So when are all other ex-felons going to be forced to pay an extortion fee?
By Doris Maricle
KINDER - Officials here agreed Monday to raise the registration fees for sex offenders and child predators living or moving into the town.
An ordinance unanimously adopted by the council increases a one-time initial registration fee from $60 to $400 for newly convicted offenders and those moving into the town. The annual renewal fee will also increase from $60 to $100 for all offenders.
The fees are the same set by the Allen Parish Police Jury last month and similar to recent increases imposed by Lake Charles, Sulphur, Westlake and other municipalities. Reeves is considering adopting a similar fee structure, according to town attorney Michael Holmes.
State law sets the annual fee at $60, but allows municipalities to increase the costs for monitoring, tracking and other services.
“The goal of the ordinance is to actually collect enough registration fees and renewal fees to cover the anticipated costs of registering and monitoring these individuals,” Holmes said.
- Why not tax the public? They are the ones who wanted these draconian laws in the first place, or get the funding from the government!
If the Police Department reports that it is costing more to track and monitor the offenders in the future, the council may consider increasing the fees again, he said.
About 40 registered sex offenders live in Allen Parish. Of those fewer than a dozen live in Kinder.
Under the measure, offenders would face misdemeanor charges and a $500 fine for failure to pay the fee. Additional penalties ranging from $1,000 to $3,000 could also be charged for those providing false information, failing to notify officials of an address change and failing to notify the community of their residence.
- You cannot force someone who is jobless due to your draconian laws to pay an extortion fee, so I guess the ultimate goal is to lock them up forever, which also costs a ton of money?
The state requires sex offenders to register with the Louisiana Sex Offender and Child Predator Registry, update their information more often and provide officials with new details of their whereabouts.
The offenders have three levels of registration periods — 15 years, 25 years and lifetime — depending on the severity of the offense committed.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
By Becky Briggs (Law Firm)
In 1855, a 19-year-old woman named Celia was executed by hanging in Missouri. Her crime? She had murdered her owner, a man who purchased her when she was just 14 years old and had been forcing her to be his concubine ever since.
There was no dispute that she had killed him. She had even confessed. But Celia’s defense attorneys boldly argued that Celia was permitted to use deadly force to protect herself from rape, basing their argument on a Missouri statute intended to protect white women. Elsewhere in the South, assault on a slave was considered “trespass,” and because in this case the rapist was also Celia’s owner, he was not able to trespass on his own property.
The defense’s argument failed. Celia was convicted and hanged.
Fast forward one hundred years. Although protection against sexual assault was certainly more robust, not until the 1970s was the idea that a man could rape his wife firmly established in all 50 states.
Largely as a backlash against centuries of historical indifference to the plight of assaulted and abused women and children, the pendulum has swung to the other side. Has it gone too far? I will leave that question for others to answer. But as a criminal law attorney specializing in the defense of sex offenses, I am continually amazed and heartbroken by how uninformed the average citizen is about how truly unforgiving and far-reaching the laws can be in this arena. What is even more concerning is the type of scenarios that fall under the law’s most severe penalties. We live in a state where it is possible that a teenager engaging in fully consensual sexual activity with another teenager could face life in prison.
In Colorado, the law allows for “indeterminate sentencing” for certain sex offenses. What this means, practically speaking, is life in prison. Indeed, life in prison is the penalty individuals face if they are charged with a long list of enumerated “sex crimes” in the Centennial State.
For instance, say you have “Sally,” an 18-year-old senior at Durango High School. Sally is dating “Billy,” a 14-year-old freshman at the same school. Billy and Sally are boyfriend and girlfriend and, because of where their birthdays fall, they are more than four years apart. If Sally and Billy have sexual relations, even if they do not have sexual intercourse, Sally can be charged with and found guilty of sexual assault on a child. This offense carries an indeterminate sentence in Colorado.
If the district attorney elects to bring charges against Sally, she almost certainly can avoid life in prison. What saves many defendants in these types of scenarios is that the prosecutor has the discretion to make an “offer,” or a plea bargain on the case. For most people, this involves a plea of guilty to either a misdemeanor or a felony sex offense. With this “deal” comes the wretched sex-offender label (and all of the registration and stigma that comes with it), months, if not years, of sex-offender treatment, a prohibition from being around anyone younger than 18 (even one’s own children), and myriad other degrading and financially devastating punishments.
The situation is grim for those who do not want to plea bargain their cases. Options for the innocent, or for those who disagree with the punishment, are limited. Taking a case to trial, particularly where “guilt” is not disputed, can carry dreadful consequences. Complicating matters is the fact that constitutional protections in this area have been seriously eroded by “rape shield” and “child hearsay” statutes, which often allow otherwise prohibited evidence to be admissible against the accused should the case go before a jury. The result is that hundreds of litigants are forced into plea agreements that label them as sex offenders, and sentence them accordingly.
Sex offenses do not require force. Sex offenses do not require penetration, or even intrusion. Sex offenses can exist even in completely consensual relationships between teenagers. “Rape” is not a word that exists within any Colorado sex-assault statute.
Another commonly held misconception is that the judge has any control over the matter. Although in some situations a judge has the authority to decide among different sentencing options, for the most part, it is the prosecutor who drives the train. He or she decides what to charge, what to pursue and what plea offer to extend.
Broadly sweeping sex-offender laws are archaic, outdated, and they are not driven by evidence-based practices. The merciless realities of current sex offender legislation demonstrate the dire need for reform in this area. At the least, Coloradans should be informed of how harsh, unforgiving and incongruent these laws are.
In our quest to protect those who need protection (a worthwhile goal), sex-offense laws have become, at times, a draconian hodgepodge that often deny common sense and human nature.
Becky Briggs is a Durango attorney specializing in criminal defense. Reach her at (970) 403-1151 or by email at BeckyBriggsLaw@gmail.com.
Next stop... Nazi style concentration camps and badges?
This is satire. The National Report is a known satire site.
Sutton - Hundreds of violent and predatory sex offenders are being transferred from multiple correctional facilities all over Texas to a specialized medical research facility where they will spend the rest of their lives being used as subjects in medical experimentation and testing.
In a bold move Texas congress passed a bill in early October to give researchers permission to use the most violent, predatory, repeat sex offenders as the first human subjects who will be used in more cutting edge clinical inquiries.
The facility which is located in Sutton County is being praised worldwide as bringing medical research to the next crucial level. Several researchers are clamoring to bring their talent to the practice. Having the opportunity to work with human subjects will give scientists the opportunity to develop sophisticated new treatments and surgical procedures that will eventually be saving lives.
During a recent press conference designed to inform the public about the facility and it’s goals, a handful of people expressed distaste for the program claiming it was inhumane and unethical to use humans in research against their will regardless of their crimes. Senior biologist Andre Bordeaux who will be the primary director of the program had this to say:
“With This New Program These Offenders Will At Least Be Able to Provide Something Of Value To Society…”
Others were overjoyed, many of them former victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by the men who were being used in the program. “This really gives me a complete sense of closure” commented Karen Kennedy at the press conference. She had been the victim of a repeat violent offender back in 1992 who was now being transferred to the institute. “I am happy that he will never be able to hurt any more children. It’s good too that they are putting him to good use. Any suffering he may experience in the process of course is an bonus” she added with a sadistic smile.
Labour does not support vigilante-type actions against sex offenders as reported in the Herald on Sunday this morning but says the police must be utterly scrupulous in investigating sex offences in order to keep public confidence and prevent people taking the law into their own hands.
- Then start arresting the vigilantes!
The Herald on Sunday today reported on a social media site (Website, Facebook) that sets up on-line conversations between men and a person pretending to be a 14 year old girl, and if the conversations become sexually inappropriate and reveal a potential for criminal offending the men are exposed.
"There is no place in our justice system for this vigilante type of conduct," Labour’s justice spokesperson Andrew Little says.
"If anyone thinks another person has committed an offence, or is about to, then the proper thing to do is to notify the police."
"I have no doubt that the confidence we are all entitled to have in the police to give claims of sexual violence due seriousness and priority will have been shaken this week, and the police have rightly copped fierce public criticism for their handling of the claims of sexual offending against under-age girls in West Auckland."
"But ultimately it is only the police that have the power and resources to go after offenders and mount criminal prosecutions, and if we want sex offenders to be brought to justice, even to get help as part of any sentence, then we have to rely on the police to do that."
"Vigilante action might satisfy the blood-lust of those taking the law into their own hands, but it doesn’t bring justice, it doesn’t necessarily stop the offender and it might just drive the offender’s unlawful behaviour further underground at the cost of more victims."
- Underage sex sting website condemned (Video Available)