Saturday, August 16, 2008

NC - North Carolina gets new powers to punish sex offenders

View the article here

Again with the word "punish!" Proving once again, these laws are about punishment, period.


Raleigh — North Carolina authorities will soon have new powers to punish sex offenders, and bartenders will be looking at underage customers' ID cards in a new way.

Gov. Mike Easley (Contact) on Saturday announced that he signed five bills into law, including those designed to help state officials protect children from sex offenders and to change the format of driver's licenses for people under age 21.

One law makes it a felony for a registered sex offender to use a social networking Web site accessible to minors, starting Dec. 1. It also increases the penalties for some sex crimes involving children.

The other law requires registered sex offenders to give law enforcement their e-mail addresses and online user IDs, starting May 1. That information can be provided to social networking Web sites so they can screen users.
- But they fail to mention, that a true predator will just use another computer at a library, coffee shop, Internet cafe, or just create a new email address in a matter of seconds.  This is just nothing but "feel good" legislation that will do nothing to protect kids from a true predator intent on committing another crime.  It's nothing but punishment, pure and simple, and therefore, the law is unconstitutional.

Officials with those sites, including MySpace, asked for the laws so they could kick off offenders.

Beginning Oct. 1, state IDs for people under the legal drinking age will be printed vertically instead of the traditional horizontal layout.

Young adults who hold horizontal cards won't need to get a new one until their current one expires.

Lawmakers passed the bill this summer as a way to help bartenders and retailers easily identify which customers were old enough to buy alcohol.

A state survey found that some young adults were able to buy alcohol even after presenting identification which showed they were not 21 years old.

OH - Prosecutors, defense lawyers plan to appeal sex offender law ruling

View the article here


ELYRIA — County prosecutors are appealing a judge’s ruling that parts of a new state sex offender law are unconstitutional.

Defense attorneys plan to do the same on the parts of the controversial law that visiting Judge William Coyne ruled passed constitutional muster.

More than 350 of Lorain County’s registered sex offenders have challenged the new law — known as Adam’s Law for Adam Walsh, a 6-year-old Florida boy kidnapped and murdered in 1981— saying the demands it places on them are unfair.
- Meanwhile, tax payer dollars are going down the drain fighting these unconstitutional laws.

The law increases the number of years that sex offenders have to report to the sheriff of the county they live in. In some cases, offenders now have to report every 90 days for the rest of their lives. It also bars them from living near schools and day care centers.
- And adding retroactive punishment (ex post facto) to a sex offenders sentence, which is a contract, violates the US and state constitutions.

When it went into effect earlier this year, the law was applied retroactively, meaning every registered sex offender in the state was reclassified, even those convicted and sentenced before the law went into effect. Courts around the state are now grappling with the constitutional questions.

In Lorain County, Coyne found that reclassifying offenders retroactively was constitutional. But he also found that forcing people to move out of homes they owned because a day care center opened up the street wasn’t constitutional.
- If this idiot knew the constitution, and was upholding it, like he took an oath to do, then he would've found the laws unconstitutional, period!  It's all written in the constitution, to prevent abuse of power, just like they are doing, and President Bush does on a daily basis.

Coyne also found that it was unfair to indigent sex offenders not to be given court-appointed attorneys to help them challenge their reclassifications.

Assistant Lorain County Prosecutor George Koury said the law makes challenging the reclassifications a civil matter, not criminal, and the state isn’t responsible for footing the bill for civil cases.

Koury also said prosecutors want to make certain that Coyne’s decision complies with an Ohio Supreme Court decision from earlier this year that said the residency restrictions can be applied retroactively in certain cases and going forward.

Laura Perkovic, the defense attorney representing the four sex offenders whose cases Coyne ruled in, said that forcing people to move out of their homes because of someone else’s actions — such as a school or day care being built nearby — has constitutional problems.
- Yeah, the people who want to open the school or day care, should check the registry, and if a sex offender lives near by, then they should NOT be able to build there, forcing the offender out of their home, and putting children in potential danger.  The laws have to work both ways!

She also said that retroactively reclassifying sex offenders adds penalties for crimes that often occurred years ago.
- And all without due process of law, thanks to Bush, and violating the constitution at the same time.  If this document means nothing, then why have it?  And if we do not have it, then we are a fascist country!

It’s an additional burden and an additional punishment,” she said.

Koury said that with the law being challenged all over the state, it’s only a matter of time before one of those challenges reaches the Ohio Supreme Court, which will ultimately decide what’s constitutional and what’s not.

“Until they make a decision, we’re going to continue to go through this process,” he said.
- Meanwhile, the tax payers dollars are going down the drain, lawyers are getting rich, sex offenders are becoming homeless and broke, being forced into exile.  That sounds like a fascist country to me!

Coyne has stayed enforcement of Adam’s Law in Lorain County while the cases wind their way through the legal system.

Contact Brad Dicken at 329-7147 or

NE - Online campaign against sex offenders show success

View the article here (Video Available)
Related Article

It's all about boosting his reputation so later he can get voted into some other office. He is assuming all sex offenders who use these sites, are sexual predators, which is an outright lie, and deceptive.

Snagged Comments from eAdvocate: (Link)
See the "Related Article" above. A few points need to be made: 1) Notice the RSOs did nothing wrong criminally, only one has to date; 2) Notice the comment of 146 this year and 247 last year. Well, obviously MySpace is not PREVENTING RSOs from signing up, but every so often (Yearly according to this report) they run a program to list them and give it to the state AG. Does that really protect minors or is their real aim something else? Think about it!


By Adam Lefkoe

Nebraska Attorney General John Bruning (Contact) said keeping sex predators off on–line social networking sites is crucial. He was one of dozens Attorney's General who launched a campaign last year to make sure sex offenders are not on websites like Myspace. The push is being called a success.
- You see, in his own words, he assumes all sex offenders are predators.  This, IMO, only makes since if the sex offender used these sites to commit their crime.  Why don't they prevent drunks from going to stores where alcohol is served (as an example)?  Also, calling this a success, is like Bush calling the war in Iraq a success, which we know was nothing but grandstanding to boost his reputation.  Do you know how easy it would be for some sex offender, who was intent on committing another crime, from doing so?  This is just grandstanding at it's best, IMO.

The Nebraska State Patrol said the results speak for themselves.
- What results?  Where is the study to show us these results?  You expect us to just take you at your word?

Nearly 150 Myspace profiles linked to registered Nebraska sex offenders were taken down in just six months.
- And how did they link them?  Email addresses?  Do you know you can create a new email address in a matter of seconds?  So how will this prevent someone who is intent on committing another crime, from doing so?  It won't, period!

Myspace began taking down profiles last year.
- Yeah, simply because they were labeled a sex offender.  But just because they have to carry this scarlet letter, doesn't mean they are out seeking a child victim.  That is just absurd.

In total, almost 400 profiles posted by Nebraska sex offenders have been deleted.

Attorney General Jon Bruning was one of the first to support the move.
- I'm sure he was, he has got to make himself look good to the sheeple who believe all this BS!

“This is part of our ongoing efforts to help protect children on the internet. Keeping sex offenders off social sites is a critical step to keeping our kids safe online,” said Bruning.
- I don't think so, it's just to boost your reputation, and appear like you are actually doing something.  Plus, it's not about protecting kids, because it won't, it's about punishment!

But it is something the State Patrol said is not always easy to do.
- Why don't you elaborate on this some more?  You afraid what I am saying might come out?

Frequently those who are trying to entice the child are not using their real name. They are not using accurate information in their profile, so it takes some effort, usually, to track it down to the responsible person,” said Lt. Dennis Leonard.
- Exactly my point. It's for people who obey the laws, not those who are real predators, they will not obey these laws anyway, and will get around it.  It's one of them so called "loop holes!"

The State Patrol said the case of one man is a prime example. He is not a convicted sex offender, but was arrested earlier this week for child enticement.

Police said he had 4 Myspace profiles and used one of them to meet a 15–year–old girl in Texas and bring her back to Nebraska.

The State Patrol has its own division that looks for registered sex offenders on websites like Myspace. Myspace works with authorities to close those profiles down.

Authorities said the best advice for parents is simply watch what your children are doing.

TX - Sex Offenders: Tracking Em' Down

View the article here

This is for those on probation and/or parole only, but it is still a violation of privacy rights, IMO.


The Nueces County Probation Department has a new way to keep track of sex offenders. They now can monitor every mouse click and every stroke of the keyboard.

A zip drive and a CD-ROM are changing the way sex offenders are monitored. It's called the Field Search Program, and was designed by a government worker for use in a forensic search of a hard drive.

Sex Offenders when they're on probation might be permitted by the court to have computer and Internet access, but they're not allowed to visit sites like MySpace and other social networking sites. The fear is they'll be tempted to entice children or other potential victims.
- You are assuming that all sex offenders who use the Internet are out trolling for kids also, which is not the case in a majority of the time.

Sydney Morris is part of the probation department's Sex Offender Unit. She tells Kiii News there was one search where the offender had an inappropriate photo of a minor. It was actually Vanity Fair's photo of pop sensation Miley Cyrus.

"Conditions include not having possession of pornography," said Morris. "Pornography for us, is whatever gets the sex offender in trouble, and that photo happened to be of a 15 year old."

In addition to the computer field searches, the sex offender unit also contracts with a company just north of Austin. The company uses retired law enforcement officers, who remotely download software to a sex offender's computer, and monitor the offenders' real-time activity.
- Again, why don't you monitor all felons on probation and/or parole like this?  That would include murderers, gang members, DUI offenders, drug dealers/users, etc.  You'd put GPS tracking on them 24/7.  Why discriminate on sex offenders only?  Why not do it across the board?  Because you know there would be TONS of law suits, fighting this invasion of privacy, wasting tons of tax payer dollars, but you pick on those you can get by with.  Who is next?

If those sex offenders seem to be violating the terms of their probation an alert goes out, and in the end they might end up in jail for violating the terms of their probation.

"The offenders will know that we're able to go in and search the computer." said Morris.
- I'm sure any intelligent computer person could probably find a way around it, if they wanted to!

"Maybe it'll help them monitor their behavior because it's important for a sex offender in treatment to know how to self regulate."
- Well, maybe if you repealed these unconstitutional laws, then they would have less stress in their lives, and could work on getting back into society.  But no, it's not about helping people, it's about punishment!

PA - In Pa., Former Lawmaker Takes In Sex Offenders

Listen to the NPR audio here
View the article here (Video Available)

Praise God for people like this man, who are willing to give someone a chance, unlike the hypocrites in the general public who claim to be Christians and/or religious.

All Things Considered, August 15, 2008 - Tom Armstrong, a former Pennsylvania state lawmaker, has taken three sex offenders into his home in Marietta. His actions have sparked anger in his community. Armstrong says his own thinking on the issue evolved after his brother's incarceration and the word of God.

Download (16.4 MB)

NV - New Sex Offender Laws Challenged in Nevada

View the article here


LAS VEGAS (AP) - Eager to protect children from sexual predators, Nevada and other states across the nation are adopting laws that publicize the names of offenders on the Internet.

But sex offenders say they have rights, too, and they argue authorities are wrong to lump those guilty of minor offenses in with the worst offenders.

"People think that imposing these Draconian retroactive laws are a way to keep their children safe," said Margaret McLetchie, an American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada (Contact) lawyer.

McLetchie and Robert Langford, who represent 27 unnamed plaintiffs in a federal civil rights lawsuit, want to block two laws sex offender from taking effect in Nevada.

The laws, which they say are unconstitutional, were tailored to meet standards under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which President Bush signed in 2006.

Nevada was among the first to pass the laws that would allow the state to post the names, photos, home and work addresses and vehicle descriptions of offenders who've served probation or prison sentences on convictions as far back as 1956.

McLetchie, who said the measures put top-level offenders together with low-level offenders convicted of misdemeanor offenses such as public nudity, could subject them to violence from neighbors who see their names and photos posted on the Internet.

"These laws don't provide public safety, they only demonize a particular group," McLetchie said.

But Binu Palal, the deputy state attorney general arguing the case for Nevada, said the law is constitutional and the legal issue is simple.

"The key is whether the Legislature has the right to inform the public of sex offenders living in the community," he said. "To protect the public."
- No, the issue is passing retroactive laws violating ex post facto issues in the constitution, as well as due process issues, and basically resentencing people over for the same crime, which occurred before the law was in place.  Plus, if you'd read the studies, the residency restrictions do not protect anybody, but banish and for people into state mandated exile.  And that is unconstitutional and cruel and unusual punishment.

Palal pointed to U.S. Supreme Court rulings from 2002 that he said limit sex offenders' ability to block the release information about their crimes.

"The system is based on the fact of conviction," Palal said. "The intent of the Legislature was not to provide punishment, but to provide a civil remedial action.
- Oh give me a break!  Punishing someone again, for the same crime, and enhancing their sentence, which was not on the plea agreement (i.e. Contract), then it's nothing but punishment.

"Informing the public of a true fact is not considered punishment," he said.
- So why not inform the public about all other true facts?  Like the murderers, drug dealers/users, DUI offenders, thieves, gang members and all other TRUE FACTS.  Like what is your record, where do you live, what is your home address, etc?

U.S. District Court Judge James Mahan is scheduled to hear arguments Sept. 10 in Las Vegas in the lawsuit, which names state Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto and top state law enforcers as defendants. He is being asked to make permanent a temporary ban he imposed June 30 to stop the law from taking effect July 1.

Mahan has expressed concerns that if Nevada posted its list of 4,941 people convicted of sex crimes since 1956, there would be no way to restore their privacy if the law was later found to be flawed.

Once posted, the judge said, "the cat's out of the bag."

A ruling is expected to be watched closely in other states that have or are considering adopting provisions of the Adam Walsh Act, named for a 6-year-old Florida boy abducted and killed in 1981. He was the son of John Walsh, star of television's "America's Most Wanted."

Implementation has been challenged in some states, including Florida and Ohio. Texas lawmakers criticized the measure as an unfunded mandate. Vermont legislators also worried about how much it would cost.

"We've objected since it was first introduced in the Legislature," said Amy Borror, spokeswoman for the Ohio public defender's office in Columbus. "We believe it's unconstitutional when it's applied retroactively. Even going forward, it's bad policy."

Borror noted similarities between the Ohio and Nevada laws, and said officials in Ohio were watching the Nevada case with interest.

The Ohio registry went into effect Jan. 1 despite challenges on grounds that it punished offenders twice, that the Legislature overstepped separation of powers lines by deciding sex offender classifications, that it broke plea deal contracts between offenders and prosecutors, and that the mandate from Congress violated the state's rights.

"We used to have a system where a judge made a decision about an offender's risk to re-offend," Borror said. "Now it's based only on the offense that they're convicted of, not on any future risk."

Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons (Contact), who endorsed the Adam Walsh Act as a congressman in 2005, expressed surprise the new laws encountered resistance days before they were to go into effect.

"Based on the unanimous passage of this legislation through both chambers of the Nevada Legislature, it would be hard to assume anyone foresaw the constitutional challenges the law is currently facing," Gibbons spokesman Ben Kieckhefer said this week.
- Why would it be hard to assume this?  The constitutional challenges are OBVIOUS!

"Still, Governor Gibbons would much rather sign aggressive laws protecting the people of Nevada from sexual predators than wait to see how other states handle federal legislation and see whether the courts agree with it," Kieckhefer said.
- And that is another point, these laws do not protect anybody, they are just "feel good" legislation to get you votes and to "look good" to the sheeple!

The federal law sets a July 2009 deadline for enactment, and threatens states with the loss of federal grant money if they fail to adopt it. In Nevada, officials told lawmakers the state stood to lose $300,000 a year if they failed to adopt the law.
- And this is another reason they are passing these laws, MONEY!!!

Langford said he believed Nevada lawmakers knew the law would change the lives of convicted offenders, but didn't consider the breadth of the measures or the increased costs of enforcing them.

"Nobody wants to say they're for sex offenders," Langford said. "Everybody wants to be pro law enforcement."

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, all male, live in cities throughout Nevada, according to court documents. They include a construction company manager, a tow truck operator, a grandfather. They are not identified by name.

Most say in court documents that they served sentences ranging from probation to prison time in plea agreements that predated passage of laws redefining a sex offender.

The plaintiffs claim the law is broad enough now to apply to a wide range of offenses ranging from child molestation to rape to theft of a pornographic magazine from a store.

Police Capt. Vincent Cannito, commander of the Las Vegas police sex crimes unit, said reclassification added about 1,800 people to a list of 2,200 offenders in Las Vegas and surrounding Clark County, home to about 2 million people.

Cannito said he had no sympathy for offenders who would have to check in more frequently with probation officers, or might be forced to move away from living near schools or parks.

"Remember, it's the offender who decided to go out and commit the crime that they did," Cannito said. "This increases the standards and raises the level of accountability of those individuals who have been convicted of sex crimes, and it raises the ability of law enforcement to further protect the community."

Langford, McLetchie and their clients argue reclassification is unfair because it categorizes offenders based on their offense instead of individual evaluations.

One plaintiff, identified as Doe 2 in court documents, said neither he nor his attorney at the time understood that lifetime supervision would apply after he pleaded guilty in 2001 to a sex offense, or that he would continue to be banned from going to parks or schools.

He blamed his ex-wife for allegations during an acrimonious divorce that he sexually assaulted her 14-year-old daughter. He faced five felony charges but pleaded guilty to one count of attempted lewdness with a minor under 14, and was sentenced to 5 years probation.

"I never touched my stepdaughter or any other child inappropriately," he said in the affidavit, which says he took a plea deal to spare his children the embarrassment of a trial. "I was not told that there would be any restrictions on me whatsoever after I was done with probation."

The 45-year-old now lives with his second wife, his adult adopted stepdaughter, his 15-year-old son and the couple's 5-year-old son in Las Vegas. He said he fears for his family's safety and his job if he is identified publicly as a sex offender.

"I have done everything I can to comply with the law, and be a good citizen," he says in the affidavit. "I would never hurt anyone. But none of that matters now."

(Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Email from The wife of Michael Kennedy

This was sent via email from someone calling themselves "The Wife of Michael Kennedy," which has not been verified, nor will it be.  If anyone can help here, then please respond with any info here.  I will NOT be posting her email address here, unless she says it's OK.

My husband, as he was getting ready to go to trial for a murder & rape he didn't commit, was offered a plea bargain, not once but 3 times. He refused each time. Would a guilty man have turned down a plea bargain that guaranteed he would have only received a 7 year sentence with the chance at parole only 24 hours later? My husband turned down that offer. Why? Because he would have had to say he was guilty of the rape and murder of Maria. You should read his PSI report. That is not a report that portrays a killer, but does just the opposite. Interestingly still, the man who wrote the report, Don J. Bennett, a parole officer from San Diego, did not believe Michael was guilty. More interesting, is the fact that several federal employees quit right after Michael's conviction because they did not want to be part of a group of so called officials that allowed an innocent man to go to prison for life.

Please read this true story. And ask yourself: Are we willing to allow an innocent man to continue to pay for a crime he didn't commit? Are we going to allow the federal officials to get away with allowing the real killer to remain free and probably has continued to rape and murder our women? The officials did this once; was this their first and only time or have they continues to cover up evidence just to get a speedy conviction? And to appease the Mexican Government. How do you think the Mexican government and their supporters would react to this story? Do you think they would be pleased to find out that they were lied to? That an innocent man was convicted just to get them off someone's back? That the real killer was allowed to continue to rape and murder more of their women? I don't think they will care that it happened over 28 years ago. They will want to find out why an innocent was convicted and why the federal officials were not interested in finding out who was the real killer of their women.

Our lives are consumed with writing appeals, attempting to get his story heard. We can't leave the state for vacation or even when we planned to have our honey moon because we have to check with his PO for everything. Our lives are an open book. He must report everything to his PO. He was out of work for 8 months because no one wanted to hire a convicted felon. Financially, we are behind on a lot of bills...Since he is now a registered sex offender... That means his face and address are available for anyone to view... I fear that one day some so called vigilante will decide Michael should no longer be able to breathe the same air he does... There is no future for us... We never know when the PO is going to show up on our door step...or what little thing he may attempt to revoke Michael's parole for and send him back to prison. Michael grew old in prison and was never allowed to have the life most men take for granted....a family with one or two children. He feels blessed to have found someone who loves him and believes in him, someone who is strong enough to handle all the constraints on his life. I admit, I love Michael very much...but at times, you just want to blow up especially when something new turns up that his parole officer wants him to do....its not that Michael does anything wrong...he's the most law biding citizen I know...he never speeds, never runs red lights or even yellow...but his PO just wants to torment him to break him down. Please put us in your newspaper. We need for Michael's story to come out. The cover ups continue. They won't even read his appeals before they deny them. I hope you're our miracle because that's what we need....Thank you for listening.

I wish to tell you a true story of the cover up by federal officials and prosecutors of evidence, an illegal search and seizure, conveniently destroyed evidence precluding DNA exoneration, and eliminating certain government witnesses. These facts are supported by:

Victim photos/crime scene photos

Crime scene investigation notes

Trial transcripts

FBI Reports

Forensic Reports

Tape Recordings of investigation

The actions of federal officials are no different than those committed by the prosecutor in the Duke University Case.

The case that I am about to tell you reflects not a pursuit for justice- but a sating of career ambitions and appeasement of the Mexican Government. It will also tell how not one but two suspects were investigated. One suspect, Michael Kennedy, my husband of one year, was employed by the Federal Protective Services in San Diego, California. His job was akin to local police officers duties except on a federal level. Michael has no history of sexual mis-conduct, no history of violence and was living with his parents at the time. His only crime was that he smoked "Kool" brand cigarettes. The other suspect, Robert Beard, also a federal protective officer. He had applied for a US customs position that Michael had ultimately received. Beard had a history of sexually abusive behavior, pornography, and a history of violence and disciplined for making sexual remarks to children. Beard also had a brown belt in Karate-strangulation could have been caused by a karate chop to the throat- and a former motorcycle gang member. Two witnesses were not allowed to testify. One was Beard's girlfriend who was going to testify about his tendency to violence behavior and his sexually abusive behavior. The other one was a female colleague who was going to testify that Beard had asked her out, when she denied, he stated: "You think you're going to end up like the other one? You are as dumb as she was!" To a woman, this is threat. It signifies that he may have asked Maria for sexual favors, and when she turned him down, he proceeded to take those favors by force. Interestingly still, despite Beard's history, and the fact that he was "O" positive blood type, the investigation on him did not continue as 1) he did not smoke 2) he was a secretor.

On Friday Nov. 23, 1979, Josephine Felix, a resident of Corcoran, California, drove to Tijuana, Mexico, for the purpose of smuggling her sister-in-law, Maria Lopez deFelix, into the United States. Maria was in the trunk of her car and at the Port of Entry in San Ysidro. A customs inspector discovered Maria and turned the two women over to the Immigration Officer for questioning. Both were photographed, and put into separate cells. Around 1:30 a.m. on November 24. Maria was released. She was pointed toward a set of double doors behind which a corridor would take her back to Mexico. Passing through the double doors, Maria encountered Michael Kennedy, who was just returning from the cafeteria. As Maria appeared lost, and Kennedy not knowing any Spanish at the time, he escorted her over to Customs Inspector Clooney, who directed her towards the corridor to Mexico.

On Monday, November 26, 1979, around 10:00 a.m., some thirty three hours after Maria was ordered back to Mexico, she was found murdered in an alleyway behind the Old Customs Building at the Port of Entry. She appeared to have been beaten, raped and strangled. Investigation disclosed that she had been murdered in the Old Customs Building. In the surrounding area, investigators found pieces of Maria's gold chain, a torn tassel from her shawl, a slip of paper containing the address of Maria's aunt, and Maria's gold-plated religious medallion. Her shoes and purse were found hidden in the toilet tank of one of the adjoining cells. Investigators also came across several "Kool" brand cigarette butts and pieces of masking tape.

Michael Kennedy became a suspect because he was one of only two people on duty that night that had possessed a key to the pad-locked gate to the area that the murder occurred, and because he smoked "Kool" brand cigarettes. Michael was scheduled to work from 12 midnight on Saturday Nov. 24 to 8 a.m. Sunday, Nov. 25, 1979. He routinely walked as part of his patrol the area where the murder had occurred. After his first 2 trials ended in hung juries, Michael was convicted at a third trial of the rape and murder of Maria Lopez deFelix and sentenced to 2 life sentences.

Time of death is crucial to the guilt or innocence of Michael Kennedy as Maria was found on Nov.26, 1979 at 10 a.m. Dr. Thomas Naguchi, an expert witness for the defense and Chief Medical Examiner for L.A. County, testified that the victim died 4-6 hours before she was found. The key here is that the close ups of the victim's face were not released as evidence at any of Michael's trials to substantiate Dr. Naguchi's testimony. The victim did not have any fly larvae deposited in her eyelids at the time her body was discovered. Per Dr.Naguchi, fly larvae would have been deposited in the victim's eye lids 4-6 hours after death. Counting back the hours, Michael was not at work when her death occurred. For the prosecution, Dr. Luibel, Chief medical examiner of San Diego County, placed time of Death 24-36 hours before she was found. Thus, the with-holding of the victim's close ups of her face was necessary by the prosecution to get a conviction.

Another example is the removal of former FBI Special Agent Frederick Wallace after his testimony as an expert witness as a hair identification expert for the government. Agent Wallace's testimony was contrary to the government's case. He testified at Michael's first trial that the four or so hair strands found at the crime scene did not match Michael's hair. Special Agent Wallace was unavailable to testify at Michael's 2nd and 3rd trials due to "medical" problems. Another FBI hair expert was consulted who testified that they could have been Michael's hair.

The other evidence that was submitted was the result of an illegal search and seizure. This is just further demonstrated to the lengths that federal officials were willing to go to obtain a conviction. The search warrant was never executed. Rather, FBI agents Jerry L. Barnett, Kenneth A. Vardell, and James M. Bird, told Michael's parents, that they had a warrant and would need to search the house. During this search, they seized one uniform jacket, uniform pants, uniform shirts, shoes, pocket knife and a roll of masking tape.

Other evidence not released during trial:

2 separate FBI investigative reports placing time of death 8-10 hours before body was found

An investigative page from Special Agent Kenneth Vardell that reflected:

Blood grouping analysis of a bloody tissue at the crime scene was "O" positive

Blood grouping analysis of the victim was Type "A" positive

Blood grouping analysis of Michael Kennedy was Type "A" positive.

Information on the testing done for secretor/non-secretor (a secretor secretes his blood type in his semen, a non-secretor does not). It was found that since the victim had not bathed nor changed her panties for more than 24 hours, that would result in the natural build up of bacteria. Couple that with the build up from the urine that was excreted at the time of death, destroys the ability to identify a secretor from a non-secretor.

Further note that all possible body fluids were accidently destroyed by other evidence collection processes and could not be used later for DNA testing as it was unavailable in 1979. (Or so we were told, how true, we do not know). There may be a small area of secretion left to perform the Y-STR test, which as I am sure you are aware, needs only a small sample to determine DNA. During his questioning, Michael had claimed that he had been framed. DNA was not done on the cigarette butts found at the scene..although since he did patrol the area as a routine, there will be his DNA on some.

I need to also point out, that during his investigation and trials, the Federal Officials investigated Michael with the rape and murder of Ramona Hernandez in San Diego. They seized his car and demolished it while searching for evidence. They found blood, which turned out to be canine. The previous owner of the car when questioned stated that her dog had been hurt and bleeding and she used her car to transport the dog to the vet. Several witnesses' testimonies and time of death made it clearly evident that Michael did not commit that crime. That murderer, too, has never been found, as once again, the federal officials spent so much time and energy in trying to also convict my husband of it.

For years after his conviction, my husband continues to claim his innocence and continues to fight for justice. All of his appeals go unheard. The most recent denial: Judge Larry Adam Burns, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of California, issued an order barring the filing of any document related to the criminal conviction of Michael Edward Kennedy, to preclude any inquiry into the actions of his former colleague and long time friend- Thomas M. Coffin, now a federal judge in Oregon. Coffin was the prosecutor, along with FBI Special Agents Barnett, Vardell, and Bird, who did not notify the court that the items involved in the search and seizure were obtained illegally without the execution of a search warrant.

My husband has been very cooperative: under went 3 polygraphs, submitted his blood for the national DNA data base and never once violated the conditions of his parole. He was released in 2000 after serving 20 years in Federal Prisons all around the United States. Federal Prisons transfer their prisoners every 2-5 years to another prison. He continues to go to his psychological counseling that was ordered by his parole officer Michael Allera since 2000 in the Sexual Offender Program. Normally, the counseling is only for 2 years, but Allera, in his attempts to break Michael down, forces him to go 2 x month. Every parole hearing, he has attempted to be taken off supervised parole. The last one he was turned down was in Nov. 2007. Their reasoning being:

He has not taken responsibility for his crime and shows no remorse. (Michael has admitted to nothing except of his innocence.)

He is still a threat as he has not registered as a sex offender. (Maryland law, at that time, stated that since his conviction was 28 years ago, he was not required to register. Michael has since registered as Allera lied to the Sheriff's Dept stating there was a court order issued by Judge Benson Everett Legg. Judge Legg issued no such order)

That the psychological testing done by Kathy Seifert of Eastern Shore Psychological finds that he has a high incidence of being a re-offender. (Michael has never taken any psychological testing. The testing was supposed to have been done in 2001, several months after his release. Yet after 3 attempts, when Michael was finally given partial copies of his medical records, there was a summary of his testing results that was signed by Kathy Seifert and another individual in July 2007. Please note, the 2nd individual signed himself as a Licensed Counselor when in fact he never renewed his license after 2004.) We have since filed a complaint and the state sent an investigator to interview us. She was quite surprised at the amount of falsifications she found in Michael's medical records from Seifert. This matter is still under investigation. It won't prove his innocence, but it will get us one step closer to getting him off supervised parole.

Allera insinuated that there was still an open investigation involving Michael in the murder in San Diego- Although sources state there is no open investigation.

I am positive that once you see the facts and talk to such people as Judy Clarke, Capitol resource Counsel for Federal Public Defenders. Although Judy was not his attorney, she was involved in Michael's case during his 3 trials and handled his first §2255 petition. You will want to see that justice is obtained. For Michael, for Maria, for Ramona but more importantly, is to identify the true killer that federal officials have allowed to roam free.

During all his trials, Michael's mother has remained by his side. She is an excellent source of information and also recorded a lot of the proceedings, interviews and even went to visit the governor of Mexico. His father died in April 2008.

I hope you want to see justice done as much as we do. To think that these federal officials are still out there and could be possibly repeating the same cover-ups is an injustice to everyone.

Thank You,

I dug up newspaper articles on his initial appeals:

NewsBank NewsLibrary

Paper: Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA)
Title: Agent's conviction appealed
Date: May 8, 1985

SAN DIEGO -- A defense attorney has filed a petition in federal court seeking to set aside the murder conviction of a former Federal Protective Service officer serving a life sentence for killing an undocumented alien.

The petition, filed Monday on behalf of Michael Edward Kennedy, 28, contends federal prosecutors withheld evidence that would have shown Kennedy was innocent of the 1979 slaying of Maria Lopez De Felix. Kennedy was found guilty in his third trial after two previous juries were unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the conviction in September 1983.

NewsBank NewsLibrary

Paper: San Diego Union-Tribune, The (CA)
Title: Retrial asked in murder case of federal agent
Date: May 7, 1985

A Baltimore lawyer says former Federal Protective Service Officer Michael Edward Kennedy's December 1980 murder convictions were the result of "a denial of effective legal counsel and the prosecution's withholding of evidence favorable to the defense."

Accordingly, the attorney, Harold I. Glaser, filed a motion yesterday for a new trial.

Kennedy is serving two life terms in a federal prison in Raybrook, N.Y., for convictions of murder and murder in the commission of rape.

The battered, partly clothed body of the victim, Maria Lopez de Felix, was discovered Nov. 26, 1979, in a breezeway next to an old customs house and a border fence in San Ysidro.

Kennedy, then a 25-year-old Chula Vista resident, had the midnight-to-8 a.m. patrol shift in the area the previous day. He did not testify at his three trials, two of which ended in jury deadlocks. After nearly a year of confinement in the Metropolitan Correctional Center, he was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Judith N. Keep.

In papers requesting a new trial, Glaser said clear evidence exists that Kennedy could not have been the killer.

"The victim's body," he said, "was discovered at approximately 10 a.m. Monday, Nov. 26, 1979, about 32 hours after the last time she was known to have been seen alive.

"It is beyond dispute that Kennedy left the border station about 5 a.m. Sunday, Nov. 25, 1979, approximately 29 hours before the body was found. If the victim was killed after 5 a.m., Kennedy could not have been the killer."

Glaser said that before the last trial the prosecution had medical information pointing to proof that the victim was killed one to four hours before her body was found.

"This would put the time of death at somewhere between 6 a.m. and 9 a.m. Monday, Nov. 26," Glaser said.

This statement was based on an Aug. 2, 1980, letter from Dr. John F. Burton, a pathologist, of Mercer Island, Wash., offering testimony to Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas M. Coffin.

Glaser said the information and the offer were wrongfully withheld from the defense until an appeal was filed.

Additionally, Glaser said Kennedy was denied effective counsel because his trial lawyers failed to raise the issue of non-disclosure on appeal. He said they had the information immediately prior to oral arguments on the appeal.

NewsBank NewsLibrary

Paper: San Diego Union-Tribune, The (CA)
Title: Kennedy defense presses case in '79 border killing

Attorneys claim withheld letter would have exonerated client in rape-slaying
Date: August 2, 1986

Defense attorneys pressed their fight to set aside the murder conviction of former Federal Protective Service officer Michael Edward Kennedy yesterday, contending the prosecution withheld evidence that would have helped prove Kennedy's innocence.

In a lengthy hearing before Senior U.S. District Judge Howard B. Turrentine, the defense asserted that the evidence would have shown that Kennedy was not on duty at the San Ysidro border crossing when Maria Lopez de Felix was raped and strangled in November 1979.

Kennedy, 31, is serving a life sentence at the Raybrook Federal Correctional Institution in New York. He was convicted in his third trial. Jurors deadlocked in the first two trials, all based on circumstantial evidence.

There were no witnesses to the murder of Lopez de Felix, whose body was found in a narrow walkway beside the old Customs House at the border. The prosecution contended she was raped and murdered in the abandoned Shore Patrol quarters in the building and dragged outside.

Assistant U.S. attorney Thomas M. Coffin denied withholding any evidence, saying the material cited by the defense could not be classified as such and was more of an unofficial opinion from a consultant who did not see the body or testify at trial. Coffin, who prosecuted Kennedy, is now with the U.S. attorney's office in Eugene, Ore.

Kennedy is represented in his bid for a new trial by attorneys Juanita Brooks and Alex Landon, who defended him in three trials, and Harold I. Glaser, president of the Maryland Criminal Defense Attorneys Association.

Arguments taken under study by Turrentine yesterday focused on an Aug. 2, 1980 letter to Coffin from Dr. John F. Burton of Mercer Island, Wash. Burton, 73 and retired, is a former chief pathologist of Wayne County (Detroit) and the author of many professional papers on causes of death.

Coffin had sought Burton's analysis of trial testimony by Dr. Thomas Noguchi, the former Los Angeles County medical examiner, who was called by the defense as an expert witness in Kennedy's trials.

Burton, in the letter to Coffin, said he had analyzed the submitted transcript of Noguchi's testimony and, based on his analysis, conjectured that Lopez de Felix must have died one to four hours before her body was found.

Burton, in his letter, said he believed Noguchi's finding of a time of death between 3:30 p.m. Sunday, Nov. 25, and 3:30 a.m. Monday, Nov. 26, was professionally sound.

However, testifying for the defense before Turrentine yesterday, Burton said he had not known at the time of his 1980 communications with Coffin that Lopez de Felix's body was found at 10 a.m. Nov. 26.

If he had had this information, he said, he would have placed the time of death between 3 and 6 p.m. Nov. 25. Kennedy, according to the defense, left work at 5:30 a.m. Nov. 25, before the slaying occurred.

The defense attorneys said they were not informed of the Burton letter until after the trials. Had they known earlier, they said, they could have called Burton as a witness.

Coffin, in his examination of Burton, handed him a copy of the transcript of the Noguchi testimony, pointing out that Noguchi had testified that the body was found at 10 a.m. Nov. 26. Burton said he had overlooked this in reading the testimony.

He did accuse the prosecutor of misleading him and sending him only selected material to get a desired opinion.

Coffin asked him if the defense attorneys, in their meetings with him, had attempted to sway his opinion. He admitted they had done this.

Kennedy's trials involved lengthy testimony on circumstantial evidence and scientific analysis of clues ranging from blood types, semen stains and pubic-hair samples. The prosecution contended that Kennedy lured Lopez de Felix back to the United States after she was ordered to voluntarily return to Mexico.

When he was sentenced to life in prison on Jan. 15, 1981, he said in court: "Her killer is still free. He is out on the streets. He will strike again."

NewsBank NewsLibrary

Paper: San Diego Union-Tribune, The (CA)
Title: 4th trial being sought for convicted killer
Date: August 2, 1986

Defense attorneys have requested a fourth trial for former Federal Protective Service Officer Michael Edward Kennedy, now serving two life terms on his 1980 convictions in the rape and murder of a Mexican woman at the San Ysidro border.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge Howard B. Turrentine took the case under submission yesterday after extensive arguments and testimony from Dr. John F. Burton, 73, of Mercer Island, Wash.

Burton, a retired forensic pathologist, was called by defense lawyers who said the doctor could present new testimony clearing Kennedy

The battered, partly clothed body of the Maria Lopez de Felix, was discovered by a Border Patrol agent at 10 a.m. Nov. 26, 1979, in a breezeway next to an old customs building and a border fence in San Ysidro.

Kennedy, then a 25-year-old Chula Vista resident, had the midnight-to-8 a.m. patrol shift in the area the previous day.

He did not testify at his three trials, two of which ended in hung juries before his conviction in December 1980.

Defense attorneys claimed that Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas M. Coffin wrongfully withheld an Aug. 2, 1980, letter from Dr. Burton indicating he felt the victim died within one to four hours of the body's discovery.

The pathologist said he based that finding solely on a transcript of the testimony of other experts, but was never told that the body was found at 10 a.m. Nov. 26, which meant significant changes likely took place in the body affecting the ability to determine time of death before it was examined at the coroner's office after 3 p.m. that day.

In papers filed on the new-trial request, attorney Harold Glaser said it was "beyond dispute that Kennedy left the border station about 5 a.m. Sunday, Nov. 25, 1979, approximately 29 hours before the body was found. If the victim was killed after 5 a.m., Kennedy could not have been the killer."

Attorneys Juanita Brooks and Alex Landon, who represented Kennedy at his three trials in 1980, said they were not told of the Burton letter until after the trials, and thus were deprived of the opportunity to call him as a witness.

Burton yesterday testified: "Now that I have reviewed information not provided me earlier ..., it is my opinion that the victim died between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. Sunday Nov. 25, 1979."

Glaser asked Turrentine to set aside the convictions and order a new trial.

NewsBank NewsLibrary

Paper: San Diego Union-Tribune, The (CA)
Title: Ex-federal officer denied fourth trial in rape, murder of woman at border
Date: August 8, 1986

A judge has turned down a defense request for a fourth trial for a former Federal Protective Service officer convicted of raping and murdering a Mexican woman at the San Ysidro border crossing.

The ex-officer, Michael Edward Kennedy, 31, a former Chula Vista resident, is serving two life terms in a federal prison in New York for his 1980 convictions. His request was rejected by Senior U.S. District Judge Howard B. Turrentine.

The battered, strangled and partly clothed body of the victim, Maria Lopez de Felix, 19, was discovered by a Border Patrol agent at 10 a.m. Nov. 26, 1979, in a breezeway next to an old Customs building and a border fence.

Kennedy had the midnight-to-8 a.m. patrol shift in the area the previous day, so times were critical factors in all three trials, two of which ended in hung juries.

Turrentine said a letter favorable to Kennedy and alleged to have been withheld by the government probably would not have changed the outcome of the third trial.

In the letter to Asssistant U.S. Attorney Thomas M. Coffin dated Aug. 2, 1980, Dr. John F. Burton, a retired forensic pathologist, said he believed that the victim had died one to four hours before the body was found.

However, Burton testified last week that he had never been told that the body was found at 10 a.m. Nov. 26 and not examined at the coroner's office until after 3 p.m. that day. He testified that he had changed his estimate of the time of death to between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. Nov. 25.

Turrentine said Burton never explained what led him to change his estimate.

The defense maintains that Kennedy could not have committed the crime because he left the border station about 5 a.m. Nov. 25, around 29 hours before the body was found.

Turrentine ruled that Burton's testimony and his statements in the letter "had no persuasive value" and that the government was not obligated to turn over the letter.

The judge said the letter was not admissible as evidence because Burton conceded on the witness stand that statements contained therein were not based on the sort of scientific and investigative material on which forensic experts normally rely.

Baltimore attorney Harold Glaser, who brought the motion for a new trial along with San Diego attorneys Alex Landon and Juanita Brooks, said before Turrentine ruled that he would appeal a negative decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.


Since his initial appeals in 1985 and 1986, Michael has made multiple upon multiple appeals...the most recent just a month ago...again and again he is denied. He served 20 years in multiple federal prisons and is now on life time parole and on the sex offenders registration. How much more must an innocent man do to find justice? Would a guilty man continue to fight after all these years? Would a guilty man volunteer for a polygraph, willingly give his DNA to go into the National Data Bank? My husband is innocent but the judicial system just doesn't care. They have taken 20 + years of his life.....he was in prison when his natural father died, when his grandfather died.......when his best friend died(dog). Please, please help us get his freedom.


In addition, there are a couple questions: 1) Are they allowed to destroy all evidence once the conviction is given? I know in the medical profession, we have to keep a patients chart forever, even if the patient had died. 2) The y-str testing (new DNA test that only requires a wee bit of sample) was never done. The innocence project won't touch his would we be able to request it? 3) Please read the news paper judge stated that the prosecution was not required to turn in a letter even though it proved that my husband was innocent due to different time of death.... 4) new facts: his mother said today that after his third trial when he was found guilty that several of the jury members questioned why he didn't have blood on his clothes and why he hadn't taken the stand? That counts as reasonable doubt doesn't it?? 5) Michael didn't take the stand because his lawyer didn't want him to because they didn't want any questions to lead to the murder of Hernandez since the prosecution knew the out come at the time( that Michael was innocent of that crime) but (the prosecutor)didn't want it to be known until after this trial.

6) Please do not forget that this case involved the Mexican government wanting a conviction...

7) Also, Michael's mother reminded him that Scotland yard did some testing on the evidence but no one ever saw their results... 8) Isn't it amazing how quickly Coffin got promoted after having Michael convicted? 9) Harold Glaser the lawyer from Baltimore, MD still has all of the information also concerning Michael's trials.

Below is his latest denial.....first error...he is not now nor ever was...a state prisoner......he served 20 years as a federal prisoner and is now on federal parole.