Tuesday, June 24, 2008

OH - HB-111 - Will cause children to be taken a way if a sex offender lives in the residence!!



As Passed by the House

127th General Assembly
Regular Session
2007-2008
Am. Sub. H. B. No. 111


Representative Collier
Cosponsors: Representatives Patton, McGregor, J., Aslanides, Bacon, Boyd, DeBose, Domenick, Evans, Flowers, Hagan, J., Heard, Hughes, Letson, Luckie, Schindel, Setzer, Skindell, Williams, S., Yuko


A BILL
To amend sections 2151.03 and 2717.01 of the Revised Code to expand the definition of neglected child to include a child whose parent, guardian, or custodian knowingly allows certain sexually oriented offenders or child-victim offenders to reside in the same residence as that child, and to prohibit a court from ordering a statutory change of name for a person who has committed identity fraud or who must register under the SORN Law for having committed a sexually oriented offense or child-victim oriented offense.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO:
Section 1. That sections 2151.03 and 2717.01 of the Revised Code be amended to read as follows:
Sec. 2151.03. (A) As used in this chapter, "neglected child" includes any child:
(1) Who is abandoned by the child's parents, guardian, or custodian;
(2) Who lacks adequate parental care because of the faults or habits of the child's parents, guardian, or custodian;
(3) Whose parents, guardian, or custodian neglects the child or refuses to provide proper or necessary subsistence, education, medical or surgical care or treatment, or other care necessary for the child's health, morals, or well being;
(4) Whose parents, guardian, or custodian neglects the child or refuses to provide the special care made necessary by the child's mental condition;
(5) Whose parents, legal guardian, or custodian have has placed or attempted to place the child in violation of sections 5103.16 and 5103.17 of the Revised Code;
(6) Who, because of the omission of the child's parents, guardian, or custodian, suffers physical or mental injury that harms or threatens to harm the child's health or welfare;
(7) Who is subjected to out-of-home care child neglect;
(8) Whose parents, guardian, or custodian knowingly allows any of the following persons to reside in the same residence as the child:
(a) A person who is a habitual sex offender, sexual predator, habitual child-victim offender, or child-victim predator, as defined in section 2950.01 of the Revised Code;
(b) A person who was convicted of or pleaded guilty to an aggravated sexually oriented offense, as defined in section 2950.01 of the Revised Code;
(c) A person who has been convicted of or has pleaded guilty to a sexually oriented or child-victim oriented offense, as defined in section 2950.01 of the Revised Code, who is not described in division (A)(8)(a) or (A)(8)(b) of this section but who is subject to one of the following imposed for that offense:
(i) A jail or prison term;
(ii) A community control sanction, as defined in section 2929.01 of the Revised Code, other than one imposed under section 2929.18 or 2929.28 of the Revised Code;
(iii) A period of post-release control;
(iv) A community control sanction imposed after a judicial release;
(v) Parole or another type of early release from confinement.
(B) A child is not a neglected child under division (A)(8) of this section if either of the following applies to the person living in the same residence as the child:
(1) The person is under eighteen years of age.
(2) The person is eighteen years of age or older, resides in the same residence as the person's parent, guardian, or legal custodian, and is enrolled in high school.
(C) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as subjecting a parent, guardian, or custodian of a child to criminal liability when, solely in the practice of religious beliefs, the parent, guardian, or custodian fails to provide adequate medical or surgical care or treatment for the child. This division does not abrogate or limit any person's responsibility under section 2151.421 of the Revised Code to report child abuse that is known or reasonably suspected or believed to have occurred, child neglect that is known or reasonably suspected or believed to have occurred, and children who are known to face or are reasonably suspected or believed to be facing a threat of suffering abuse or neglect and does not preclude any exercise of the authority of the state, any political subdivision, or any court to ensure that medical or surgical care or treatment is provided to a child when the child's health requires the provision of medical or surgical care or treatment.
Sec. 2717.01. (A) A person desiring a change of name may file an application in the probate court of the county in which the person resides. The application shall set forth that the applicant has been a bona fide resident of that county for at least one year prior to the filing of the application, the cause for which the change of name is sought, and the requested new name. The application shall require the applicant to state whether the applicant has been convicted of, pleaded guilty to, or been adjudicated a delinquent child for identity fraud or has a duty to comply with section 2950.04 or 2950.041 of the Revised Code because the applicant was convicted of, pleaded guilty to, or was adjudicated a delinquent child for having committed a sexually oriented offense or a child-victim oriented offense.
Notice of the application shall be given once by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least thirty days before the hearing on the application. The notice shall set forth the court in which the application was filed, the case number, and the date and time of the hearing.
Upon Except as provided by division (C) of this section, upon proof that proper notice was given and that the facts set forth in the application show reasonable and proper cause for changing the name of the applicant, the court may order the change of name.
(B) An application for change of name may be made on behalf of a minor by either of the minor's parents, a legal guardian, or a guardian ad litem. When application is made on behalf of a minor, in addition to the notice and proof required pursuant to division (A) of this section, the consent of both living, legal parents of the minor shall be filed, or notice of the hearing shall be given to the parent or parents not consenting by certified mail, return receipt requested. If there is no known father of the minor, the notice shall be given to the person who the mother of the minor alleges to be the father. If no father is so alleged, or if either parent or the address of either parent is unknown, notice pursuant to division (A) of this section shall be sufficient as to the father or parent.
Any additional notice required by this division may be waived in writing by any person entitled to the notice.
(C)(1) The court shall not order a change of name under division (A) of this section if the person applying for a change of name or for whom the application for a change of name is made has pleaded guilty to, been convicted of, or been adjudicated a delinquent child for a sexually oriented offense or a child-victim oriented offense and has a duty to comply with section 2950.04 or 2950.041 of the Revised Code as a result of the guilty plea, conviction, or adjudication unless the guilty plea, conviction, or adjudication has been reversed on appeal.
(2) The court shall not order a change of name under division (A) of this section if the person applying for a change of name or for whom the application for a change of name is made has pleaded guilty to, been convicted of, or been adjudicated a delinquent child for committing an act that if committed by an adult would be a violation of section 2913.49 of the Revised Code unless the guilty plea, conviction, or adjudication has been reversed on appeal.
(3) As used in this division, "sexually oriented offense" and "child-victim oriented offense" have the same meanings as in section 2950.01 of the Revised Code.
Section 2. That existing sections 2151.03 and 2717.01 of the Revised Code are hereby repealed.


TX - NBC resolves lawsuit over 'To Catch a Predator' suicide

View the article here

In other words, they probably gave her the $100 million, or a large sum of money to shut her up, IMO. I wonder when someone will file a freedom of information act to get this information. I'd love to see what the outcome was, but I'm willing to bet I am right.

06/24/2008

NBC Universal has “amicably resolved” a $105-million lawsuit filed by a woman whose brother committed suicide during a taping of its controversial “Dateline NBC” series “To Catch a Predator,” both parties said today.

Bruce Baron, an attorney for Patricia Conradt, told The Times in an interview today that “the matter has been amicably resolved to the satisfaction of both parties.”

Conradt’s brother, Louis William Conradt Jr., a 56-year-old assistant county prosecutor in a Dallas suburb, shot himself in November 2006 when officers showed up at his house as part of a pedophilia sting arranged by “Dateline.”

Patricia Conradt sued NBC last July, claiming that the network interfered with police duties and then failed to protect her brother's safety.

When asked today about the status of the suit, NBC News spokeswoman Jenny Tartikoff echoed Baron, saying “the matter has been amicably resolved.”

Both sides declined to comment on when they came to agreement or the terms of the resolution. A sealed document regarding the suit was filed with the court June 3, but the case remains open, according a spokesman for the New York Southern District Court.

The resolution of the lawsuit caps a controversial chapter for “Dateline,” which drew both ratings bonanzas and sharp critiques for its “To Catch a Predator” investigations. In the segments, which NBC began airing in 2004, the newsmagazine worked with an Internet watchdog group called Perverted Justice to contact men online who were seeking to meet underage children for sex, then lure them to a house, where they were confronted on camera. Police waiting outside then arrested the men.

Media ethicists objected to the deception used in the investigation, as well as NBC’s close relationship with law enforcement agencies in the jurisdictions where it set up stings.

NBC News executives staunchly defended the “Predator” investigations but eventually concluded the series had become too highly charged to continue. “Dateline” quietly aired its 12th and final installment of “Predator” in late December.

Tartikoff said that “Dateline” is currently focused on investigative stories about national security and the economy, adding that if the newsmagazine pursues further “Predator” segments, “we want to make sure we are complementing past investigations, not just repeating them.”

Louis Conradt was one of two dozen men in the Dallas-Fort Worth area snared by the ninth “Predator” sting in the fall of 2006. He allegedly engaged in a sexually explicit online chat with a Perverted Justice member posing as a 13-year-old boy, and then an actor invited Conradt to meet him at a decoy house NBC set up in Murphy, Texas.

But Conradt did not show up at a camera-rigged house, where “Dateline” correspondent Chris Hansen and local police were waiting, outfitted with cameras provided by NBC, Hansen later told Dallas-Fort Worth television station WFAA-TV, which did its own investigation into the incident.

The next day, a "Dateline" crew and a team of officers went to find Conradt at his home in a nearby town. "Dateline" cameras taped the scene as a police tactical team forced its way into Conradt’s house. As the officers entered, Conradt shot himself with a small-caliber semi-automatic handgun. He died later at a nearby hospital.

The incident was featured in a “To Catch a Predator” segment that aired on “Dateline” in February 2007.

In her lawsuit, Patricia Conradt accused NBC of being “concerned more with its own profits than with pedophilia.”

She claimed a police officer at the scene of the shooting told a “Dateline” producer: “That’ll make good TV.”

The network said her suit was without merit.

But in February, U.S. District Judge Denny Chin ruled that the case could go forward on claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and violation of civil rights.

Chin dismissed some causes of action but said in his ruling that the network “placed itself squarely in the middle of a police operation, pushing the police to engage in tactics that were unnecessary and unwise, solely to generate more dramatic footage for a television show.”

“A reasonable jury could find that by doing so, NBC created a substantial risk of suicide or other harm, and that it engaged in conduct so outrageous and extreme that no civilized society should tolerate it,” Chin wrote.

At the time, NBC said it planned to fight the claim, saying it had “acted responsibly and lawfully.”

“Dateline’s” Murphy sex sting failed to net any convictions. The Collin County district attorney’s office declined to pursue more than 20 cases related to the “Predator” operation, citing problems with the evidence gathered.


IL - Waukegan Cop Charged With Rape

View the article here

06/24/2008

WAUKEGAN ― A north suburban police officer is in Lake County Jail on Tuesday after he was charged with restraining a woman and forcing her to perform sexual acts against her will in January.

Delatwon A. Haynes, 32, of Waukegan, was order held on $2 million bond Monday, according to a release from the Lake County Sheriff's office. Haynes, who resigned from the Waukegan Police Dept. on Jan. 11, was charged with four counts of aggravated criminal sexual assault, one count of aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated sexual abuse and eight counts of official misconduct on Monday.

The charges were filed as a result of an investigation prompted by a complaint filed on Jan. 7 by a woman reporting that an officer restrained her against her will and forced her to perform sexual acts, the release said.

The 39-year-old woman said that in the early morning hours of Jan. 6, an officer confronted her as she was walking in the 900 block of North Lewis Avenue in Waukegan, according to the release. The officer and the woman had a short conversation and he told her to go home.

About 30 minutes later, the officer confronted the woman again and ordered her into the back of his squad car, the release said. She got in and the officer drove her to the rear of an abandoned building in the 1700 block of North Lewis. He then told the woman she was "required" to perform sexual acts with him, after which he released her near her residence.

Waukegan police and the Lake County State's Attorney's office began investigating immediately after the complaint was filed, the release said. Haynes was stripped of his police powers and placed on leave.

Haynes resigned from the department about four days later when faced with an administrative investigation, the release said. He was a member of the department since 2001 and served in the patrol division.

In February, Haynes was named in a lawsuit filed by Denise Swinney, who claimed the officer falsely arrested and raped her about 1 a.m. Jan. 6, 2005.

The suit claims Haynes fondled her chest, forced her to engage in oral sex, then had sex with her for more than 30 minutes.

Swinney claims she was never charged with a crime and was released by Haynes after being raped.


WA - Money Offered To Bail Sex Offender Attacker Out, Family Says

View the article here

Yep, the vigilante hate squad is condoning this. This will only help boost her ego and next time someone will die, which I'm sure the evil, hate filled vigilantes would love to see. YOU PEOPLE ARE SICK!!!!! Lets just remove all laws, and let everyone kill each other, is that what you want? Lawlessness? Sounds to me like what these sick people want.

06/21/2008

TACOMA -- Offers of bail money from around the country have been offered for the woman accused of beating a sex offender with a baseball bat.

Forty-year-old Tammy Gibson attacked 24-year-old William Baldwin late Monday at a trailer park near Puyallup after sex offender notification fliers were posted in the neighborhood. The fliers detailed Baldwin's conviction for molesting two 5-year-old girls when he was a teenager.

As far as the law is concerned, Gibson's assault on a convicted sex offender was a crime. However, a lot of people see the attack as an act of heroism, and they want to let Gibson know they are on her side.

“As soon as they seen her on TV, they called here. As a matter of fact, we got three or four calls right away,” said Tony Hyatt, Gibson’s brother.

After KIRO-7 aired a jailhouse interview Thursday with Gibson following her arrest, she’s been getting calls from people around the country.

Hyatt said he's even had some offers of money to bail Gibson out of jail.

“Basically we just told them to call the bail bondsmen, because they wanted to put money on the books to help her and get her bailed out,” said Hyatt.

Even one local bail bond company agreed to put up bail at half price, said Gibson’s family.

William Baldwin said he understands Gibson's anger. In a jailhouse interview, Baldwin said he is not only a sex offender, but was also the victim of sexual abuse.

I did wrong to kids and people, but I mean nobody should ever have to go through that. I went through it myself,” said Baldwin.

Some neighbors said Gibson went too far.

I don't agree with what she did, at all. You know it's wrong to go after somebody and take justice into your own hands,” said neighbor Dawn Northern.

Others think she did the right thing.

“I actually think that she did a good deed, because you know what? Now he's sitting in jail,” said neighbor Janet Hauff.
- So she could have called the police and said he was not living where he was suppose to, like any LAW OBIDING citizen should do, yet you condone violence.

As of Friday afternoon, Gibson was still behind bars, but she could be out soon.

Baldwin is still in jail, facing charges of failing to register as a sex offender.


IN - Judge strikes down Indiana sex-offender law

View the article here

These laws, IMO, are just test beds to see what the corrupt government can get a way with, then they will be coming after you and your rights. Watch and see...

06/24/2008

INDIANAPOLIS - A federal judge has struck down a new state law that would allow police to search the computers of convicted sex offenders long after their sentences had been served.

Starting July 1, the law would require sex offenders enrolling in the state's public registry to submit e-mail addresses and user names for instant messaging and chat rooms.

They would then have to sign a consent form allowing searches of their personal computers at any time. The restrictions already are conditions of probation, but the ACLU of Indiana challenged their use for offenders who have finished serving parole or probation but must still be registered.

U.S. District Judge David Hamilton agreed with the ACLU's claims that the restrictions were unconstitutional because they violated privacy rights. The attorney general's office said it was reviewing the ruling and had no immediate comment.


WI - Howard passes sex offender restrictions

View the article here

06/24/2008

Residency ordinance similar to Green Bay, Ashwaubenon laws

HOWARD — Certain sex offenders moving to the village will be limited to certain areas.

On Monday, the Village Board voted unanimously to pass an ordinance that will prohibit court-supervised sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of any school, licensed day care center, park, trail, playground, place of worship or other place where children congregate. It also prevents landlords from knowingly renting to sex offenders.
- I can feel the law suits coming... Where do you expect these people to live?

Trustees Ron Braedel and George Speaker were not present for the vote.

It would effectively shut off a large portion of the village to new sex offenders.

Almost a year ago, the Village Board rejected a similar proposal. However, changes were made to the ordinance to address some of the concerns, said trustee David Steffen, one of the co-authors of the law. One of those changes is a sunset clause of June 24, 2010.

"It's basically a replication of the Green Bay and Ashwaubenon ordinances with a couple minor changes," Steffen said. "This ordinance becomes a road map for the Department of Corrections — tells them where they can and where they can't place pedophiles and child rapists."
- Not all sex offenders are pedophiles and child rapists!

In the year since Green Bay passed its residency restriction law, some suburban zip codes have shown an increase in the placement of newly released sex offenders. Some officials said they worried more would be placed in Howard as other communities continued to restrict where offenders can live.

"This is certainly ripple legislation and demonstrates what happens when one community doesn't think about the other communities around it," village President Burt McIntyre said. "Any reasonable person has to understand that we have to do this."
- Any reasonable person would see that 90% or more of sex crimes occur in the victims own home, so these residency restrictions do nothing to protect people, except FORCED BANISHMENT!

The ordinance also would establish a five-member appeals board and would grandfather those already living in the village.

Other communities have taken different positions on the issue.

The village of Ashwaubenon recently adopted two ordinances dealing with sex offenders: one prohibiting certain types of court-supervised offenders from living within 1,500 feet of school, day-care center, park or other place children might gather, and another preventing them from loitering around 200 feet of those areas.

The villages of Hobart and Bellevue both have laws preventing sex offenders from loitering around areas where children gather. The city of De Pere and the village of Allouez both are in the process of looking at ordinances to potentially restrict where sex offenders can live.


Keeping kids safe in a digital world


In the spirit of National Internet Safety Month, we welcomed Ernie Allen, co-founder and president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to the Googleplex last week to discuss child protection issues.

For those not familiar with it, NCMEC works closely with federal law enforcement across the U.S. to help prevent child abduction and sexual exploitation and to help find missing children. From serving as the clearinghouse for reports of online child pornography to issuing Amber Alerts when children go missing to reuniting families in the wake of Katrina, NCMEC is at the forefront of efforts to protect society's most vulnerable members.

In a policy talk called "Beyond Milk Cartons: Keeping kids safe in a digital world", Ernie provided an overview of NCMEC's work and chatted with Googlers about the ever-changing landscape of child protection challenges shared by parents, educators, advocacy organizations, and technology companies like Google as we work to help families make smart choices online.


Technology is an invaluable tool for addressing some of these challenges. In a recent example, a team of Google engineers dedicated their 20 percent time over the last year and a half to build cutting-edge software for NCMEC that uses image and video recognition technology to help NCMEC analysts more effectively sort and review incoming reports of child exploitation. NCMEC analysts sort through tens of millions of images in child sexual abuse investigations, and we've tried to leverage our expertise in organizing huge amounts of data to help make their important work more automated and efficient.

When it comes to keeping kids safe on the Internet, we believe that education for families, support for law enforcement, and empowering technology tools, like our SafeSearch filter and the NCMEC software, are all critical pieces of the puzzle.

Tackling online child safety issues is no small task, but we'll continue our collaboration with organizations like NCMEC, along with other partners in schools, government and industry, to take collective strides in the right direction.


GA - Injunction filed on Volunteer Ban

View the article here | Lawsuit PDF

06/24/2008

Friends,

This morning we filed a preliminary injunction on the portion of the new sex offender law that prohibits people on the registry from volunteering at churches or other places of faith. As you know, the Georgia General Assembly passed SB 1 this year which in addition to reinstating the residency restrictions, also made it a crime punishable by 10-30 years in prison to volunteer at a church. To read the press release and legal documents, click here. This action is on behalf of everyone on the registry and seeks to preserve your right to volunteer with places of faith.

This law is effective July 1, 2008. As you know, last month we amended the Whitaker lawsuit to include SB 1’s residency and employment restrictions in our challenge which you can read about by clicking here.

Over the last two years, we have heard from so many of you about the important role the church plays in your lives. We have heard about your activities singing in choirs, studying the bible, serving in soup kitchens, doing landscaping at the church and much more. We understand that the ability to live faith in action is deeply treasured and has helped you lead much happier, fuller lives. We hope that the Court similarly recognizes this importance as well as the law’s improper imposition on your First Amendment right to practice religion.

We will keep you posted about next steps and any actions from the court on the injunction or the residency restrictions. We include an article from the Associated Press below on this new filing.

All the best,

Sara, Sarah, Mica, Gerry, and James



Ga. sex offenders challenge church volunteer ban
By GREG BLUESTEIN

ATLANTA (AP) — Five sex offenders filed a lawsuit Tuesday claiming that a tough new Georgia law that bans them from volunteering at churches also robs them of their right to participate in religious worship.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Rome, claims the Georgia law effectively "criminalizes fundamental religious activities" for sex offenders and bars them from serving as a choir member, secretary, accountant or any other role with a religious organization.

"Even helping a pastor with Bible study or preparing a meal in a church kitchen will subject (sex offenders) to prosecution and imprisonment," the complaint said.

It is the latest of a growing list of legal challenges targeting Georgia's strict sex offender statute, which was hailed by supporters in 2006 as one of the toughest in the nation but has since been the frequent focus of lawsuits contending it is far too restrictive.

The main portion of the measure bans sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of just about anywhere children gather. That includes schools, parks, gyms, swimming pools and the state's 150,000 school bus stops.

The original version of the law banned sex offenders from working at churches, but when it was retooled this year supporters slipped in a provision also banning them from volunteering at houses of worship. Doing so could risk a penalty of 10 to 30 years in prison.

The changes were adopted with little debate in April at the urging of Republican lawmakers who said it will help protect Georgia's children and prevent the state from becoming a "safe haven" for sex offenders.

"I have not had one prosecutor, one judge, one sheriff, one mama, one daddy, one grandparent coming down here telling me to repeal the residency requirements on sex offenders," state Rep. David Ralston, one of the measure's sponsors, told House lawmakers during the session.

"I think the people of Georgia understand we're trying to protect the children of Georgia," said Ralston, R-Blue Ridge.

Critics have launched a slew of lawsuits over the last two years claiming the law is unconstitutional, and federal judges are already considering challenges targeting the school bus stop portion of the law and another provision that could evict offenders who live near churches.

The latest challenge, which was filed by the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights, claims that the measure deprives Georgia's sex offenders of the "rehabilitative influence" of religious activity.

"Certain people on the sex offender registry should not work with children in a church setting or elsewhere," says Sarah Geraghty, an attorney with the center. "But criminalizing the practice of religion for all 15,000 people on the registry will do more harm than good."

The group's lawsuit centers on five sex offenders who fear the new provision, which goes into effect July 1, will ban them from participating in many religious functions.

Among them is Omar Howard, a 33-year-old who is on the registry after he was convicted of false imprisonment of a minor during a 1993 burglary.

He got involved in a Christian ministry during his 14 year prison sentence and he became an active volunteer at several churches after his release last year. Now he's not sure whether the law will allow him to help prepare for revival meetings, serve on church committees or sing in the choir, which he feels is part of his calling.

"What really can I do? This law cripples me. All I can do is go to sermons and leave. Why am I a threat to exercise my faith?" he said

Sara J. Totonchi
Public Policy Director
Law Offices of the Southern Center for Human Rights
83 Poplar Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
404/688-1202 voice
404/688-9440 fax
stotonchi@schr.org


UK - U.K. to Begin Microchipping Prisoners

View the article here

I know this is the UK, but what usually starts over seas, comes here, and you can take this chip and stick it where the sun don't shine...

06/21/2008

The British government is developing a plan to track current and former prisoners by means of microchips implanted under the skin, drawing intense criticism from probation officers and civil rights groups.

As a way to reduce prison crowding, many British prisoners are currently released under electronic monitoring, carried out by means of an ankle bracelet that transmits signals like those used by mobile phones.

Now the Ministry of Justice is exploring the possibility of injecting prisoners in the back of the arm with a radio frequency identification (RFID) chip that contains information about their name, address and criminal record. Such chips, which contain a built-in antenna, could be scanned by special readers. The implantation of RFID chips in luggage, pets and livestock has become increasingly popular in recent years.

In addition to monitoring incarcerated prisoners, the ministry hopes to use the chips on those who are on probation or other conditional release. By including a satellite uplink system in the chip, police would be able to use global positioning system (GPS) technology to track subjects' exact locations at all times. According to advocates of such a measure, this could help keep sex offenders away from "forbidden" zones like schools.

Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of the National Association of Probation Officers, blasted the measure as degrading to the people chipped and of no benefit to probation officers.

"Knowing where offenders like pedophiles are does not mean you know what they are doing," Fletcher said. "Treating people like pieces of meat does not seem to represent an improvement in the system to me."

Shami Chakrabarti of the civil rights group Liberty had even stronger words:

"If the Home Office doesn't understand why implanting a chip in someone is worse than an ankle bracelet, they don't need a human-rights lawyer; they need a common-sense bypass."