Good, it appears they are sticking to the constitution on some portions of the laws. This would violate ex post facto laws. But, are those convicted before 2006 on the registry? If so, then it's also unconstitutional. You can't have it unconstitutional for one issue, but not the others.
A Massachusetts court ruling that sex offenders convicted before 2006 cannot automatically be forced to wear a GPS monitoring device has put every child in the state in danger, a victims' rights group says.
- Well, this person doesn't know what they are talking about. GPS will NEVER prevent a crime if the person is intent on committing a crime, period.
In the 4-3 ruling on Tuesday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that retroactively forcing sex offenders convicted more than three years ago to wear the tracking devices violates state and federal constitutions.
- And also forcing those convicted before 2006 to be on a sex offender registry also violates the state and federal constitution.
Debbie Savoia, vice president of Community Voices, a victims' rights group, said the ruling is a "slap in the face" to every sex crime victim in the state and a threat to public safety.
"I'm very angry," she told FOXNews.com. "It's all about the criminal's rights. What about the victims?"
- All people have rights, and you cannot trample on one persons rights without trampling on all people's rights, period. This violates ex post facto laws, and therefore, like the judge ruled, is unconstitutional. And I am sick and tired of people saying "what about the victims rights?" Well, yes, they have rights, and they have no right to trample on someone else's, and all people have rights. You may not like that, but that is tough, the constitution guarantees all equal protection under the law, or it did.
Savoia saw the effects of the state's highest court's ruling Wednesday when she attended a hearing for _____, who was convicted in 1990 of kidnapping and raping a 7-year-old boy. _____ was released on probation earlier this year after the state determined he was no longer dangerous.
Superior Court Judge Kathe Tuttman was asked by prosecutors to require _____ to wear a GPS device on his ankle while he lives in Lowell, and Tuttman said she was "legally prohibited" from forcing him to wear the tracking device.
"He's an extremely dangerous man, and the fact that he's not being monitored 24/7 is an issue," Savoia said. "I feel like every kid in Massachusetts is in danger. His crime was absolutely horrible."
- Yes, his crime may be horrible, but he was convicted, and has completed his sentence, so you have no right to continue to punish him, to make yourself "feel" better!
"I've spoken to the [boy's] mother, and the pain in that woman is horrific and the fear is he'll do it to another child, and he probably will."
- He might, and if he does, lock him up for a long time!
Middlesex District Attorney Gerald Leone Jr., who sought GPS monitoring for _____, was also disappointed by Tuttman's decision.
"GPS monitoring of convicted sex offenders is an important, preventative tool to monitor the whereabouts of defendants who have preyed on victims and demonstrated a likelihood of reoffending," Leone said in a statement. "[Wednesday's] decision does not alter our opinion that it remains within the court's discretion to impose GPS monitoring for this class of criminal offenders, nor will it deter us from continuing to argue for this monitoring for other sexual offenders in the interest of public safety."
- Okay, so you track all offenders with GPS, but will that prevent a crime from being committed? No, so it's nothing more than punishing someone to make you and others "feel" better, nothing more. Again, if a person is intent on committing a crime, they will, regardless of being on a registry, residency restrictions or GPS. This is all nothing more than a placebo.
Coria Holland, spokeswoman for Probation Commissioner John O'Brien, said "every sex offender case" is currently being reviewed as a result of the court ruling.
Massachusetts currently monitors 82 sex offenders with GPS devices. An additional 221 sex offenders in the state are wanted for violating conditions of their parole. In 2006, the state passed the GPS provision as part of several changes to its Sex Offender Registry Law. Among the changes: homeless sex offenders must register every 45 days, rather than every 90 days, and the most egregious sex offenders are prohibited from living in nursing homes.
- And even this, if applied to those off probation or parole, is also unconstitutional!
Jeannine Mercure, _____'s attorney, could not be reached for comment on Thursday. She had objected to the GPS request, arguing that _____ receives psychiatric counseling and is visited by a nurse daily to ensure he takes required medications.
_____'s neighbors in Lowell told FOXNews.com they were "shocked" by the court's decision.
"If I had children, you bet it would concern me," said one woman who asked not to be identified.
"What this guy did, he's got a serious problem and that doesn't just go away. We have lots of kids in this development."
- So if it scares you so much, move. You want to protect your child, right? Or only when it doesn't inconvenience you?
"The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of a civilization. We must have a desire to rehabilitate into the world of industry, all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment." - Winston Churchill (United States Constitution)