Friday, June 27, 2008

MI - Flint cracks down on sagging pants

View the article here

The next sex offenders? Here comes the moral police!

06/27/2008

FLINT -- Flint's new police chief wants to crack down on sagging pants that expose too much skin.

"This immoral 'self expression' goes beyond freedom of expression; it rises to the crime of indecent exposure/disorderly persons," interim Chief David Dicks said in a memo today.

Under the order, anyone with exposed buttocks could be arrested on a misdemeanor charge of being a disorderly person, punishable by up to a $500 fine and three months in jail.

Dicks, who was appointed to his position June 2, said in the memo the measure was prompted by "a significant number of complaints from citizens."

But some are concerned that stepped-up enforcement could violate the Constitution or disproportionately target African-American men.

The American Civil Liberties Union has opposed clothing restrictions in other cities.

Greg Gibbs, an ACLU attorney, told the Flint Journal he plans to research the issue to see whether the crackdown violates the right to free expression.

Frances Gilcreast, president of the Flint chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said she is "not interested in looking at anyone's underwear."

But, she said, she is worried police are focusing on a loose-fitting style favored by some young black men.

"My concern is how (the policy) will be applied equitably," she said.

Flint Police Officers Association President Keith Speer said that in the past, officers have given out warnings for exposed skin and arrested those with their entire rear exposed. He said he doesn't anticipate any significant changes in how police will enforce the law.


Day care sex abuse hysteria

View the article here
False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse

Day care sex abuse hysteria occurred in the 1980s and early 1990s. This occurred mainly in the United States, with some cases in Canada and New Zealand. A prominent case in Kern County, California first brought the issue of day care sexual abuse to the fore in the public consciousness, and the issue figured prominently in news coverage for almost a decade.

The Kern county case was followed by a wave of similar accusations that started in California and spread throughout the United States, as well as to Canada, New Zealand and some European countries.

Significant cases

Kern county child abuse cases

The Kern County child abuse case was the first prominent instance of accusations of ritualized sex abuse of children. In 1982 in Kern County, California, Debbie and Alvin McCuan were accused of abusing their own children. The initial charges were made by Mary Ann Barbour, the children's step-grandmother. Barbour had a history of mental illness. The authorities used coercive techniques to get the children to tell of abuse by their parents. In 1982, the girls further accused McCuan's defense witnesses: Scott Kniffen, his wife Brenda, and his mother. Mary Ann Barbour reported that the children had been used for prostitution, used in child pornography, tortured, made to watch snuff films. The McCuans and the Kniffens were each sentenced to over 240 years in prison in 1984. Their convictions were overturned in 1996.

McMartin preschool trial

"The case began in August 1983 when the mother of a 2 1/2 year-old boy reported to police that her son had been abused by Raymond Buckey at the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California." After seven years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. As of 2006, it is the longest and most expensive trial in the history of the United States. The accusations involved hidden tunnels, killing animals, Satan worship, and orgies.

Nine of 11 jurors at a press conference following the trial stated that they believed the children's testimony. These same jurors stated that they believed that the evidence did not allow them to state who had committed the abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.

In 2005, newspapers reported that a former student had completely retracted his story and said he lied, attempting to protect his younger siblings and to please his parents.

In The Devil in The Nursery, Margaret Talbot for the New York Times summarized the case:

When you once believed something that now strikes you as absurd, even unhinged, it can be almost impossible to summon that feeling of credulity again. Maybe that is why it is easier for most of us to forget, rather than to try and explain, the Satanic-abuse scare that gripped this country in the early 80's -- the myth that Devil-worshipers had set up shop in our day-care centers, where their clever adepts were raping and sodomizing children, practicing ritual sacrifice, shedding their clothes, drinking blood and eating feces, all unnoticed by parents, neighbors and the authorities.

David Hechler, author of The Battle and the Backlash - The Child Sexual Abuse War, states:

“What happened at the McMartin Preschool will be debated for a long time. Few aspects of the case are clear, but it requires no strain of credulity to believe that the children could have been abused at the facility without being diagnosed by a pediatrician.”

Dade County Day Care Center

Miami-Dade County, Florida state's attorney Janet Reno crafted a "children's rights" approach to the prosecution of several suspected child abusers during her reelection campaign in 1984. Hundreds of prosecutors nationwide patterned themselves after her systematic style, including some of the other examples listed here.

Starting in 1984, Reno used Joseph and Laurie Braga, two self-styled experts at interviewing children, to gain most of the "confessions" from the children. The Bragas coerced numerous children into confessions that were thrown out on appeal in both state and federal courts years later. One federal judge described the confessions as "fundamentally unfair." Some of the kids later admitted that they confessed only because they were told other children claimed abuse, and that they were tired of being told "I don't believe you," and "because I was getting tired ... [that] I told a lie."

Fells Acres Day Care Center

The incident began in 1984, when a 5-year-old boy told a family member that Gerald Amirault, administrator and handyman at the Fells Acres day care center, had touched his penis. The boy's mother notified the authorities, and Gerald was arrested. The children told stories which included being abused by a clown and a robot in a secret room at the day care center. They told of watching animals being sacrificed, and one girl claimed Gerald had penetrated her anus with the twelve-inch blade of a knife (which left no injuries).

”All nine children testified in a broadly consistent way...The children testified to numerous instances of sexual abuse...The children testified that the defendant threatened them and told them that their families would be harmed if they told anyone about the abuse”

In the 1986 trial, Gerald was convicted and sentenced to thirty to forty years in state prison. He was released in 2004. In 1995 the chief prosecutor of both of the Amirault cases responded to a critical series of articles in the Wall Street Journal by Dorothy Rabinowitz. He stated that "the children testified to being photographed and molested by acts that included penetration by objects" and "the implication ... that the children's allegations of abuse were tainted by improper interviewing is groundless and not true."

The Bronx Five

In The Bronx, prosecutor Mario Merola, convicted five men, including Nathaniel Grady, a 47 year-old Methodist minister, of sexually abusing children in day care centers throughout the Bronx.

Praca Day Care

Three employees of a Bronx day-care center were arrested in August, 1984 on the charges of abusing at least ten children in their care. Federal and city investigators then questioned dozens of children at the day care. They used “dolls, gentle words and a quiet approach.” More children reported being sexually abused, raising the total to 30. “Three more city-financed day care centers” also were investigated for sexual abuse. On August 11, 1984, it was reported that federal funds had been cut off to the Head Start preschool program at the Praca Day Care Center and now four employees had been arrested. In June, 1985 the day care center was reopened with new sponsorship. In January 1986, Albert Algarin, employed at the Praca Day Care center, was sentenced to 50 years in prison for “raping and sexually abusing five children.” It was reported in May 1986 that Jesus Torres, a former teacher’s aide at the Praca Day Care “was sentenced to 40 years in prison yesterday for sexually assaulting two boys at the center.” ”Franklin Beauchamp who had been “convicted of nine counts of rape, sexual abuse and sodomy involving three children at Praca,”had his case overturned in New York state’s highest state court in May 1989. “ The State Court of Appeals ruled that the indictment used to obtain his 1986 conviction was duplicitous, or not specific enough.” On a web page from Frontline Innocence Lost Other Well-Known Cases PBS, it is stated that the “remaining defendants eventually had their convictions overturned as well."

Wee Care Nursery School

It started in Maplewood, New Jersey in April of 1985. Margaret Kelly Michaels was indicted for 299 offenses in connection with the sexual assault of 33 children. Michaels denied the charges. "The prosecution produced expert witnesses who said that almost all the children displayed symptoms of sexual abuse." Prosecution witnesses testified that the children "had regressed into such behavior as bed-wetting and defecating in their clothing. The witnesses said the children became afraid to be left alone or to stay in the dark." Some of the other teachers testified against her. "The defense argued that Miss Michaels did not have the time or opportunity to go to a location where all the activities could have taken place without someone seeing her." Michaels was sentenced to 47 years in the "sex case." Michaels "told the judge that she was confident her conviction would be overturned on appeal." After five years in prison her appeal was successful and sentence was overturned by a New Jersey appeals court. The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld the lower court's decision and declared "the interviews of the children were highly improper and utilized coercive and unduly suggestive methods." A three judge panel ruled she had been denied a fair trial, because "the prosecution of the case had relied on testimony that should have been excluded because it improperly used an expert's theory, called the child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome, to establish guilt." The original judge was also criticized "for the way in which he allowed the children to give televised testimony from his chambers."

Glendale Montessori

In 1989, James Toward, owner of Glendale Montessori School in Stuart, Florida, pleaded with the Alford plea to child sexual abuse charges and received a 27-year sentence. He pled guilty to molesting or kidnapping six boys. His office manager, Brenda Williams, 30, was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison. She pled no contest to sex and attempted kidnapping charges involving five boys and she was released from prison in 1993 after serving five years. The psychotherapist Jeanne Ralicki, who treated many of the victims stated "There's this whole underbelly of evil here that just oozes...Who wants to think that that exists in the world?" James Toward is still being held in Civil Commitment due to the Jimmy Ryce Act. Children described being threatened with guns and knives, photographed for pornographic purposes, and forced to participate in sadistic rituals. (Miami Herald, June 15, 1989). Toward and Williams were accused of kidnapping and sexually abusing six boys who attended Glendale as preschoolers in 1986 and 1987. Investigators knew about up to 60 victims, mostly from the ages 2 to 5. Hearsay testimonies were to be permitted during the trial, and although he maintained his innocence, Toward plea-bargained using the Alfred plea to avoid a seemingly certain life sentence. (Palm Beach Post, June 15, 1989). The information in the case was considered too graphic to repeat in news accounts and it was so disturbing that the judge who presided in the case stated that he was very nearly physically ill after listening to some of the testimony. Many parents and former co-workers supported Toward's innocence. One parent's statement in the Martin Circuit Court about how the defense interviewed her child: "I think he felt that he was being called a liar through most of the deposition." (Palm Beach Post, February 7, 1989). As a result of this case, the state of Florida passed a bill in 1993, changing the state law to allow victims of child abuse more time to file claims with the state's Victim's Compensation Fund for money to help pay for counseling and other needed treatment. (Palm Beach Post, February 5, 1993). The doctor of several of the child victims in the case, including the first, was named Dr. Alan Tesson. Also, at the time, the mother of the first child to make a complaint was Dr. Tesson's secretary. Dr. Alan Tesson was sued in 1996 for $650,000 for implanting false memories of satanic ritual abuse and child pornography in an adult patient. (Palm Beach Post, February 6, 2000). During this lawsuit it was proven that Dr. Tesson frequently consulted with self-proclaimed experts in satanic ritual abuse (SRA) (Corydon Hammond, Catherine Gould and Judianne Denson Gerber) on the subject of SRA mind control. As of 2008, Tesson has not been held accountable for his involvement in the Glendale Montessori case, and Toward is still being held in Civil Commitment under the Jimmy Ryce Act. Ralicki thinks she will be called to testify at an upcoming Jimmy Ryce hearing. She stated that she does not doubt that Toward still poses a threat to children. She can never forget what he did to the 20 or so children she treated.

Little Rascals Day Care Center

In April of 1989 in Edenton, North Carolina, Robert Kelley was arrested and charged with child sexual abuse. “Robert F. Kelly Jr....face(d) 187 counts, including having sexual intercourse with children and with other adults in front of them. His wife, Betsy, 36, and five other adults face(d) similar charges.” By the end of the investigation 6 other people were charged, including a woman who was in a child custody case with her police officer husband, who had no connection to the facility or the Kelleys. The children testified that they were forced to have sex and their parents testified that "their children exhibited abnormal behavior." "Robert Kelly Jr. was convicted of 99 of 100 counts of rape and related crimes against children." The jury believed the children on the witness stand. One juror stated “the children were convincing.” Kelly and his supporters believed he was innocent. On May 23, 1997, the prosecution dropped all charges related to the Little Rascals case against Bob Kelley and his wife.

Dale Akiki

Main article: Dale Akiki

Akiki, 36, in 1991 had Noonan's syndrome. He was recently married and was arrested in May of 1991. He and his wife were volunteer baby-sitters at Faith Chapel in Spring Valley, California. On each Sunday, they would keep an eye on the children while their parents were attending services in the church next door. The accusations started when a young girl told her mother that "He [Akiki] showed me him's penis." The mother contacted the police. After interviews, nine other children accused Akiki of killing animals and drinking their blood in front of the children. He was found innocent of the 35 counts of child abuse and kidnapping in his 1993 trial.

Wenatchee sex ring

Main article: Wenatchee sex ring

In Wenatchee, Washington in 1994 and 1995 police and state social workers undertook what was then called the nation's most extensive child sex-abuse investigation. Forty-three adults were arrested on 29,726 charges of child sex abuse involving 60 children. Parents, Sunday school teachers and a pastor were charged and many were convicted of abusing their own children or the children of others in the community. Dr. Deborah Harper testified in the trial "One girl showed definite medical signs of sexual abuse and it could not be ruled out for two others." However, prosecutors were unable to provide any physical evidence to support the charges. The main witness was the 13-year-old foster daughter of a police officer, Robert Perez, who had investigated the cases. A consultant, retired Bellevue Police Chief D.P. Van Blaricom, hired by a city insurer who looked into how the Wenatchee police ran the child abuse investigations stated that the cases were handled properly. A Justice Department investigation also found that was no evidence of civil rights violations. However, a jury found the city of Wenatchee and Douglas County, Washington negligent in the 1994-1995 investigations. They awarded $3 million to the couple who had been wrongly accused in the inquiry.


Satanic Ritual Abuse Panic

Satan's Silence - Ritual Abuse and the Making of a Modern American Witch Hunt

Day Care Sexual Abuse Hysteria

And the stuff in this video, is still being done to this day. It seems we NEVER learn from history. Read the above book and it will open your eyes! Anything for a conviction, at ANY expense! See the second video to see what I am talking about here.




OH - Ohio mother files suit against sex offender law

View the article here

What about all the porn web sites and businesses? Will they be slapped with the sex offender label as well?

06/27/2008

CINCINNATI (AP) -- A mother of two girls is trying to get Ohio's new sex offender law struck down as unconstitutional.

The mother, a sex shop manager referred to as "G.B." in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Cincinnati Thursday, fears she'll be prosecuted for pandering obscenity because of her job. According to a new state law, she would then be classified as a sex offender.

She says the sex offender label would mean her daughters could no longer go to Catholic school because the school conducts background checks.

The woman argues that the sex offender law violates her First Amendment and privacy rights. She says Hamilton County has a history of aggressively enforcing a loose interpretation of what constitutes obscenity.


NV - Suit seeks delay in enforcing Nevada sex offender law

View the article here

06/27/2008

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada has asked a federal judge to postpone Tuesday's enforcement of a new law that would reclassify sex offenders in the state.

The request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court, followed a lawsuit filed the day before against the Nevada attorney general, department of public safety and various law enforcement agencies contending the new law is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge James Mahan set a hearing for Monday in Las Vegas.

The ACLU filed the suit on behalf of a dozen sex offenders in Washoe and Clark counties saying it was vague, ambiguous, and would "apply severe criminal sanctions retroactively."

Sex offenders in Nevada are categorized in a tier system based on a psychological assessment to determine whether they are likely to re-offend. But under the new law, sex offenders would be classified based on the crime for which they were convicted.

The reassessment would mean that some sex offenders now considered low-risk Tier 1 offenders would become Tier 3 offenders, the highest risk for repeating the offense, and would be required to follow a new list of rules, the suit said.

The change in the law for many of the unidentified plaintiffs could mean the loss of a home, job and could lead to vigilante attacks, the suit said.

The new law also redefines who would be considered a sex offender and would require some to register and be subject to community notification and other restrictions, the suit said.

"These restrictions are being imposed retroactively, regardless of the limitations imposed -- or not imposed -- on offenders at sentencing," the suit said.


TN - New sex offender laws go into effect on July 1

View the article here

06/27/2008

The Tennessee Sex Offender Registry will begin collecting new information on July 1, 2008 to be in compliance with the state’s legislation that was passed during this year’s legislative session. Overview of Sex Offender Registry law changes

  • Sex offenders will provide electronic email addresses along with instant message, chat or any other internet communication name or identity to their registering agency (this information will NOT be available to the public)
  • Sex offenders who fail to provide an address (such as the homeless) will be required to report monthly rather than quarterly or annually
  • All aliases, including previous married names, are required to be reported
  • Every sex offender on the Registry will provide a DNA sample (current law only requires sex offenders who committed offenses after July 1, 1998)
  • There will be tighter restrictions on sex offenders spending time at schools
  • Offenders, whose crime was against a minor, will not be allowed to work where the offender is in direct, unsupervised contact with a minor or operate a vehicle for the purpose of attracting minors.

Additional changes to the Sex Offender Registry will take effect Jan. 1, 2009. At that time a physical description of the offender, text of the law describing the criminal offense, and a criminal history of the offender will be added. TBI will also set up a system where the public can register their email addresses and be notified if a sex offender moves into their area.


GA - Registry Lists Sex Offenders At Wrong Address

View the article here

Video is available at the site.

06/27/2008

Three Sex Offenders List Ministry As Home Address

ATLANTA -- Multiple convicted sex offenders are listed on Georgia’s online registry as living at the same non-residential address in downtown Atlanta. But none of the sex offenders actually live there, according to a CBS 46 News investigation.

There are discrepancies in the addresses. The three convicted sex offenders appear to be calling 420 Courtland Street their home. But that address is not a residence. Crossroads Ministries, which is listed at that address, helps the homeless but doesn't provide shelter.

The Fulton County Sheriff's Office is in charge of verifying addresses and received tips about the three men back in March. Investigators said convicted rapist Anthony Treep told deputies that he was moving to Wayne County last month.

Investigators said convicted child molester Eddie Parks actually stays at the shelter around the corner.

Deputies are seeking a warrant for Will Purnell, but they haven't been able to find him.

The registry provides none of this updated information, even though it was designed to be accurate.

“If you talk to a parent, and you and they find out someone they thought was living in one location is living in another location, I think it's very much a concern,” said state Sen. John Wiles (Email).

Wiles is a parent and lawmaker who has worked to pass tough sex offender legislation. It is legal for homeless sex offenders to list shelters as their home address, but Crossroads Ministries is not even a shelter.

According to the registry, offenders currently list the homeless shelter at Peachtree and Pine streets as their home address. Director Anita Beaty said the sheriff's office has never come by to conduct address verifications.

And if they did, we would say, ‘Show us a warrant, because we don't show our list to anybody without a court order,’” Beaty said.

A homeless sex offender is not allowed to live on the street. They must list a home address such as a homeless shelter or they risk being picked up by police and taken to jail. Some lawmakers have told CBS 46 that they would like to see homeless offenders prevented from listing shelters as their addresses.
- So now, being homeless, due to these draconian laws, is against the law..


GA - New Brief, FAQs, news coverage

View the article here

06/27/2008

Friends,

We are writing to share a few pieces of information with you.

On June 9, the State filed a motion to decertify the class of people on the registry in the Whitaker case, arguing that SB 1 solved many of the problems that affected the class of people on the registry. SCHR filed a brief opposing the State’s motion and explaining to the Court that people are still being evicted from homes and required to leave jobs due to the law. We are asking the Court to resolve this case as soon as possible. Click here to read the brief.

In response to your requests, we have updated the Frequently Asked Questions section on our website. Click here to read the Frequently Asked Questions.

We also include an article below published this afternoon on FoxNews.com.

All the best,

Sara, Sarah, Mica, Gerry, and James



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,372941,00.html

Sex Offenders Sue in Georgia for Right to Volunteer in Churches

Friday, June 27, 2008
By Blane Bachelor

ATLANTA — Sex offenders in Georgia are suing for the right to volunteer in houses of worship as a new measure already approved by lawmakers has some critics up in arms.

The Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights filed a lawsuit Tuesday on behalf of the 15,400 sex offenders on Georgia’s state registry. Georgia already has one of the nation's toughest sex offender statutes, and the center is hoping to stop the added measure, set to go into effect July 1.

The new provision would make it illegal for sex offenders to sing in adult choirs, prepare for events or cook meals in church kitchens. Violating the law could spell a prison term of 10 to 30 years, which sponsors said is a vital addition to help keep children safe.

"It’s designed to protect children, to keep people who have a history of pedophilia or sex crimes against children away from children so they’re less likely to repeat," said David Ralston, a Republican state representative and one of the measure’s sponsors.

"This latest filing is simply another tactic by those people who disagree with the whole purpose of the law and try to chip away at it until it’s abolished."

But some religious leaders say the law would undermine the positive effects of religion.

"Thieves, robbers, murderers — we give them all a second chance," said Mark Hanson, senior pastor at New Beginnings Tabernacle, a small evangelical ministry in Buchanan, Ga.

"It seems like under the sex offender law you’re banned permanently from society," he said. "Without forgiveness and mercy, how do we expect anyone to start over?"

For the past two years Hanson has worked closely with 47-year-old Lori Collins of Henry County, Ga., a named plaintiff in the motion. Collins was listed on the state registry after having sex with a 15-year-old boy when she was 39.

After serving a three-year jail term, during which she completed the Department of Corrections Faith and Character Program, Collins became a licensed minister. She volunteers for two small evangelical ministries and participates regularly in prison ministry outreach.

But Collins said she would never volunteer for any activity involving children.

"I understand where [the law is] coming from," she said. "I want my [own] children and grandchildren protected. But I’ve turned my life around. The root of my life is good."

Yet lawmakers stressed that former sex offenders won’t necessarily be barred from volunteer work for life.

"Let’s not forget that people on the sex offender registry have ways of getting off it," said Eric Johnson, president pro tem of the state Senate and author of the legislation. Johnson told FOXNews.com that with the passage of time and through appeals, individuals can lobby to have their names removed.

Proponents of the measure also stressed that the impositions on sex offenders were a necessary outcome of their crimes.

"When you do wrong, there are consequences," Ralston said. "And one of the consequences that the people of Georgia appreciate is that we will restrict where people can live and work and volunteer so that they don’t have proximity to minor children."

Omar Howard, another of the five named plaintiffs in the suit, was dismayed by the new provision. Howard, 33, was added to the registry after being convicted of the false imprisonment of a minor during a 1993 burglary — but he’s never been convicted of a sex crime.

Howard became involved in a Christian ministry during his 14 years and 10 months in prison. Since his release last year, he’s been an active participant in several churches and outreach programs. He is involved in his church choir, speaks at church activities and served as a mentor for troubled youth.

Howard said the new law would cripple his ability to give back to his community through his church and to help others avoid some of the same mistakes he made.

"I always had a strong desire to make sure I changed myself and put myself in a better predicament," Howard said. "I don’t think I can call myself a man of God unless I extend the same hand that’s been handed to me. It’s a real blow to your faith."

But proponents said nothing in the law prevents sex offenders from attending a place of worship and that critics are misinterpreting the intent of the provision.

Ralston told FOXNews.com that the law was revised to include the "volunteer language" so people who cannot work in schools, churches or day-care centers won’t be able to avoid the prohibition by claiming they were volunteering at those places.

The restriction against volunteering at a church or other places children congregate was added at the recommendation of local sheriffs, Ralston said.

But Georgia’s sex-offender statute is still a target for some advocates, who say the law may do more harm than good.

"The church is in the redemption business," said Floyd Rose, pastor emeritus at The Church at Pine Hill in Valdosta, Ga., whose sworn affidavit was part of Tuesday’s motion. "If [offenders] come to a place where they want you to redeem them, and you take that away, where do you leave them?"

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


Is Congress Out Of Control?

YES!

Sounds all good, and is true, yet the government and sheeple continue to let them eradicate all of our rights! PATHETIC!



CO - Cops: Sex offender went unregistered for years

View the article here

So apparently the police are NOT doing their jobs. Years this person was not checked on, and whose fault is that? But do you think the police will admit it was their fault? I doubt it!

06/26/2008

DOTSERO — Prosecutors charged a man with failing to register as a sex offender earlier this week, even though the Eagle County Sheriff’s Office knew the man was a sex offender almost four years ago, authorities said.

Anthony James Carmona, 58, of Dotsero, is accused of not registering in Eagle County after he was convicted of felony lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 years old in California in 1985, according to a report written by Lt. Mike McWilliam of the Sheriff’s Office.

Carmona had lived in lived in Colorado 12 years without registering and had not told his wife he was a sex offender, Carmona told McWilliam when he was arrested June 18 at his home at the Dotsero mobile home park, the report says.

During the arrest, Carmona’s wife got upset, the report says.

“She said he never told her that he was a sex offender and that he should move out when he gets out of jail,” the report says.

Carmona said he “thought he took care of everything he was supposed to do, such as jail, probation,” the report says. However, California records show Carmona was supposed to register permanently, the report says.

Tamra Blackard, a former sheriff’s deputy, found that Carmona failed to register in 2004, when background checks were being done on prospective jurors in the Kobe Bryant case, the report says.

Blackard has since left the Sheriff’s Office for another job, McWilliam said, and could not be reached for comment. Her decision to leave the Sheriff’s Office was unrelated to Carmona’s case, McWilliam said.

“We should have done something with it then,” McWilliam said. “We dropped the ball. I did, too.”

California police failed to issue a warrant for Carmona’s arrest after they learned in 1997 that Carmona had left town without reporting to authorities, the report says.

McWilliam said he learned Carmona was a sex offender when authorities investigated an abandoned car, owned by Carmona, in Dotsero recently.

Prosecutors charged Carmona Tuesday with failing to register as a sex offender, a felony, authorities said. Sex offenders are ordered to report their addresses so authorities can keep track of their whereabouts.

June 18, Carmona paid a $2,000 bond and was released from Eagle County jail after he registered, which he now will be required to do several times each year, authorities said.

Carmona hung up the telephone when asked whether he wanted to respond to the allegations.

Staff Writer Steve Lynn can be reached at 970-748-2931 or slynn@vaildaily.com.


MA - Lawmaker's Remark on Child Rape Victims 'Ripped' Apart

View the article here

Leave it up to FOX News to try to smear someone. If I was faced with a murder charge or sexual crime, this is the man I'd want to defend me, someone who will stand up for my rights instead of trying to get me to plead to some plea bargain. This is not news, this is one sided BS to attempt to harm someone who was speaking the truth. If you really think he means to harm children, you are stupid!! See the video mid way through this article.

06/26/2008

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record ," June 25, 2008. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: A Massachusetts state representative goes on a shocking tirade on the statehouse floor against Jessica's Law. Now, Jessica's Law was first passed in Florida and has since been passed in other states, imposing a minimum sentence of 25 years for first offenders committing certain crimes against children.

A version of the law was being debated in the Massachusetts legislature last month, and clearly, Representative James Fagan didn't want it adopted. This is what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES FAGAN (D), MASS. STATE REP.: When we face it in this situation, why is it so wrong? Let me tell you why it's so wrong. It's so wrong because in these situations, until and unless the lady in Shrewsbury and people of her ilk have the opportunity to do away with the right of confrontation, which I'm sure they'd like to, that 6-year-old's going to sit in front of me, or somebody far worse than me, and I'm going to rip them apart.

I'm going to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined, that when they're 8 years old, they throw up, when they're 12 years old, they won't sleep, when they're 19 years old, they'll have nightmares. And they'll never have a relationship with anybody.
- I don't agree with the wording here, but he is trying to make a point. When someone is faced with these serious allegations, it is his and any lawyers job to defend the client, at all costs.

And that's not because I'm a nice guy. That's because when you're in court and you're defending somebody's liberty, and you're facing a mandatory sentence of those draconian proportions, you have to do every single thing you can do on behalf of your client. That is your oath and obligation as a trial lawyer, to confront the witnesses against your client, which in this instance will always be a child, who will undoubtedly be permanently dreadfully scarred.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAN SUSTEREN: Jessica's law is named after Jessica Lunsford. In 2005, the 9-year-old Florida girl was sexually assaulted and murdered by a previously convicted sex offender.

Jessica's father, Mark Lunsford, joins us live from Boston. Nice to see you, Mark.

MARK LUNSFORD, DAUGHTER MURDERED BY SEX OFFENDER: Yes. Good evening. It's nice to see you again.



VAN SUSTEREN: Mark, how are you doing? We have not spoken in so long.

LUNSFORD: My parents often remind me of you and the picture you took with them. So we are always thinking about you. And we definitely appreciate all of the help that you and FOX National has done for Jessie's law over the last couple years.

VAN SUSTEREN: Go ahead. I am sorry.

LUNSFORD: I'm sorry, Greta, but it has just been overwhelming how good Fox has been an advocate for Jessica's Law, as so many other media has, too. But, FOX, I really need your help now. We have a problem here in Massachusetts.
- Yeah, we have a lawyer, who finally has the balls to say it like it is, and stand up for his client, if he would have one. I don't think anybody agrees with the wording he chose, but he was trying to make a point! Now a days, everyone tries to get a plea bargain. Don't believe me, see this video.



VAN SUSTEREN: I certainly appreciate the kind words you said about FOX, and I did not necessarily need to elicit them. And, frankly, the work that you have done on behalf of your daughter is just extraordinary.

You have been pounding the pavement, doing everything you can so that other children do not have to face some of the things that they have to face in the system.

So, anyway, let's talk about this Massachusetts. Have you ever met this guy?

LUNSFORD: No, I have never met him. Today was the first time I have actually heard him say the things that he said. It had been given to me by reporters, and I had made statements about it, but to actually hear him say these things, I mean, he is adding insult to injury.

But he is telling the truth about defense attorneys. But my concern is that even he does not like the mandatory 25 years.

My problem is, why are we politicking our kids and debating their safety? We are talking about our children, the helpless ones, children under 12 years old. An 18-month-old baby who is molested, they can't testify either. But does that mean that they deserve to be stomped to death by their perpetrator?
- Why are we not upholding the constitution, and everyones rights? Every person charged with a crime, has the RIGHT to confront any witnesses and evidence against them, yet you all are willing to remove that right just for a conviction. If this continues, like the above video shows, we might as all report to prison.

These types of people are constantly repeating their crimes, and they get more and more heinous as they go. Was John Evander Couey not a good enough example for you?
- Bulls--t. Where is your proof Mark? Why did John, who begged and begged and begged for treatment, not get it? Why don't you ask that question? If he would've got the treatment he BEGGED for, your daughter would still be here. So who failed who here? Sounds to me like the system failed everybody. What about your own son? He committed a sex crime, but he got off simply because he is your son. So from your statements above, you are saying your son is a high risk to reoffend, so why aren't you pushing to get him back in prison where he belongs? Come on, you are an idiot!!! Also, what about the CHILD PORN that was on your machine, which magically vanished? Maybe Joshua should be in prison for 25 years, since from what you say, they are likely to reoffend, instead of the 10 days he got.

VAN SUSTEREN: You mentioned him, and what a hateful guy, and I am not going to take you through the horrible details of that crime. I know that you do not forget them. We do not forget them.

But what is the status of his case? Is it pending appeal? He has not been convicted and sentenced to death, but is it on appeal?

LUNSFORD: Yes. I mean, the way the system works, he will be on appeal for a long time. But Florida is making more improvements as we go. There has been talk about maybe taking $10 million away from Jessie's Law for tracking devices, but I am not sure how far that will go. But even new legislation was going to be passed here recently for more punishable crimes for sex offenders.

But in Massachusetts here, the attorney general and the legislature had gotten together and drafted a piece of legislation that they felt like they could get passed, because here in Massachusetts, they don't want to pass mandatory sentencing, they don't want to pass 25 years, they just do things differently here, as each state does things different with their own language and their own way of doing things.
- So why isn't your son in prison for a mandatory 25 years? He is a sex offender, and did commit a sex crime? You are a HYPOCRITE!!!!

But my concern is for the children here in Massachusetts.

VAN SUSTEREN: Mark, thank you very much. Nice to see you, and your daughter would be immensely proud of you. Thank you, Mark.

LUNSFORD: Thank you.

VAN SUSTEREN: Is Representative Fagan making a valid point, or is he just way over the line? Joining us live in New York is former Westchester County D.A. Jeanine Pirro; in San Francisco, criminal defense attorney Michael Cardoza; and right here with me in D.C. is defense attorney Ted. Ted, we'll start with you--Ted Williams.

TED WILLIAMS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Let me just say that Fagan is a wacko. He gives lawyers a bad name.
- No he doesn't, he is making a point, and this is what ALL lawyers should be doing, defending their client... Remember that? That is your job isn't it? Well, appearently from the video above, your job is not to defend anybody, but get a plea deal so you can go fishing or something and get rich from the system. You are the one who gives lawyers a bad name, IMO.

Defense lawyers have a right to zealously represent their clients. This is the day, Greta, that the Supreme Court ruled that a rapist cannot be put to death for the rape of a child. I do not think that is maybe a bad ruling, but I just wish that somebody would look out for the best interests of children.
- And I wish people who took oaths to uphold the constitution and defend clients would do what they took an oath to do... Instead they are greedy sick people, like yourself, who abuses the system to get rich. Pathetic, IMO.

And let me just make it very clear if you touch a child, as far as I am concerned, you should be castrated, as far as I am concerned.
- Spoken from a true idiot who knows nothing of what he speaks about, but from his own personal feelings. Castration doesn't always work, and sex crimes are not always about sex. If you'd get past your EGO and GOD COMPLEX you would see the facts.

VAN SUSTEREN: Jeanine, I understand the point that he was trying to make, but he made such a lousy, cold, horrible, rotten way that if that is what he wants, he has done himself a huge disservice, if that is the law he wants to oppose.
- I agree, the way he worded it, wasn't good, but yes, he was trying to make a point, and anybody with half a brain left could see that. Most people though, all they heard was the harsh words, and could not see past that, and they still are not seeing past it to see the true meaning he was trying to make.

JEANINE PIRRO, FORMER D.A.: You look at this guy and you say who voted this guy into office? What constituency does he think he is serving?
- His clients maybe???? Who the hell voted you into office???

And for your viewers, Greta, they ought to know that this guy is the chair of the House Ethics Committee in the legislature. He is on the board of directors on a Boys and Girls club, and he is a soccer or a basketball coach.
- And I think he's doing a good job... The discussion he was making, WAS ABOUT ETHICS, which you seem to have forgotten...

But here is the bottom line. If this guy thinks he is going to rip and tear apart six-year-olds and torment them and give them nightmares, then he has not been in a real courtroom, because that does not happen. It is called "badgering a witness." It is called you have to keep your remarks relevant.
- Do you truly believe he meant that literally? If you do, then you are sick yourself... Badgering a witness is part of being a lawyer. To cut through the BS and get to the facts.

And he has never really tried a case with children. And I have done this for decades. These kids are smart. They are going to stick it to him. The judge is not going to let him get away with it, and the jury is going to convict his client.
- You have not tried anything, I bet, but made everyone take a plea bargain. Do you have any proof of what you speak of? How many sex offenders did you win cases for? How many did you tell to take a plea bargain? Huh? Answer me those questions..

VAN SUSTEREN: You know Michael, the guy--forget what he is even arguing, he is an idiot. Number one, if he did this in the courtroom, the jury would hate him, absolutely hate him. There is no juror that would have any sort of affinity for him or his client.

And, number two, if he is trying to persuade people that this is a bad law, he has used the most hateful language. We finally have someone that makes Reverend Wright look a little nice.
- Well, he did it to get people to think, and you know what, it got everyones attention didn't it? Yet you cannot see past the words he used to get to the true meaning, typical though!!!

WILLIAMS: That takes a lot.

MICHAEL CARDOZA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: He really does. As you said, Greta, I understand the point he is trying to make. They want a mandatory law for 25 years. What I think he was trying to say is that is too much time. That is an awful lot of time. That is going to force a lot of those cases to trial that may plead if you had a little lesser penalty. Then you get into the penalty discussion.
- I don't think you do understand the point he is trying to make. From your own words above, that is obvious. Why don't you quit putting words in his mouth, and let him speak for himself? There is no such thing as proving a case anymore, you are guilty automatically and they do everything possible to get a plea bargain. That is the word you hear out of all lawyers and DA's mouths all the time, not about proving someones innocence. At least from what I've heard and seen. You are automatically guilty and cannot prove your innocence. So you are screwed from the moment the accuser opens their mouths.

I absolutely agree with you and Jeanine. This guy could never have been in a court room. He certainly does not represent me as a defense attorney, because what we do is vigorously represent ethically. And if you did what he said, a jury would convict him --
- You people do not know what ethically means. You are about plea bargins, so you can get the conviction, and move on to the next VICTIM!!!

VAN SUSTEREN: But here is the problem--he is talking about having mandatory minimums. You do not have to have this law, and a judge could still give somebody 25 years on the bottom.

CARDOZA: No question.

VAN SUSTEREN: We are talking about whether the judges have discretion or not, not whether someone deserves this time and should get it. And instead you have him, who is the most ineffective advocate for his position. Anyway--

WILLIAMS: You have to wonder where this guy got his bar license from.
- No, I wonder where you got yours!

VAN SUSTEREN: Anyway, I took the last word on that one, I guess.

WILLIAMS: What a wacko.
- Right back at you!

VAN SUSTEREN: And Ted had the gratuitous remark from the sidelines. Anyway, panel, thank you.