Saturday, July 11, 2009

EMAIL - Requirements for Sex Offenders when traveling

See the comments to this post.

I have a document from a friend of mine, who also is a SO. He works for a Lawyer. I recently asked him if he could give me information on requirements to register in each state. I would like to provide that document to you or just forward the e-mail he sent me. I think it is very valuable since each state has different requirements for how soon you need to register after arriving. Times range from 24 hours to 70 days in some states. California requires 5 days but if you are registered in California and travel on vacation in California and stay 5 days or longer you are required to register in that jurisdiction. I think this information is worth publishing and I have been given permission to do so. I tried to send an e-mail to your Gmail account but I kept getting errors. If you send me an e-mail I can return the mail with the information. Thank you



Thank you all for your feedback.... and if this is your first e-mail from me on this subject, I ask you to read this, read the attached .doc info for your clients/yourself... and feel free to feedback...

A few things are clear:

  • nearly 100% people affected by this are unaware of these laws... and while they may get permission to travel from their PO (while on vacation) they haven't been told about the facts/requirements.
  • so far 100% of psychologists/ therapists that deal with this cliental did not know of this requirement (I have asked them to spread the word)
  • 100% of attorneys that deal with this population were not aware of this (I have asked them to spread the word)

The majority opinion I have received was the assumption that one had to re-register only if one moved (changed domiciles)

There is little or no info/discussion with or regarding visitation/vacationing and requirements therein.

Therefore a person making progress and truly trying to overcome his/her past... is in jeopardy of being tossed back into jail in another state, receiving a fine and felony for lack of knowledge.

Or even within California somewhere in California more than 5 days! (note enhanced explanation in attachment.. this stipulation will more likely effect most people/clients)

And just look at the requirements.. some states have 24 hour... one has 70 days requirements!

Lastly, and most importantly, since most your contacts under these rules are in California (where they live and in which most will likely vacation) need to know the 5 day rule.

"Go to Tahoe for a week... on the 6th day if you're not registered with localities there... it's likely 18 mos jail and a fine"... and a felony.

... all when they thought they had permission to travel, etc..

Help in anyway you can to distribute this important information.

We certainly don't want to fill jails and fine people already stretched financially due to a misunderstanding and/or non-disclosure.

Thank you for your help in this matter. Feedback is valued.

Click the image to enlarge



"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)


NE - Mom Busted for Sex Crimes Involving Her Own Daughter

View the article here

07/11/2009

By Molli Graham

Omaha - A mother is headed to prison in a sex crime case involving her own daughter. A warning for parents, this is a disturbing story that is not suitable for children.

The Sarpy County mom was sentenced on Monday for buying her daughter a sex toy. Plus, she stood by and did nothing while the step-dad abused the young girl for years.

The girl's heartbroken father wants you to see the pictures of _____ and _____. They exposed his young daughter to the most disturbing sex crimes. What's more awful, they're the girl's step-father and own mother. "She bought a vibrator for her for her 13th birthday. What does that do to you as a dad? It tears me up inside, this is a 13-year-old girl," says Art, the girl's biological father.

It was Art, who first found out. He found x-rated texts on his daughter's phone from her step-dad. Dad ignores his gut reaction and calls police. "Only thing that kept my cool head is that I have a daughter to think about. If I go and do something stupid like that, where does she go."

The Sarpy County sheriff's office blew the case wide open. Not only do they get the step dad to admit to abusing the girl since she was eight, mom admits she was involved too.

"He wanted for _____ and her daughter to take photos of each other and send them to him," says Chief Deputy County Attorney Tricia Freeman. Freeman is talking about a text message from the step-dad asking for naked pictures of both mom and daughter. The girl says mom stood by allegedly laughing it all off. "Inexcusable as a mother and a step-father you're there to protect the children not do this to them," says Art.

Art tells us his daughter is doing better. She's in counseling and has lots of good friends and family by her side. Again, her mom will spend 5 and half years in prison and her step-dad could see 60 years behind bars.




"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)


CA - SoCal woman get year in jail for molesting teen (And the double standards continue!!!)

View the article here

Reverse the roles, a man doing this to a female child, and he'd be in prison for a long time, yet as usual, the female offender gets a slap on the wrist!

07/11/2009

SANTA ANA (AP) - A woman has been sentenced to a year in jail for molesting a 14-year-old boy at her home.

_____ of Newport Beach pleaded guilty on Thursday to two felony counts of lewd acts upon a child. She also was sentenced to three years probation.

Prosecutors say the 49-year-old was a family acquaintance of the victim who was abused when he was visiting her home in October 2007. _____ was cuddling with the teen when the crimes occurred. A witness told authorities about what happened.

If _____ had been found guilty at trial, she could have gotten three years and eight months in prison. She will have to register as a sex offender.


"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)


MD - Sex Offender Sues Therapist!!!!

View the article here

07/11/2009

By Dee

A Parsonsburg, MD RSO sues his therapist and others involved: Kathryn Seifert and Karen Ray of Eastern Shore Psychological of Salisbury, MD and a past employee, Paul DesPres. According to the claim, the suit includes Kathryn Seifert's refusal to turn over his personal health information as per HIPPA. The claim states that once he received his information there were several discrepancies within his records. These discrepancies, according to the claim, include: 1)Seifert stating that the RSO had received over a dozen evaluations, 2 of which were over 5 hours long ( The RSO claims he was given none and since those evaluations were not disclosed to him as Seifert and Ray stated they were "Trade Secrets" but state and Federal law require them to release his answers and raw test scores. To date they have not done so.), 2)The summary of the evaluations was signed by Seifert and DesPres in July 2007 (the evaluations were supposedly administered in 2001 , DesPres had ceased his employment for Eastern Shore Psychological in 2002 , in 2007 DesPres was not licensed as a counselor in MD, DE, or VA, and the RSO has never met DesPres.) 3) Several forms within the RSO's medical files contained the RSO's forged signature. Interestingly still, according to 2 Federal Officials, Eastern Shore Psychological receives all the federal contracts for all sex offenders east of the Bay Bridge. (There are more discrepancies, but the few listed were the high lights). Sex offender programs are normally 12, 24 or in extreme cases 36 months in length. According to the claim of this RSO's law suit, he has been in Sex Offender Therapy for 9 years based upon the results of the falsified evaluation supposedly performed by Kathryn Seifert and Eastern Shore Psychological. It is also noted in the claim, that this RSO had 2 previous evaluations done: one at PRMC and one with a private practice: both evaluations determined that this RSO did not need therapy. Yet a few months later, Seifert states that not only did he need therapy but also long term therapy. In the claim, the RSO stated that one of his previous therapist at Eastern Shore Psychological , had told him that he(the therapist) had recommended to Seifert in the presence of the RSO's Parole Officer that the RSO be discontinued from treatment. The therapist stated that Seifert stated that the RSO will continue with treatment for monetary reasons only. The RSO's parole officer was present when Seifert stated this according to the therapist. Hmmmmmmmmm!

Ok!! More interesting events. On July 9, 2009, the RSO was visited by 2 Federal officials. One of the topics of discussion: Eastern Shore Psychological were refusing to continue to see the RSO because he was suing them. According to the Feds, this was a condition of the Parole Commission (but in truth, the Parole Commission had left it up to the Parole Officer). Then, there was a discussion about a supposedly new Federal law (I searched and googled and contacted everyone I know and I can't find it!). This federal law requires maintenance polygraphs to be given as often as every 6 months if necessary. This polygraph will be referencing any possible criminal activities that the RSO may have done since his being on parole. (Let me point out that a federal parolee can be violated and returned to prison for such things as a speeding ticket, accidentally running a red light, etc.) Not to mention that this maintenance polygraph violates the fifth amendment and other constitutional rights. Then there were the discussions that were basically BS: old cell phone number on parole report, need to know exactly how many hours are actually worked in a week( the RSO is a salaried employee, considered full time, drives a semi ) So it doesn't really matter how many hours he works, he gets paid the same amount of money each week whether he works 10 hours or 70. The conditions of his parole is that he keeps a full time job.....and he has a full time job. What's the problem? In other words, the July 9th visit was in retaliation for him suing Seifert, Ray of Eastern Shore Psychological.

Let me ask all of you this: If you had a contract with a company, and found out that they were being sued for falsifying records just to maintain a lengthier contract and get more money out of the people who had hired them, wouldn't you be more interested in the outcome of the suit then at retaliating at the one suing? After all, if they had falsified the records of one company....did they falsify any others for purely monetary reasons?

And life goes on in the life of the wife of a sex offender...............I'll keep you posted.


"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)


WA - Children: Father didn't abuse us

View the article here
Update: Charges dismissed against former police officer

07/11/2009

By STEPHANIE RICE

Ex-Vancouver police officer spent nearly 20 years in prison

The two adult children of former Vancouver police officer Clyde Ray Spencer, who spent nearly 20 years in prison after being convicted of molesting them, testified in court Friday the abuse never happened.

A 33-year-old son recalled how, at age 9, he was repeatedly questioned, alone, by now-retired Detective Sharon Krause of the Clark County Sheriff's Office. He said after months of questioning, he said he was abused to get Krause to leave him alone.

A 30-year-old daughter said she doesn't remember what she told Krause at age 5, but recalled Krause bought her ice cream.

Both children, who live in Sacramento, Calif., said that while growing up in California they were told by their mother, who divorced Spencer before Spencer was charged, that they were blocking out the memory of the abuse.

They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

The fallout from Friday's hearing won't be known for months, after appellate judges weigh in. But the hearing does pave the way for the state Court of Appeals to allow Spencer to withdraw the no-contest pleas he entered in 1985 and have his convictions vacated.

After Matthew Spencer and Kathryn (Spencer) Tetz each took a turn on the witness stand, Superior Court Judge Robert Lewis said their testimony followed the written declarations they filed with the Court of Appeals.

Since the appellate court doesn't take live testimony from witnesses, Lewis was ordered to listen to the children testify and see whether they stuck by their written declarations, even under cross-examination by a prosecuting attorney.

They did, Lewis said.

Spencer, 61, who goes by Ray, hugged his son and daughter after the hearing while a dozen supporters cheered.

In 1985, Spencer was also convicted of abusing a 4-year-old stepson, who was not at Friday's hearing.

The Court of Appeals ruled his testimony was not necessary, given his age at the time of the alleged crimes and the fact his mother had an affair with Krause's supervisor.

According to Krause, the children were together when they were abused.

Both Matthew Spencer and Tetz testified their stepbrother was never abused by their dad.

In 1985, Spencer entered the no-contest pleas, a type of guilty plea, after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense. He felt pleading no contest was his only option, and that he would appeal his convictions.

Former Judge Thomas Lodge sentenced Spencer to two life terms in prison, plus 14 years.

For several years, Spencer's appeals failed. He was denied parole five times because he refused to admit guilt and enter a sex offender treatment program.

He hired Seattle attorney Peter Camiel in the mid-1990s. Camiel and a private investigator uncovered several disturbing facts about the investigation — including that prosecutors withheld medical exams that showed no evidence of abuse, despite Krause's claims that the children had been violently, repeatedly raped — and those discoveries led Gov. Gary Locke to commute Spencer's sentence in 2004.

Spencer was ordered to be on supervision for three years.

He's still a convicted sex offender, and Friday's hearing was just another step in the long process of clearing his name.

The process has admittedly taken its toll on Spencer, who suffered a heart attack in April.

"For so many years, nothing went right," said Spencer. "When things keep going right, I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop."

Senior Deputy Prosecutor Kim Farr grilled Spencer's children about why they are so certain they weren't abused.

Matthew Spencer said he knew his father had ruined the relationship with his mother.

"He had downfalls. But none of them were molesting children," he said.

Tetz said when she finally read the police reports she was "absolutely sure" the abuse never happened.

"I would have remembered something that graphic, that violent," she said.

Krause, who declined an interview request from The Columbian in 2005, could not be reached Friday.

If the Court of Appeals vacates Spencer's convictions, the case would return to the Clark County Prosecutor's Office.

Charges would either be refiled or dismissed.

Chief Criminal Deputy Prosecutor Dennis Hunter wasn't ready to wave a white flag on Friday. He said if convictions are tossed, prosecutors could appeal to the state Supreme Court.

After the hearing, Spencer, who has received his doctorate in clinical psychology but cannot get his state license as long as he has a criminal record, said he will just have to wait and see.

But at least he has his children, who didn't talk to him for more than 20 years.

"They were my life, and they were taken away from me. That was the hardest part. I could serve in prison," Spencer said, before his voice trailed off, and his son came up for another hug.




"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)


PA - Woman Headed to Prison for Child Sex Abuse

View the article here

07/10/2009

By Sarah Buynovsky

A woman from Luzerne County who admitted sexually abusing a boy learned her fate Friday.

_____, 34, of Wanamie, pleaded guilty earlier this year to raping and assaulting a child for 10 years. She was sentenced to four to eight years behind bars.
- Reverse the roles, a man molesting a female child for 10 years, do you think they would've received 4 to 10 years?  Of course not, they would've received a lot harsher punishment, and once again, another person KNOWN to the offender, not some stranger, like 90% or more of all cases are.

"I never encouraged the behavior. I probably should have gone to the authorities," _____ said.

According to police, _____ is related to her victim and often babysat him.

From the time he was five years old, police said, _____ began to sexually assault him and the assault didn't stop for 10 years. The boy's mother, who is not being identified to protect the victim.

"Since he was a young boy until he was a teenager this was happening to him. His life would be totally different this day if this had not happened to him. I mean, he got wrapped up in a lot of bad things because of this," the boy's mother said.

She added she wishes _____ was headed to prison for life. She said what she did destroyed an entire family.

"We have to put this behind us and heal and somehow move on with our lives," the mother added.

_____ is listed as a sexually violent predator and when she is released from prison, she will be required to register on the Megan's Law registry for the rest of her life.




"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (Bill Of Rights)