View the article here
Today, Christopher Michael Hennessy was arrested by the Gulf Coast Violent Offenders Task Force in Houston, TX. Hennessy was wanted by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office on arrest warrants for probation violation / motion to adjudicate guilt, instant offense of sexual assault of child, possession of controlled substance, and failure to comply with sex offender registration laws.
Information developed by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office revealed Hennessy was working and living in the Houston, TX area under a new identity. The Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office forwarded this information to the Joint East Texas Fugitive Task Force (JETFT) in Tyler. The information was forwarded to the Gulf Coast Violent Offenders Task Force who arrested Hennessy this morning. Hennessy is in the Harris County Jail awaiting extradition back to Cherokee County.
Hennessy was a City of Rusk Police Officer when he was arrested for sexual assault of a child in 2004. Hennessy was convicted in 2005 and received 10 years deferred adjudication. Hennessy has been a fugitive since 2006.
Annually, investigations carried out by the U.S. Marshals result in the apprehension of approximately 34,000 federal fugitives. More federal fugitives are arrested by Marshals than all other federal agencies combined.
The Joint East Texas Fugitive Apprehension Task Force is a team comprised of law enforcement officers from 56 law enforcement agencies in the East Texas area. The task force objective is to seek out and arrest federal, state, and local fugitives, mainly those with violent criminal histories to include sex offenders. Last year, U.S. Marshals task forces arrested more than 27,000 state and local fugitives on felony charges.
Additional information about the U.S. Marshals can be found at http://www.usmarshals.gov.
Friday, February 29, 2008
View the article here
View the article here
For those who want to contact Bubba the Love Sponge, go here:
And read the item for February 26, 2008. Also take the POLL on the left of the page entitled "Do you believe Mark Lunsford is exploiting his daughter's murder for his own personal gain?" Right now, this poll says 2,382 people say YES, and 16 say NO. Amazing!!!
It was a brutal sentence, uttered in the middle of a heated argument.
But shock jock Bubba the Love Sponge Clem isn't backing off a harsh comment he made Thursday morning while pressing Mark Lunsford, whose 9-year-old daughter Jessica was abducted, raped and murdered by convicted sex offender John Couey in 2005.
Clem insists that Lunsford, who last week revealed his intention to file suit against the Citrus County sheriff's office for failing to investigate the disappearance properly, is addicted to the fame which has resulted from his daughter's death. The radio personality also raised pointed questions about what Lunsford has done with cash contributions to the foundation he established in his daughter's honor.
Lunsford called in to Clem's Cox Radio show Thursday morning. As he was talking about how he had to wait for IRS approval to establish his foundation, Clem let the bombshell drop: "You have to wait for your daughter to die before you can start raping money from people -- I understand."
"The only thing I'm guilty of is sticking up for the people of Citrus County, who will have to pay for this lawsuit," Clem said Thursday night. "I'm the most pro-law enforcement radio person out there. I stick up for cops...Maybe if he would have spent less time at the tavern (the night Jessica disappeared) she would still be around."
Lunsford's counsel, Jacksonville attorney Eric Block, accused Clem of trashing the father of a murdered girl to win ratings for his radio show. "(Lunsford) lost his daughter to a rape/murder.... He was furious. I was listening in and I was shocked," said Block, who added that Lunsford has hired a First Amendment attorney to explore the possibility of suing Clem. "They're not interested in facts; they're interested in shock radio."
- Facts? Why isn't Mark Lunsford and all the state legislatures looking at the facts about these sex offender laws, and listening to experts who say they will not and are not working? They don't want facts either!
During the 12-minute interview, Lunsford insisted all his foundation's financial records are available online, disputing a Tampa Tribune story which said the foundation claimed $25,000 in expenses for office supplies and furniture. Lunsford said he takes a salary of $54,000, inviting Clem to join his board of directors so he could see all the records.
Clem asked Lunsford if he would take a drug test before coming on his show, repeatedly asking where cash donations to the foundation have been spent. Lunsford eventually hung up the telephone when Clem asked a pointed question alleging he was at a bar while Jessica was abducted.
Block said Lunsford is limited to a maximum $100,000 award, which he has promised to donate to charity minus attorney's fees. The attorney added that Lunsford blames the sheriff's office for focusing on his father Archie as a suspect when Jessica's disappearance was first reported.
- That is normal and because 90% or more of all sexual crimes are usually family who committed the crime, so they did their job!
"The police lied to Mark and told him Jessica's blood was found in his father's underwear," said Block, noting that Jessica was taken from Lunsford's home while he was out and his father was babysitting; Lunsford maintains Jessica was alive for days after Couey abducted her. "The sherriff's office decided she was dead and Archie killed her. They weren't looking for a live little girl. they were trying to get Archie to admit to a crime he didn't commit."
- Police will lie to get a confession, it's called interrogation tactics. They are allowed to lie to get someone to admit to a crime. Again, they were doing their job. Also, I think they should open up the child porn investigation again... I am not saying Archie did it or not, but I guess Mark knows what is in people's hearts? Nobody except Archie and God know what exactly happened. See the interview here.
Citrus Country Sheriff Jeff Dawsy disagreed with Lunsford's assertions last week, telling the St. Petersburg Times "Jessie was already dead before I hit the street looking for her."
- So how does the Sheriff know she was dead? What did the autopsy show?
Producer Brent Hatley said Clem knows Dawsy and may be partially reacting to defend the sheriff. But Clem claims to have two private investigators and a forensic accountant looking at the publicly-available financial records for Lunsford's foundation. And given that Lunsford is a nationally-known advocate who called into the radio show himself, Clem isn't worried about a lawsuit, either.
"I cannot wait to get into a courtroom over this," said Clem. "I may be looking like the bad guy now. But I won't be for long."
Bubba's Hot Wife:
View the article here
Bill's sponsor describes father's abuse by priest
The Kentucky House approved a bill yesterday that would strengthen penalties for sexual abusers and those who fail to report them to authorities.
The vote on House Bill 211 -- which now goes to the Senate -- was 96-0.
Passage came after the bill's sponsor told colleagues of the decades of turmoil his late father had suffered after being molested as a boy by a Roman Catholic priest in 1930.
"A tragedy occurred that night," said Rep. Jim Wayne (Contact), D-Louisville. "In his 70s, he told his family about this tragedy and how upsetting it was and how really it impaired his relation to God as well as to his church."
- I think that is an excuse. You should not let anybody interfere with your relationship with God, regardless of who they are or what they do. It's just a cop out, IMO.
HB 211, prompted by similar revelations in recent years of sexual abuse by clergy, teachers and other authority figures, would make sexual contact with someone younger than 16 a felony if committed by someone older than 21.
And anyone in a position of authority or trust -- such as a family member, teacher, employer, clergy member or coach -- who has sexual contact with someone younger than 18 could be charged with a felony.
"Kentucky needs laws that recognize the seriousness of offenses committed by sexual predators, particularly those who use positions of authority to abuse children," Wayne said.
- Not all sex offenders are predators. Stop using sex offender, predator, child molester and pedophile as if they are all one and the same, they are not!
Currently some forms of sexual contact with minors older than 11 -- other than rape and sodomy -- are considered misdemeanors.
As felonies, such crimes would carry heavier sentences and could be prosecuted years into the future. Misdemeanors generally have a one-year statute of limitations.
The few sex crimes involving minors that would remain misdemeanors would have a five-year statute of limitations under the bill.
Advocates say victims often take years to come to terms with their abuse and report it to authorities.
"We need to make it easier for victims to bring charges against their abusers later in their lives," Wayne said.
While his father did not bring legal action in the case, Wayne said he was abused by a priest who has since died and who was accused of abuse in another person's lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Louisville several years ago. That suit was later settled.
The bill also imposes progressively steeper penalties for people who repeatedly fail to report sexual abuse to authorities.
- The net is getting larger....
Backers of the bill include the Catholic Conference of Kentucky and the Kentucky Baptist Convention -- representing the two largest religious groups in Kentucky -- as well as Kentucky Youth Advocates, the Family Foundation of Kentucky and Protect Our Children KY, a coalition of victims' advocates from various religious groups.
Nearly 30 legislators "from the left to the right" signed on as co-sponsors to the bill, Wayne said.
View the article here
From what I have been seeing over the last couple years, I do believe there is a hidden agenda. Just look at the laws! Nothing about them will truly protect children from someone who is intent on committing another crime! They are just laws to make you "feel better" without actually doing anything except banishing people. It's forced exile! These very politicians that were "supposedly" voted into office and who took an oath to uphold the constitution, are not doing this, so they lied. And they are not listening to experts, but their grandiose ego's lead them to believe they know better than anybody else. So why do we have experts if legislature knows everything?
The City Council will discuss Monday whether to monitor Long Beach's plan to restrict where registered sex offenders can live in the city.
HUNTINGTON BEACH - Surf City officials are eyeing a plan to further restrict the city's estimated 170 registered sex offenders.
The City Council will consider Monday whether to direct staff to monitor the progress of Long Beach officials who are in the midst of creating an ordinance that would restrict where registered sex offenders can live.
Councilman Joe Carchio, who introduced the item, said he hopes Huntington Beach will mimic the ordinance if it proves successful in Long Beach.
"I don't want to do it by taking away other people's rights," Carchio said. "I just want to make it all legal and give the kids as much protection as we can."
- So by passing this very law, it will be taking away people's rights. Stop the double-speak!
The creation of stricter rules in Long Beach and possibly Huntington Beach mirrors a statewide trend of municipalities tightening local rules regarding sex offenders, said Jeff Stein, spokesman for California Attorneys for Criminal Justice. The organization is opposed to further limiting the rights of registered sex offenders.
The proposed Long Beach ordinance would prevent sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of licensed child-care facilities. High-risk offenders would have to stay up to 2,500 feet away from such facilities. The ordinance also could limit the number of sex offenders who can live in a multi-family residence.
Currently, state law says that sex offenders paroled after Nov. 8, 2006 have to be at least 2,000 feet away from a school or park where children regularly congregate. In addition, the law doesn't allow registered paroled offenders to live in the same single-family dwelling as another registered offender, unless they are legally related by blood, marriage or adoption.
There are no restrictions, however, on keeping sex offenders from living near child-care facilities. The law also allows offenders to live in separate units in a multi-family complex.
Long Beach residents sparked the legislation after they complained about 13 registered sex offenders living in a dozen-unit apartment complex.
Huntington Beach police Lt. Dave Bunetta said there doesn't seem to be a problem controlling the registered sex offender population in the city.
People convicted of sex crimes -- ranging from indecent exposure to rape by force -- must register as sex offenders, Bunetta said.
Still, Carchio said, the city should look at avoiding a potentially similar situation to that of Long Beach.
"I feel that we on a local level need to take the bull by the horns and lay down some guidelines so we can protect our kids in our community," Carchio said.
- So tell me, if 90% or more of all sex crimes involving children are family members or those very close to the family, how will dictating where they can and cannot reside protect anybody?
Further restrictions on offenders, however, may just push them further into the shadows of society, Stein said.
"The registrants' increased difficulty in finding housing makes it vastly more likely that they become homeless," Stein said. "When they are displaced and homeless you can't find them."
Stein said it's far more dangerous to institute a policy that forces offenders below the radar than to have a system that allows them to live at a stable residence where law enforcement can easily find and question them.
Some cities could potentially craft legislation that would ultimately keep sex offenders from living in that particular city, Stein said.
"We're in an environment where politicians thrive on appearing tough on crime regardless on whether it's smart on crime," Stein said. "Essentially what municipalities are trying to do… their unstated goal is banishment and the policy effect of banishment is to displace the registrants to other cities,"
Carchio said he admits that he doesn't know where offenders should live.
"I don't know what the answer is to that," Carchio said. "But that's something I don't need to solve. What I'm trying to do is protect our community and protect our kids."
Contact the writer: 714-445-6688 or email@example.com
View the article here
Brenda Reddout, a member of the Polk County School Board, made a wish this week that sounded more like a voter's prayer:
"I wish they'd [members of the Florida Legislature] get the political will to do what's right."
Amen, sister. Preach on!
The Legislature, wishing to portray itself as tough on crime as possible, passed the Jessica Lunsford Act, named for the little girl kidnapped, raped and murdered in 2005. The act prohibits people who have ever been convicted of certain crimes from working on school campuses with children.
In this case, "certain crimes" means also anything imaginable, whether violent or nonviolent, and "ever" means no matter how long ago in the person's past. Even if those people have served their time, made restitution and lived lives as pure as the driven snow ever since, the Legislature wants them banished from the presence of school children.
In addition, the Legislature That Knows Best left Florida's school boards almost no wiggle room for longtime employees who have done their jobs without incident - in some cases, for decades.
So the Polk County School Board had little choice but to fire six employees for committing crimes years ago. None of the employees fired had ever been convicted of a sex-related crime - the very crime that brought about the Jessica Lunsford Act. The six employees were just the ones the School Board had to fire. About 18 others affected by the act chose either to resign or retire. Still others remained employed, but had to have their jobs or hours changed to eliminate contact with children.
Those who had to be fired were two district paraprofessionals, three custodians and a food-service assistant. Their crimes, all committed more than 15 years ago, ranged from grand theft to drugs.
Fred Murphy, superintendent of transportation services in the district, lost eight employees who resigned or retired because of the act.
The law, said Murphy, "was an overreaction, and some very fine folks got caught up in it. If I had a newborn child right now, I would leave it with any one of those eight."
But the Legislature wants to protect Florida's children.
If it really, really wants to contribute to the safety of children - and adults as well - the Legislature should adequately fund the Florida Highway Patrol to make the roads safer. Safety organizations have said the state needs to add dozens of troopers to met national standards.
In addition, the FHP has 200 vacancies - the Legislature won't raise pay to keep the troopers' jobs competitive.
The Legislature could also make the population safer by properly funding the state attorney offices throughout Florida. Prosecutors are having trouble handling caseloads and competing with offers from private law firms. But addressing those problems actually requires good old-fashioned gumption. And getting a raise for a state trooper would require some additional revenues.
Legislators might find those additional revenues if they would simply close some large loopholes in the state sales tax laws.
The state could raise tens of millions of dollars by simply eliminating the sales tax exemption for bottled water, ostrich feed and luxury sky boxes.
Just getting rid of the exemption on bottled water would bring in an additional $50 million for the state.
Over the years, the Legislature has filled the sales tax law with so many exemptions that it lets more money through the loopholes than it collects. The exemptions, numbering about 250, take up three pages of small print in the state's tax-code handbook.
In addition, the Legislature has failed to attempt to try to collect sales tax on items purchased over the Internet. Although 22 states have signed cooperative agreements to collect sales taxes for one another, Florida isn't one of them.
If the Legislature acted, it would raise $2 billion a year from those Internet collections - an amount about equal to what legislators are faced with cutting from the budget next month because of falling revenue projections.
Let us pray:
We humbly ask that members of the Florida Legislature will find the political backbone during the March session to do what's right.
View the article here
Check out this article on "Economic Fascism"
I knew the Internet police were coming, and here they come. More ways for the government to intrude on our personal lives. Next they will be taxing the Internet also. Say hello to "Big Brother!"
Firms, Experts To Help Protect Kids Online
Some of the country's biggest Internet companies are teaming up with experts from Harvard Law School to find ways to protect children from online predators.
Google, Yahoo, AOL, MySpace and Facebook are just a few of the companies that have agreed to participate in a newly formed Internet safety task force that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (Email) and attorneys general from the 49 other states have been seeking for months.
The task force, which was announced Thursday, will evaluate how new software that can verify a person's age and other technological advances might be used to better protect children when they are online.
Other participating companies include AT&T, Comcast, Microsoft, Symantec, Verizon and Xanga. The task force will be led by John Palfrey, executive director of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society. The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children is also volunteering its resources.
"This task force is virtually a who's who of the Internet," Blumenthal said. "Teaming MySpace and Facebook together with other Internet titans is a major breakthrough for social networking safety."
Blumenthal and North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper are leading a national attorneys general work group on Internet safety. The group formed more than a year ago in response to an increasing number of cases in which adults were preying on young children by reaching out to them through popular social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook.
Last year, MySpace officials, responding to pressure from Blumenthal and others, identified more than 5,000 registered sex offenders nationally who had created profiles on the network, including about 100 in Connecticut. Those profiles have since been purged.
- I guess next they will "purge" sex offenders from society, under the assumption that all sex offenders are child molesters and/or predators and trolling for children?
Last month, MySpace started restricting public access to profiles created by its 16- and 17-year-old users. Such restrictions used to apply only to profiles for 14- and 15-year-olds. The change was part of 74 new security measures MySpace enacted after striking an agreement with the attorneys general on safety concerns.
Contact Colin Poitras at firstname.lastname@example.org.
08 LC 28 4109ERS (SCS)
Senate Bill 474
By: Senators Staton of the 18th, Heath of the 31st,
AS PASSED SENATE
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
To amend Title 39 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to minors, so as to provide for definitions; to provide for the availability of parental controls over Internet access by children; to provide for the development and distribution of Internet online safety curricula and information; to provide for the monitoring of Internet use by registered sexual offenders; to provide for the registration of e-mail addresses and usernames of registered sexual offenders; to provide for certain disclosures; to provide that interactive computer services shall provide certain information for investigative purposes; to provide for the reporting by interactive computer services of child pornography violations; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF
Title 39 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to minors, is amended by adding a new chapter to read as follows:
As used in this chapter, the term:
(1) 'Child' means a person who is less than 18 years of age.
(2) 'Internet or any other computer network' means the computer network commonly known as the Internet and any other local, regional, or global computer network that is similar to or is a predecessor or successor of the Internet.
(3) 'Internet access provider' means an entity that provides consumers with access to the Internet.
(4) 'Interactive computer service' means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.
(5) 'Order' means a legal process for the release of information including, but not limited to, a subpoena, court order, search warrant, or summons.
(6) 'Username' means a string of characters chosen to identify uniquely an individual who uses a computer or other device with Internet capability to communicate with other individuals through the exchange of e-mail or instant messages or by participating in interactive online forums.
(7) 'User password' means a string of characters that enables an individual who uses a computer or other device with Internet capability to gain access to e-mail messages and interactive online forums.
(a) If an Internet access provider knows or has reason to know from registration data in its possession that a subscriber currently resides within this state, the provider shall make available to the subscriber a product or service that enables the subscriber to control a child´s use of the Internet.
(b) The product or service shall enable, in a commercially reasonable manner, the subscriber to:
(1) Block a child´s access to specific websites or domains;
(2) Restrict a child´s access exclusively to specific websites or domains approved by the subscriber; and
(3) Allow the subscriber to monitor a child´s use of the Internet service by providing a report to the subscriber of the specific websites or domains that the child has visited or has attempted to visit but could not access because the websites or domains were blocked or restricted by the subscriber.
(c) If a product or service described in this Code section is reasonably and commercially available for the technology utilized by the subscriber to access the Internet service, the Internet service provider shall:
(1) Provide to the subscriber, at or near the time of subscription, information about the availability of a product or service described in this Code section; or
(2) Make a product or service described in this Code section available to the subscriber either directly or through a third-party vendor and may charge for the product or service.
(a) The State Department of Education shall develop and propose model curricula for educating students regarding online safety while using the Internet, taking into consideration curricula on this topic developed by other states as well as any other curricula and materials suggested by education experts, child psychologists, and technology companies that work on child online safety issues.
(b) Each local school district shall incorporate into its curriculum a component on online Internet safety to be taught at least once each year to students in grade 3 and above.
(c) The State Department of Education shall provide to each local school district educational materials for parents and guardians regarding online Internet safety for children.
(a) Any person required to register with the state sexual offender registry as provided in Code Section 42-1-12 may, as a condition of probation, supervised release, parole, or entry into the state, be subject to one or more of the following provisions and conditions while remaining on the state sexual offender registry:
(1) Continued supervision, either in person or through remote monitoring, of the person´s incoming and outgoing e-mail and other Internet based communication for evidence relevant to any crime that would require registration with the state sexual offender registry;
(2) Continued supervision, either in person or through remote monitoring, of the person´s history of websites visited and content accessed for evidence relevant to any crime that would require registration with the state sexual offender registry; and
(3) Periodic unannounced inspections of the contents of the person´s computer or any other device with Internet access including the retrieval and copying of all data from the computer or device and any internal or external storage or portable media and the removal of such information, computer, device, or medium to conduct a more thorough inspection for evidence relevant to any crime that would require registration with the state sexual offender registry.
(b) If the Internet was used by the individual in the commission of a crime that would require registration with the state sexual offender registry, the court, as part of its sentence, may limit or restrict the person´s Internet access in a manner tailored to prevent further use of the Internet by the person to commit any such crime.
(c) The supervision shall be conducted by a probation officer, parole officer, law enforcement officer, or computer information technology specialist working under contract with the probation, parole, or law enforcement agency, in a manner and form prescribed by the Attorney General.
(a) In addition to any other information required for registration on the state sexual offender registry, the registrant at the time of registration and at each annual reregistration shall provide his or her e-mail addresses and usernames that such person uses or intends to use.
(b) If a person required to register under Code Section 42-1-12 fails to provide his or her e-mail addresses and usernames that such person uses or intends to use as required by this Code section, the person shall be subject to the same penalties applicable under such Code section for a failure to register.
(c) The e-mail addresses and usernames shall be made available to the public by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation under such restrictions as the Board of Public Safety shall promulgate by rule and regulation. The Board of Public Safety is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations necessary for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the
(d) No provider of an interactive computer service shall be liable under this Code section or any provision of law for:
(1) Identifying, removing, disabling, blocking, or otherwise affecting a user based upon a good faith belief that user´s e-mail address, username, or other similar Internet identifier appeared in the National Sex Offender Registry or the state sexual offender registry; or
(2) Failing to identify, block, or otherwise prevent a person from registering for its service or failing to remove, disable, or otherwise affect a registered user whose electronic mail address, username, or other similar Internet identifier appeared in the National Sex Offender Registry or the state sexual offender registry.
(e) Law enforcement agencies, employees of law enforcement agencies, and state officials shall be immune from liability for good faith conduct under this Code section.
(a) An interactive computer service, upon the request of a law enforcement agency for an investigation of a possible sex offense involving a child, shall take all necessary steps to preserve records and other evidence in its possession pending the issuance of an order or other legal process concerning such records and evidence. The interactive computer service shall comply with the request as soon as possible following the receipt of such request. The records and evidence shall be retained for a period of 90 days which shall be extended for an additional 90 day period upon a further request by the law enforcement agency within the initial 90 day period.
(b) In connection with any criminal investigation of a possible sex offense involving a child that involves immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm, a law enforcement agency in this state may issue a request without compulsory legal process or court order to a designated recipient of an interactive computer service to disclose, consistent with 18 U.S.C. Sections 2702(b)(8) and 2702(c)(4), the information identified in 18 U.S.C. Section 2703. The interactive computer service shall communicate with the requesting agency to discuss the nature of the request and to coordinate an appropriate response immediately and without delay.
(c) Subsections (a) and (b) of this Code section shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the requirements of federal law that apply to providers of an electronic communications service, including, but not limited to, 18 U.S.C. Section 2701, et seq., and 42 U.S.C. Section 13032.
An interactive computer service doing business in this state that obtains knowledge of facts or circumstances from which a violation of any law of this state prohibiting child pornography is apparent shall make a report, as soon as reasonably possible, of such facts and circumstances to the Cyber Tipline at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children consistent with the requirements of 42 U.S.C. Section 13032."
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
View the article here
From this article, the son is being charged with the deaths
I am not making any speculations here, but I wonder if this was a revenge attack, since this person worked with sex offenders? I will post more as it comes out. I hope and pray that is not the case...
Woman's son came home to find police
Gwinnett County police were investigating a triple homicide Thursday night of a Gwinnett County sheriff's deputy and her two young daughters at their Lawrenceville-area home.
The female deputy was about 40 years old and was a 7-1/2 year veteran of the Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office. Her two daughters were ages 4 and 11, according to Gwinnett County police spokesman David Schiralli. All three were dead of gunshot wounds.
Officials would not release names of the three because next of kin were still being notified at midnight.
The deputy's 17-year-old son, who lived there, arrived while police where at the house.
"We do have him right now for his own safekeeping," Schiralli said. "Right now we're looking after him because he has no one."
"Anger," Gwinnett County Sheriff Butch Conway said when reached by phone and asked his reaction to the crime. "I've got a deputy dead and two children. We just want to find out who did it and why."
The triple homicide occurred around 8 p.m. at 425 Madison Chase Drive, near Simonton Road.
The deputy worked in the sex crimes unit of the sheriff's office and interacted with registered sex offenders, maintaining a database of their addresses in Gwinnett, according to Schiralli.
Investigators did not name any suspects in the murder. Schiralli said the deputy had never been married.
At the scene of the shooting, Schiralli said police responded to a call from a neighbor of shots fired in the Madison Chase subdivision near Lawrenceville said they found a bullet hole in a house next door, then went to the home where they found the deputy and her 11-year-old dead inside the front door. The officers then went upstairs and found the 4-year-old.
One neighbor, Jim Clark, lives near the deputy's house and said he was "shocked and horrified" to learn of the crime. "You never think something like this is going to happen in your neighborhood."
He said the deputy and her family had been living there for about a year. Clark's family was happy to hear that a law enforcement officer was going to be their neighbor.
"We were excited about it," Clark said. "It's good to have a sheriff's car on your street."
But Clark said he had not gotten to know the deputy personally.
"She seemed friendly. She waved," he said.
Clark said he didn't hear gunshots or anything to alert him to the crime, but police officers still interviewed him.
"I didn't know about it until a neighbor called and said police cars were all up and down the street," Clark said.
Conway said he was at his home, nursing a bad back, when a sheriff's sergeant called to tell him what happened. He and numerous other sheriff's officials went to the crime scene.
"Everybody's concerned," Conway said. "We just want to find the perpetrator."
View the article here
Video is available at the site.
Under a new ordinance, sex offenders and predators within all of Bay County will have to live at least 2,500 feet away from anywhere kids congregate. The state law is 1,000 feet.
One county commissioner says there's a difference between offenders and predators, and the ordinance should reflect that.
"Consensual sexual acts of different kinds, Romeo and Juliet rules they're passing now to change some of those things and some of the way they're classified I'm not so sure they don't treat people a little too harshly than they should be treated," said Mike Thomas, Bay County Commissioner.
A local family wrote to the commission urging them against the proposal for exactly that reason. Their son served eight years for a "Romeo and Juliet" situation. He's now listed as a sex offender.
His father, Kenneth Siders, said, "There's a huge difference between sexual offenders and predators. Predators are actively seeking to reenact their perversion. Many sex offenders found themselves in an unfortunate situation and paid their dues, but are still being treated as a predator."
Still, some say it's hard to differentiate.
- No it's not. Just look at their crime and history. Very simple!
"There's always a first time offender. At which point in time do you say they're not a predator. I think every predator starts off as an offender so where do you draw the line," said Scott Jaffray, a parent.
"They've got to serve whatever penalty the system has given them and unfortunately you can't differentiate because who says an offender won't become a predator," said Shirley Jaffray, a grandparent.
It's an issue Commissioner Thomas says they need to look at more closely before making a decision. He says he's still not sure the county should make any changes to the ordinance at all.
They'll begin by hearing from the public at the next commission meeting on Tuesday. Similar ordinances are already in place in all of the county's cities.
View the article here
At Issue: Protecting children from sex offenders.
Our Opinion: Jessica's Law is proving more trouble than it's worth. It needs to be revised.
Proposition 83, also known as Jessica's Law, was designed to protect children by restricting where paroled sex offenders could live. It was popular with California voters who passed it with 70 percent of the vote in 2006.
Unfortunately, but predictably, the law has become so burdened with legal and logistical problems that the Legislature needs to take action. Prop. 83 is a statutory initiative, which gives the legislators latitude to make needed changes.
The intended purpose of Jessica's Law is commendable - to keep sexual predators away from children. However, the law is not as clear as it should be, is costly and difficult to enforce.
- And it's a law for ALL sex offenders, not just predators or people who harm children.
Prop. 83 prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children congregate. But the law does not say how to measure the distance, how to define a park, who will monitor offenders once their parole is over or who falls under the 2,000-foot rule.
The 2,000-foot rule residency limit often excludes paroled sex offenders from urban and even many suburban areas that are close to jobs.
Consequently, hundreds of recently paroled sex offenders are living illegally too close to parks or schools. Sex offenders who comply with the law most likely will be moving to small towns and rural areas such as Woodland, West Sacramento and even Dunnigan and Esparto. Many of the parolees are not likely to find housing near their jobs and others could end up homeless, which certainly is not conducive to rehabilitation.
More than 700 parolee sex offenders are registered as transients and go from house to house at night and, of course, can roam anywhere they want.
Fortunately, the courts have ruled that the law applies only to inmates freed after the measure was approved, not to all paroled sex offenders. But even this number is huge and growing.
Dealing with just those is becoming a major problem that will grow worse as increasing numbers of released sex offenders seek places to live.
Clearly, Jessica's Law is in need of reform that goes beyond definitions of the 2,000-foot limit. It should concentrate on high-risk parolees and restrict where released sex offenders can travel during the day, not necessarily where they sleep at night.
California also needs to treat sex offenders while they are still in prison. This state is one of a few that still does not have such services.
Without major reforms, Jessica's Law is not likely to be fully enforced nor particularly effective in protecting children from sexual predators.