Wednesday, December 14, 2011

TN - Sequatchie Commissioner (Barney Slatton) Pleads Guilty to solicitation of a minor for sex and statutory rape, gets no jail time and not on the registry!

Barney Slatton
Original Article

12/14/2011

By John Madewell

Barney Slatton resigned today as a Sequatchie County Commissioner, but he will not go to jail. Slatton also doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

Those were some of the conditions of his guilty plea to solicitation of a minor for sex and statutory rape. The two crimes were with two different girls.

The teenager involved in the solicitation charge was 17 years old at the time in September of 2010. Slatton was 34.

There was no sexual act in that case, but solicitation in person and suggestive text and Facebook messages.

The statutory rape case happened between 2007 and 2008 with a 16-year-old girl.

Slatton has been sentenced to four years of supervised probation, 100 hours of community service and no contact with either victim.

Friends and family of the victims were in court but declined to comment.

District Attorney Mike Taylor said they were satisfied with the sentence, specifically his resignation from the Commission.

Chairman of the Commission Tommy Johnson told NewsChannel 9 the vacant seat will be recognized at the next Monday's meeting.

Next, the Commission will go through a nomination and appointment process. It hopes to have Slatton's District 1 seat filled at some point in January. The appointee will fill the seat until the August 2012 election.


ME - Group pushing mandatory sex offender sentences in Maine

Original Article

12/14/2011

By Mal Leary

AUGUSTA - A coalition of groups, individuals and lawmakers wants anyone convicted of a sex crime against a child under age 12 to serve a mandatory sentence of at least 25 years in prison. If the Legislature fails to pass such a bill in the session that opens in January, the coalition plans to collect signatures to put the issue on the ballot in 2013.

We really need to take them off the street because the recidivism rate is so high,” said Ellsworth City Councilor Matthew Boucher, a member of the coalition. “They will in one form or another hurt hundreds of children over their lifetime. We really need to get a grasp on this; it’s really about protecting our children.”
- Recidivism rates are not high.  Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any other criminal, except maybe murderers and a couple others.  They are advocating passing laws based on lies not facts, and no, it's not about protecting children, it's about exploiting fear and children for political gain, IMO.

Even as its members hoped the Legislature would take it up this session, the group filed paperwork with the Secretary of State’s Office on Wednesday to begin the process of putting the issue, often called “Jessica’s Law” after a similar measure in Florida, on the 2013 ballot. Petitioners must get 57,277 valid signatures, 10 percent of the votes cast in 2010 for governor.

We are ready to go forward and collect the signatures if the Legislature does not pass this during this session,” said Stavros Mendros, a former lawmaker and owner of a company that conducts petition drives.

Lawmakers have rejected the proposal twice, adopting a law in 2006 that set a 20-year sentence as a “benchmark” for judges to use in setting a sentence and requires a judge to explain why he went below or above that target sentence.

Boucher said sentences that have been actually handed down average between seven and eight years and are woefully short of the penalties he says are warranted for sexual abuse of children.

We need to put these people away so they can’t prey on any more children,” he said.

Carroll Conley, executive director of the Maine Christian Civic League, agreed. He said the league is supporting the effort to pass the tougher penalties both in the January session and through a petition drive if that is necessary.

We believe that any society has as its first responsibility to protect children,” he said. “This law is talking about adults committing sex crimes against children. We need to protect our children from predators.”

Rep. Emily Cain, D-Orono, House minority leader, has opposed the legislation in the past and said it would face opposition if allowed into the session. She has not heard any request to allow the bill into the session.

We passed our own version of Jessica’s Law by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority,” she said. “I would have to be convinced that is not working,”

Rep. Anne Haskell, D-Portland, the lead Democrat on the Criminal Justice Committee and a former co-chairwoman of the panel, said mandatory sentences are a bad idea with unintended consequences.

I am not a supporter of mandatory penalties,” she said. “I believe the judges ought to have the discretion in sentencing.”

An example of an unintended consequence could be a situation in which a victim has been seriously traumatized and can’t testify, and instead of some punishment through a plea bargain, the perpetrator could be freed to offend again.

Rep. Tyler Clark, R-Easton, also a member of the coalition, said he supports the coalition efforts and will support the measure if it is allowed into the session. He serves on the Appropriations Committee and acknowledged any measure with a price tag will be difficult to fund as millions of dollars in spending cuts are being made.

In all of government, there needs to be priorities,” he said. “That includes crimes.”

Sen. Garrett Mason, R-Lisbon Falls, co-chairman of the panel, said he would support the bill if it is allowed into the session. He said he is not part of the coalition, although he supports its goal.

Mendros said he believes the measure will be allowed into the session and that there will be enough support to pass it. But no one in Senate President Kevin Raye’s office was aware of a request. Raye is chairman of the legislative council that would have to vote to allow consideration of the after-deadline request for a new bill.

If we have to get the signatures, I think we will get them in plenty of time to file and get it on the ballot,” Mendros said.”We are better organized than we were last time.”

In 2009, Mendros led an effort to put the question on the ballot for 2010, but collected only about 30,000 signatures, well short of the minimum. He also said the measure has the support of Gov. Paul LePage, but the governor’s legal counsel, Dan Billings, said he could not confirm that.


The Child Abuse Statistic That’s Scary, Ubiquitous – and Wrong

Original Article

11/30/2011

By Richard Wexler

A 17-year-old and a 19-year-old go out on a date. At the end of the evening they kiss goodnight. If that is sexual abuse then it is just possible that, yes, one in four girls and one in six boys might be sexually abused by the age of 18.

If, on the other hand, your idea of sexual abuse is Jerry Sandusky allegedly raping a boy in a shower, then the figure probably is wildly inflated.

In the wake of the Penn State scandal, that one-in-four / one-in-six claim has become nearly ubiquitous. And despite it turning up in scores of news stories and opinion pieces, I have found not one that cited an actual study. So I went looking for it myself and, after a couple of hours of searching on the web, I found it.

It’s known as the Adverse Childhood Experiences study. It involved administering questionnaires to thousands of adults who received check-ups at a California HMO between 1995 and 1997.

Among the questions about a long list of childhood experiences was one which asked if:

“An adult or person at least 5 years older ever touched or fondled you in a sexual way, or had you touch their body in a sexual way, or attempted oral, anal, or vaginal intercourse with you or actually had oral, anal, or vaginal intercourse with you.”

A lot of what is in that definition is, in fact, sexual abuse, and it is sexual abuse regardless of whether the victim supposedly “consented.” When you’re a child there is no such thing as consent to sexual touching or any of the rest, period, end of story. As for teenagers, the use of the five-year age gap probably was meant to exclude so-called “Romeo and Juliet” cases.

But under the study’s definition that goodnight kiss still qualifies as sexual abuse. If, for argument’s sake, you want to say 19-years-old is not an adult, substitute 21 and you have the same problem.

Or suppose that 19-year-old and 17-year-old are working at a summer job and the 19-year-old pats the 17-year-old on the rear. That’s certainly sexual harassment, but is it sexual abuse? And if it is, do we really want to lump it together with rape?

So it’s not surprising that when the one-in-four / one-in-six claim concerning “sexual abuse” is broken down, far more respondents said that they were “touched or fondled in a sexual way,” than anything else.

Of course one might wonder why one would answer yes to a question about “sexual abuse” if the incident in question was just an innocent kiss. But the question itself doesn’t mention sexual abuse. Rather, respondents were asked (PDF):

“Some people, while growing up in their first 18 years of life, had a sexual experience with an adult or someone at least five years older than themselves. These experiences may have involved a relative family friend or stranger. During the first 18 years of life, did an adult or older relative, family friend or stranger ever: Touch or fondle your body in a sexual way?...”

Subsequent questions go on to list other behavior that no one would doubt is abusive. But it’s all lumped together as “sexual abuse” in that one-in-four / one-in-six statistic.

Before receiving this questionnaire, the same respondents received a preliminary survey which asked, simply, "As a child, were you molested or sexually abused?” When left to define the term themselves, 6.1 percent answered yes.

The problems with the statistic don’t end there.

It was up to the survey respondents to determine if they were touched “in a sexual way” and they had to make that determination sometimes decades after the fact – the average age of respondents was 56.

And much more recently, another study posed nearly identical questions, and got lower results.

As I’ve noted previously, the best available estimates, from comprehensive reviews of multiple studies suggest that 10 to 12 percent of girls and five to six percent of boys are victims of child sexual abuse. Those numbers are plenty serious enough. It’s plenty of reason for concern and action – but not the kind of action that those pushing the hyped numbers want, like urging - or forcing - anyone and everyone to report anything and everything to child abuse hotlines. That would only deluge those hotlines with more false reports, leaving workers less time to find children in real danger.

And as the one child welfare agency chief gusty enough to say so, Joette Katz, in Connecticut, points out, it also would subject thousands of children who were not otherwise abused to the trauma of a child abuse investigation.

Some of those children likely would end up in foster care, which has problems of its own. While most foster parents try to do the best they can for the children in their care, study after study (PDF) finds abuse in one-quarter to one-third of foster homes. The record of group homes and institutions is worse. The accused in the Penn State cases, Jerry Sandusky, was a foster parent. His charity began as a group home.

It’s a pretty straight line from scare statistics to inanities like the case in Florida in which an assistant principal – a mandated reporter – called in a report, and sheriff’s deputies investigated, after a 12-year-old girl kissed a 12-year-old boy during gym class. The assistant principal called it “a possible sex crime.”

One can only hope the next big “study” doesn’t further broaden the definition of abuse to include cases like that.

Richard Wexler is Executive Director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform.


TN - MPD Officer (Ericck Cain) Charged With Aggravated Statutory Rape of a 14-year-old female

Ericck Cain
Original Article

12/13/2011

By George Brown

MEMPHIS - A Memphis police officer has been Ericck Cain was arrested and charged with Aggravated Statutory Rape and Exploitation of a Minor by Electronic Means.

Investigators say they were alerted yesterday that Cain was involved in a sexual relationship with a minor.

"MPD's Sex Crimes Bureau opened an investigation regarding the allegations. Investigators found that on January 26, 2011, 25-year-old Ericck Cain sent nude photographs of himself via email to a 14-year-old female. Investigators also discovered that in June of 2011, Cain and the victim were involved in a sexual relationship."

Cain has been an officer since June of 2009 and is assigned to uniform patrol at the Mt. Moriah Station.

Cain is currently relieved of duty pending the outcome of the investigation.

"As Director of the Memphis Police Department, it is very disheartening to know that an officer has not only violated the law, but has also taken the innocence of a child. I will not tolerant this type of behavior from a member of my department and we will assist with the Attorney General's Office in the prosecution of Cain", said Memphis Police Director Toney Armstrong.


OK - Supervision program is big moneymaker for DAs

District Attorney Tim Harris
Original Article

12/13/2011

By JACLYN COSGROVE

But some say it's a conflict of interest to have prosecutors overseeing offenders.

Editor's note: Oklahoma Watch is an independent, nonprofit investigative reporting team that collaborates with other media organizations.

District attorneys across the state are scrambling to pay their office bills by increasingly relying on a supervision program that critics say presents a conflict of interest, lacks accountability and hasn't demonstrated it has improved public safety.

Under the district attorney supervision program, about 38,000 offenders each pay an average of $40 a month on top of court costs.
- What?  This is insane!  38,000 * 40 = $1,520,000 for one month, then multiply that by 12 months equals $18,240,000.  Yes I'd say it's a big money making scheme!

During the 2012 fiscal year, district attorneys generated about $14 million in revenue - almost 20 percent of their budgets - by supervising an estimated 27,600 people on misdemeanor cases and about 10,500 on felony cases.

"Philosophically, I don't believe that an entity that is prosecuting the individual should be supervising the individual," said Bob Ravitz, Oklahoma County public defender. "When you have the DA supervising, they're the ones who decide to file charges or not. They have a vested financial interest if that person is convicted or not and put on probation."
- Remind me of the cash for kids judge.

Prosecutors don't disagree that the program has flaws, but they say they need it to keep their offices afloat because of budget cuts and a drop in revenue from the bogus check fund.
- So they need to exploit people in order to keep money in their pockets, is that what they are saying?

In the past three years, the state has cut funding to prosecutors by about 24 percent.

Before the program was put in place, the Department of Corrections administered most supervision programs. Probation intakes are down about 50 percent since district attorneys expanded their supervision programs to include felonies.

Tulsa County District Attorney Tim Harris said he was reluctant to use the DA supervision program and told lawmakers at the time that it created a conflict of interest.

"They said other DAs in the state are doing this, if you don't get on board and use the tool we've given you, quit crying about your budget woes," Harris said.

Trent Baggett, assistant executive director of the Oklahoma District Attorneys Council, agreed that the program creates an appearance of a conflict of interest and said it's important for DAs to make sure they are doing things in an even-handed way.

"Would it be a whole lot better system if we were funded entirely by one entity where we didn't have to rely on these additional funds?" Baggett asked. "Absolutely. Absolutely, it would be great if we could do that, but you know what? That's the hand we're dealt."

The District Attorneys Council will meet Thursday to discuss and possibly adopt guidelines or standards for the program.

The Legislature created the district attorney supervision program in 2005 as an alternative to Department of Corrections supervision.

If a judge gives someone a deferred or suspended sentence but doesn't order them to DOC supervision, then, according to law, the person "shall be required to pay the district attorney a monthly supervision fee" of $40.

"We are very protective of our DA supervision fees, and I really don't want it (the program) to be a sham, because if for whatever reason the Legislature were to take this tool away from me, I don't really know how I would operate," Harris said.

Harris' office reported to the District Attorneys Council that it collected $1,109,435 in the 2011 fiscal year from the supervision fees.

Candice Ramsey, director of Tulsa County's district attorney supervision program, said she believes she and about 11 other staff members who work in her office are making a difference for the people in their program.

Every week, Ramsey takes a stack of about 200 files and starts checking on people in the supervision program.

Every five weeks, a defendant on the program gets a call from Ramsey or someone else in her office to check in on their case. Each employee has a list of 19 items they have to go over with every defendant in the program.

"If I can reach them, it could be a really quick phone call, which is, everything looks great on our end, no new charges or arrests, you're in good standing with our office," Ramsey said. "... If there's nothing to be changed, we let them know we'll be contacting them in about five weeks."

Probation and parole officers under DOC must create individualized programs for each offender based on their criminogenic needs. This isn't part of Ramsey's job.

Instead, Ramsey and her fellow employees are charged with ensuring defendants have completed their court requirements, such as any drug or alcohol assessments and treatment recommended from those assessment, urine analysis tests, and restitution payments.

District attorneys say they are primarily supervising misdemeanor offenses, which no one supervised before, and low-level felonies.

During the 2011 fiscal year, district attorneys supervised an estimated 27,600 people on misdemeanor cases and about 10,500 on felony cases.

But these numbers are only estimates. When the Legislature created the program, it did not require district attorneys to report anything about the program, such as how many people were in the program, what types of offenders they were supervising or what tactics they were using to supervise.

It didn't actually do anything other than create the program via two sentences in a state statute. Nowhere in the statute is "supervision" defined.

This leaves the possibility open that a district attorney could simply take $40 a month from someone and not provide any services to that person.

"I hear that tired argument over and over and over again," Baggett said. "Now do I personally know what all 27 elected district attorneys are doing in their probation services in all 77 counties? No, but at the same time, I would want to see who that person is and where that is happening before I would put a lot of stock in that."

Allen Smallwood, a Tulsa attorney and past president of the Oklahoma Bar Association, is more skeptical that some district attorneys are doing more than collecting a fee.

"I've never had any of my clients tell me there was any degree of supervision other than taking their checks," Smallwood said.

Without any standardization or consistency and evaluation, criminal justice senior policy analyst Robert Coombs said it's virtually impossible to know whether the program is achieving a certain set of standards.

"It just makes it that much harder to know that everyone is on the same page, that everyone is doing things the same way, that you're maintaining a consistent amount of quality across the board," he said.


Has to be the cutest Nativity story I have ever seen!

The Christmas Story

Video Link

Good News of Great Joy

Video Link


NY - County step away from sex offender law

Original Article

Putting sex offenders into "bubbles" does nothing except make their lives harder (i.e. more punishment), and does nothing to protect anybody.  If a person is intent on harming anyone, the "bubble" could be 1,000 miles, and it would make no difference, but, I guess politicians, the media and public just want to continue to live in Wonderland.

12/14/2011

By W. T. Eckert

Lawmakers to draft resolution for public hearing

CATSKILL — Greene County is one step away from reaching the final draft of the new Local Law No. 3 addressing residency and other restrictions against sex offenders.

The proposed final draft of the law was presented to Greene County Legislators at the Public Safety Committee meeting Monday night. Committee Chairman William Lawrence, R-Cairo, wanted to review the document before drafting a resolution for a public hearing.

We had a situation almost a year ago,” Lawrence said, “where we got concerns about sex offenders that were being placed in locations that were near schools, playgrounds and we were doing that through [Greene County Department of] Social Services because there is a limited amount of places that we can put them.”

DSS inquired about the laws that restricted the residency on sex offenders in the county. Lawrence said there were none.

According to the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services Office of Sex Offender management, “The Sex Offender Registration Act does not restrict where a registered sex offender may live.”

It furthers that “if the offender is under parole or probation supervision, other New York State laws may limit the offender from living within 1,000 feet of a school or other facility caring for children.”

Legislators are using the restrictions in other counties as a template and asked what they would like to see in terms of restriction on a sex offender.

Lawrence said he is using four prong approach: 1. Making sure residents sign up for NY-Alert, the sex offender relocation email alerts; 2. County lawmakers lobbied the State of New York for support and urge the New York State Assembly and the New York State Senate to implement improved regulations dealing with all sex offenders and stricter monitoring and/or penalties for those assigned as Level 2 of Level 3 offenders with offenses against children in the form of a resolution; 3. County lawmakers assigned a full-time sheriff’s deputy, Robert LaBuff, to sex offender checks; and 4. Creating a local law for residency restrictions, which the lawmakers are trying to finalize.

The first prong … lets you know if there is a sex offender is coming in or out of your location,” Lawrence said. “The second puts on more strict restrictions for sex offenders. The third step … has a deputy, Rob LaBuff, keeping track of the 87 or so that we have in the county, making sure that they are living where they are supposed to live and that they haven’t moved and he has arrested two or three in the last few months that moved without registering, moved where they weren’t supposed to or caused other problems.”

As of Dec. 6, 2001 Greene County has a total of 92 sex offenders; 37 Level 1, low risk of repeat offense, 37 Level 2, moderate risk of repeat offense, and 18 Level 3, high risk of repeat offense

Greene County Sheriff Greg Seeley said that assigning Deputy LaBuff the sex offender beat was the best thing the legislators did.

He communicates with all the schools,” Seeley said, “he communicates with DSS. It’s a job within itself.”

LaBuff wanted this tool, Lawrence said, to give him some enforcement rights if there is a sex offender who is not violating any other laws but is near children and wants to get them away from the children, which brought Lawrence to his fourth prong.

The next prong is this sex offender residency law,” Lawrence said. “We talked about bus stops and how far away, 500 feet, 800 feet, [they should live] that’s a quarter of a mile according to the Suffolk County. What this would do is if there is a reasonable belief that a sex offender is a problem and they are within this radius, the sex offender deputy can remove them or violate them and make them pay a fine or go to jail."

With local law, by New York State standards we have to pass a resolution and set up a local law hearing within 30 days. People can come to [the county building], they can express their comments, we take their comments into consideration, we pass the local law and it becomes binding on the county.

Article I of the proposed local law states its purpose is to restrict all registered sex offenders from residing within a quarter mile of any school, licensed day-care center, playground or prior victims current homes and workplaces.

A discussion over the language of Local Law No. 3’s Article IV: Disclosure of Sex offender Status at Hotels and Motels was raised and the language is being worked on so the law can be finalized.

The concern was, as it started a year ago,” Lawrence said, “that sex offenders were being placed in motels by DSS because they were homeless and [DSS] is mandated to put them somewhere.”

The problem with the current situation is that DSS, when doing a background check on the homeless being placed in motels or hotels, is unable to inquire if they might be a sex offender, Lawrence said but Greene County Sheriff Greg Seeley said the proposed law will allow his department to communicate with DSS Commissioner Kira Pospesel.

The way this can be very effective now,” Seeley said, “the legislature here changes the rules and regulations about sex offenders with them [DSS]. Either make them ask, or, if they don’t ask, and all of the sudden we get wind of it, we now know he is a sex offender we can immediately know he is a sex offender and can go to Kira and say this guy is a sex offender, he’s got to go now.”

Legislators are looking to pass the local law for the residency and other restrictions against sex offenders in February 2012.


Sex Offenders Nude Photo Goes Viral Online!

Not really, but now that you are here, why don't you look around and learn the facts the media, politicians and others who are raking in the dough, won't tell you.

Below is some recommended reading material:


These are just a couple.  You can read more using the pull-down menus at the top of this blog.


Sex offender's ex-wife speaks out

This is only one person and not the norm. The original poster, apparently posted it to attract attention to his/her spammy web site, so we re-posted it.


AR - Arkansas Time After Time - It Could Be You!

The following was posted with permission from Lynn. Visit Arkansas Time After Time for more info and shows.


GA - Local group wants to ensure sex offenders are not on Facebook

Original Article
Related Article

12/14/2011

By Megan Thornton

CANTON — Sparked by the recent murder of Jorelys Rivera, a local group is trying to get convicted sex offenders in Georgia off Facebook and are requesting help from the public to get their profiles removed.
- Once again, a non-sex offender kidnaps and kills a kid, but all sex offenders are the target.  This kid who did this, is not a sex offender and is not on the sex offender registry, so why aren't they going after murderers instead?  Oh yeah, sex offenders are the scapegoat, I almost forgot.

The group, GA SafeKids, is composed of individuals from Cherokee County who wish to remain anonymous.

A spokesperson for the group said they are a branch of Operation SafeKids, whose Facebook page states the group is “a not-for-profit collective of people that have come together to have Facebook remove child porn, sex trafficking and pedophilia from the social network.”
- Okay, that is a good cause, but not all sex offenders are pedophiles like the title makes it seem you believe.  Kicking someone off who is posting child porn, yeah, I'm all for that, but all sex offenders, that I am not for.

After death of Jorelys, we realized people in Cherokee County didn’t realize sex offenders lived across street from them, so we started doing something more local,” a GA SafeKids spokesperson said.
- Who was not killed by a sex offender or pedophile!

GA SafeKids’ Facebook page, created on Saturday, instructs Facebook users to do do two things: report Facebook pages of convicted sex offenders by notifying GA SafeKids on their Facebook page or via email, and report the pages of convicted sex offenders listed on the GA SafeKids page to Facebook.
- And they have likes and links to pages by the criminal hacker group Anonymous, and others.

Facebook policy states that sex offenders are prohibited from using Facebook.

Once we are able to verify a user’s status as a sex offender, we immediately disable their account and remove their account and all information associated with it,” reads the Facebook policy.

Facebook accepts the following forms of documentation to verify a convicted sex offender’s status: a link to a listing in a national sex offender registry, a link to an online news article, a link to a court document and/or documentation verifying the report attached to the sex offender report form.

If Facebook gets enough reports, they take the person’s page down,” the spokesperson said. “We consider that a victory.”
- And most, since using the Internet is a right, will just create another profile under another name.

GA SafeKids administrators then report these violations to local authorities to attempt to prevent future pages from going up.
- Well, there is no law in the state of Georgia, and many other states, that ex-sex offenders cannot be on Facebook, so your attempts are futile, IMO.

If it’s a web address containing (child porn), we send the information to the web hosting site and FBI to have the site taken off the web while the FBI can investigate the person trafficking,” an administrator wrote in a Facebook comment on Sunday.

Though GA SafeKids says it forwards information to law enforcement, there may be little authorities can legally do.

There’s no Georgia law that I’m aware of that prohibits convicted sex offenders from using social media,” Georgia Bureau of Investigation spokesman John Bankhead said.
- Exactly!

Lt. Jay Baker, spokesman for the Cherokee Sheriff’s Office, also said there are no state laws that apply to what a convicted sex offender can and cannot do on Facebook.

With that said, some convicted sex offenders have restrictions on all types of activities they do on their computer,” Baker said, adding that it would fall under the conditions of that individual’s probation.
- Those off probation and/or parole, don't have these restrictions, and ever those on either, don't always have them either.  It depends on the crime.  But like usual, this group and others are assuming all sex offenders are out to harm kids, which is false, and they are trying to put all ex-offenders into one group.

Baker noted that the Cherokee Sheriff’s Office welcomes any information from citizens or groups involving potentially criminal activity.

The GA SafeKids spokesperson said this was an effort of three local individuals who pursue child predators in their free time, adding that they will likely be more successful with the help of others.

The more people that hear about [GA SafeKids,] the more people are going to feel comfortable reporting different things,” the spokesperson said, adding that the FBI have so far been cooperative with their efforts.

So far, GA SafeKids has successfully removed one Facebook page.
- Wow, one account?

To contact GA SafeKids about a convicted sex offender, email gakids@hushmail.com.


GA SafeKids also claims they do not condone breaking Facebook rules, but, if they read all their rules, that would include using their REAL names, so they are breaking Facebook rules!

Click the image to enlarge