycles.

Hadley and his girlfriend had been dating since June, he said.

"This situation has profoundly affected him and confused him," Campbell said. "He certainly did not deserve what this man did to him, which is outrageous under any circumstances."

That morning, the girl failed to show up for her first-period class. School officials and then the girl's parents began to search for her, to no avail. Hadley and the girl returned to school at the same time, through separate entrances.

The teens later admitted to having sex during the school day, but off school property, Weare Police Detective Lou Chatel said.

Under state law, a person can't consent to sex until the age of 16. The girl is 15 1/2.
- So this may be true, but when you don't teach the kids this, how are they suppose to know? These kids should just be sent home and punished like in the old days.

In some circumstances, and if their age difference was three years or more, the youth could have faced a felony charge.

The girl's father reported the sexual assault to police, then drove to John Stark Regional High School and attacked Hadley in the parking lot, in full view of students and parents just as school was letting out around 3 p.m.
- And he still couldn't let the cops handle it. Why didn't he just go over to the boys parents, tell them what happened, and take his girl home and punish her, like the old days?

The father was arrested and charged with simple assault, a Class B felony.
- Good, hope he gets some jail time for this stupidity!

The girl has filed a restraining order against Hadley. She and her siblings have also transferred high schools.
- What? By this, is she stating it wasn't consensual? Sounds like she had sex and then decided to play the rape or abuse card so she could have sex but then get rid of him.

"I don't think it's that unusual that a 17-year-old is having sex with a 15-year-old," Michael Iacopino, president of the New Hampshire Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers. "It seems to me this is the perfect case where prosecutorial discretion ought to be used so we don't have a travesty of justice."
- Amen! Just look at Genarlow Wilson who only received oral sex, and he's in prison for 10 years.

Detective Chatel said Hadley will likely have to report his arrest on college and job applications.

"If the girl's father had a concern that she was having sex with another student at her high school, the proper approach would have been to speak with his daughter and to avail himself to resources in their community," said Campbell. "His response should not have been to lash out in anger about a situation that he clearly didn't understand."
- Amen! He should've talked with the boys parents, expressed his anger, told the boy to stay away, and take his girl home and punish her.


TX - Little Elm aims to limit sex offenders' travel

View the article here

10/15/2007

Ordinance would ban them from majority of area

Little Elm has a message for sex offenders: Stay away.

The town is considering an ordinance that would restrict not only where registered sex offenders live but also where they can go in this lakeside community.

Town officials say they know of no other municipality that bans all sex offenders outright from certain areas.

The residency restriction is similar to ordinances already on the books in such cities as Arlington, Carrollton, Duncanville, Farmers Branch, Prosper, Rowlett, Richardson, The Colony and Watauga. It would prohibit registered sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of places where children commonly gather, including schools, parks, libraries, day-care centers and video arcades.

Little Elm wants to take its ordinance a step further by also prohibiting registered sex offenders from entering these areas, regardless of where they live.

About 68 percent of the land in town is included in the restricted zones.

The Town Council is expected to vote on the ordinance tonight.
- Nice, you put out the news article one day before, so people don't have enough chance to prepare for it and get their word in. This is how politics operates, and is a load of BS. You should put notices out about ANY law being proposed at least one week in advance.

Texas law prohibits most sex offenders who are on parole or probation from going within 1,000 feet of places such as schools and day care centers. But Little Elm wants to extend that to all registered sex offenders, even after they have completed their probation or parole.
- Thus once again violating ex post facto laws, due process and others.

"My job is to try to outthink the bad guys," said Police Chief Waylan Rhodes, who drafted Little Elm's ordinance. "When I started reading about sex offenders and how ... residency restrictions are ineffective because [sex offenders] go outside from ... where they live and offend, I thought, 'Well, if that's the case, why don't we just make our 1,000-foot radius apply to any registered sex offender?' "
- Out think the bad guys? Do you really think a predator who is intent on committing another crime is going to obey a law? Nothing about these laws will prevent a predator from doing whatever they wish. Where did you read this BS? 90% or more of sex crimes occur in the victims home and is a family member, or someone close to the victim, so 50 or 100 miles would not make a bit of a difference. You are all blind idiots, really!!!!

The measure makes exceptions for registered sex offenders who are visiting family members or friends, attending an educational institution or doing legitimate business. Police may require proof of a sex offender's activity if he or she is found within a restricted area.

The 16 registered sex offenders living in Little Elm would also be exempt from the residency requirement.

Some defense attorneys question the legality of such an ordinance and wonder how the town would enforce it.

"How are you going to know that those people come within 1,000 feet unless you catch them right there in the act?" asked Toby Shook, a former Dallas County assistant district attorney and now a partner in the law firm of Fitzpatrick Hagood Smith & Uhl LLP.
- And if the buffer is 1000 feet, does them standing 1001 feet away make you more safe? It doesn't make a damn bit of a difference, could be 50 or 100 miles.

William Buckman, a national sex-offender policy expert and defense lawyer, also has concerns.

"I highly doubt constitutionally that a local municipality can essentially require sex offenders to present an internal passport, so to speak, to a law officer upon request for just traveling in their town or go to school," Mr. Buckman said. "It brings out visions of dictatorship where one cannot freely travel unless he or she presents papers."
- It is a damn dictatorship! Welcome to communist USSA folks! You will be next, mark my words on that. May take awhile, but the New World Order is coming, and I bet you won't like it. Did you not listen to Reagan, Bush Sr.? The both talked of a New World Order and everyone did not even hear or pay attention to it. Well, it's coming! When they come for you, it will be too late!

Mr. Buckman said sex-offender residency restrictions are counterproductive in the long run.

"The probability of recidivism is greatly increased in the sex-offender population if they're not allowed to establish a stable home and re-establish their social and support network," Mr. Buckman said. "By appealing to knee-jerk reactions and inflaming the public, law enforcement officials and municipal officials actually make the problem worse for the public. They actually increase the level of danger for the public through these ill-conceived statutes."
- The Police love it, so they can harass and beat the crap out of people. Police brutality is on the rise, and TONS of police are being busted for these very crimes, so why are they not making headline news?

Little Elm council member David Hillock supports the residency restriction but is leery of limiting where offenders can go, in part because of the challenges in enforcing it. His real concern, though, lies in creating the perception that parents don't need to worry.
- What??? You support it, but you are leery of it? So you are willing to torture millions of people, when you have doubts. Insane, totally insane! So do you or don't you support it?

"I don't want to create the mentality or the complacency that may come from parents expecting that their kids are safe simply because there is an ordinance on the books," Mr. Hillock said. " However, if we can do something that prevents registered sex offenders [from] moving to Little Elm, I'm certainly in favor of that."
- Nothing you do will make people safe, nothing! If a predator wants to commit another crime, what will stop them? If a murderer wanted to kill someone, what would stop them? When will people ever realize no matter how tough on crime, all the zero tolerance, all the registries in the world will not prevent a murderer from murdering, a thief from stealing, a dealer from dealing, a user from using, a rapist from raping....accusations on any sex crime, child abuse, or domestic violence will literally nail your butt to the wall! No DNA has to be present, No violence has to be present..... HEARSAY ALONE IS LITERALLY NAILING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE WALL BECAUSE THESE LAWS ARE BIASED. Sounds to me like you don't know what to do, you are just following the bandwagon. Either you support and understand it, or you don't! So would you be ok with banning gays, blacks or some other race from Little Elm? Probably so.... What about all the killers, drug dealers, gang members, or other criminals around you? DUI offenders and drug dealers kill more people than sex offenders, so why are you not outraged by that? Because you like going after the weak, which is pathetic, IMO!!

Chief Rhodes said he is also concerned about the false sense of protection. The ordinance is simply an additional tool for law enforcement, he said.
- False sense of security, I agree with that, been saying it for about a year now. And how exactly does this "tool" help law enforcement? If they are not following a sex offender, then how are they going to know when they break the law by coming too close to some place?

Parent Cindy Polando supports the proposal. She said sex offenders shouldn't be allowed near a facility that houses children.
- So when you find out your husband is molesting your own child, I bet you will see it differently, since about 90% or more of all sex crimes occur in the victims own home. You sheeple are so blind and gullible... You would believe ANYTHING the government tells you. Just keep following the herd, and eventually they will come to get you as well.

"If they're told that the law is you can't go within 500 feet of a school – and they do it – at least we got some kind of repercussions, especially if they're over there soliciting our children," Ms. Polando said. "There are too many of those."
- 10% or less of all crimes occur like this, so why are we punishing 100% of sex offenders when predators are who are killing the children? Why can't you blind sheeple see this? You just love torturing people, admit it!

A violation of the ordinance is a misdemeanor that comes with a fine up to $500.

The ordinance would apply to anyone required to register on the Texas Department of Public Safety's Sex Offender Database.
- Sex offenders first, then drug dealers, then users, then gang members, then prostitutes and Johns, then gun owners, then gays, then blacks, who is next? Why not just one CRIMINAL registry and laws and all criminals have to follow the same rules? Huh?

Chief Rhodes welcomes legal challenges to the ordinance.

"If it were going to get challenged – win, lose or draw – I would like to hear what the courts say about it," he said. "It'll give the cities more direction in these specific incidences. That's how we arrive at our legal resolve."
- Why don't you talk with experts and people who deal with sex offenders on a daily basis and think everything through before you pass laws to look good to the people? That sure would help! But no, you got to have knee-jerk reactions and not even look at the facts before making a law. If this is how laws are made, we are doomed!

Mr. Hillock said Little Elm wants to be on the front end when it comes to restrictions for sex offenders.
- Oh, every state does, believe me. Read the news, everyone is trying to out do the next state, and everybody states they are the toughest. So how long before we open the concentration camps and fire up the ovens?

"We want to be one of the places where registered sex offenders know that they're not welcome so when they're looking for a place to live, Little Elm is not even on the radar."
- Hell, sex offenders already know they are not "welcome" anywhere. So what is your point? Mark Lunsford once asked, "what is worse, your child being killed or molested?" I think death is pretty final, so I think death is the worse, yet he sees it differently. Insane! I'd rather get my arms and legs blown off and in a wheel chair than be dead. Death is final! Oh yeah, what about the child porn Mr. Lunsford had on his machine, which magically vanished?


FL - Does law foil defense in child porn cases?

View the article here

10/15/2007

Defense attorneys say a new federal law makes it tougher to defend those wrongly accused of child pornography crimes.

WASHINGTON - As the Justice Department steps up an aggressive crackdown on Internet child pornography, a little-noticed provision of a sex offender law is making it harder for defense attorneys to review some of the most important evidence against its suspected purveyors and consumers.

In response to a section of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, judges and prosecutors are requiring defense attorneys and computer forensic experts to examine digital pornography images on computers at government facilities, rather than receiving their own copies. Often, FBI agents stationed in the rooms monitor their activities.

The new provision has triggered an emotional debate about the constitutional rights of suspects who are accused of some of the most heinous crimes.

Supporters say the measure is needed to prevent children from being revictimized by unnecessary copying and distributing of the digital contraband. Many of the images gathered as part of the evidence depict very young children being raped and beaten.

"The law is designed to protect the rights and interests of child victims," said Andrew Oosterbaan, the Justice Department's chief of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section. "I don't think there's a human being out there who wouldn't agree with its purpose."

But some of the provision's most vocal critics are former law enforcement officers and prosecutors, who say their ability to defend child-pornography suspects has been compromised.

"This has had a profound effect on defense work," said Wayne Marney, a computer forensics expert and former Oregon state trooper. "It could make a difference between whether someone is convicted or found not guilty."

Computer experts say a thorough examination of the images is crucial because malicious software and the widespread use of legal adult porn and popular file-sharing networks mean that suspects could have downloaded or sent child pornography unintentionally.

"Not everyone charged with child porn is some lecherous scumbag who is leering around corners in an alleyway," said Boland, the Ohio defense attorney and former state prosecutor. "It is a fact that someone may have absolutely no idea that they have child porn on their computer until law enforcement seizes it."

Sometimes after examining the evidence, defense attorneys say, they've been able to clear suspects even before charges are brought.

In one case, a tenant who was in the process of being evicted accused his landlord, a teacher, of downloading child pornography. Authorities decided not to press charges against the teacher after defense attorney Michael Iacopino analyzed the computer evidence and determined that the teacher wasn't at home when the porn was downloaded.

"But the guy still lost his job," Iacopino said.

In what appears to be an unintended effect of the provision, defense attorneys technically could be prosecuted for possessing child pornography even if they receive copies legitimately .

In some states, attorneys and experts continue to get such copies as an exception for sharing evidence in state cases. But federal authorities have warned that the new restrictions apply to state cases as well.