New Life Style

Selasa, 24 April 2007

Police officer accused of having sexual contact with minor

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

04/24/2007

Douglas Wilkinson, 23, is now on the other side of the law. The Scotia police officer faces charges for having a sexual contact with a 16-year-old boy.

“It's devastating for all of us here. Nothing like that has happened in our police department in the past,” said Scotia Police Chief John Pytlovany.

Pytlovany said Wilkinson's been with the department a little over a year. Glenville police charged him with committing a criminal sexual act and endangering the welfare of a minor.

“Glenville Police Department is very interested if any other persons have had contact with Mr. Wilkinson,” said Sgt. Stephen Janik.

Police said the contact with the 16-year-old happened at an apartment building off Saratoga Road. They said it's just a coincidence that they found out about it.

Police said the victim went to Glenville police to file a harassment charge against someone else who was at Wilkinson's home when the contact occurred.

“Through the investigation into the harassment, other things came to light, and the investigation intensified,” said Janik.

Pytlovany said it's a shame for the rest of the department's dozen officers.

“There are plenty of good police officers that are dedicated to their work and do the best they can. It’s too bad,” Pytlovany said.

Wilkinson is suspended without pay. He was arraigned in Glenville Town Court and is out on bail.

Berrien County jailer arrested - Nichols is charged with felony sexual assault

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

04/24/2007

NASHVILLE - The Georgia Bureau of Investigations received warrants Monday on a Berrien County Jail employee after an investigation into allegations of improper conduct began Saturday, according to Sheriff Jerry Brogden.

The incident was reported to the Sheriff’s Office Saturday at approximately 2:30 p.m. The GBI was immediately notified and called in to investigate the incident, which reportedly took place in the jail Feb. 14 and involved a male jailer and a female inmate.

Saturday evening, Jonathan Nichols, 20, of Ray City, was arrested and held at an undisclosed facility outside of Berrien County. Warrants issued Monday initially charged Nichols with two counts of felony sexual assault and one felony count of false imprisonment, according to Brogden.

Nichols, who is a certified jailer, had reportedly worked at the jail for 12 months before the incident was brought to the Sheriff’s attention.

“I’ve never had anything happen like this in 23 years,” Brogden said. “I am very saddened by this. We just do what we have to do, and we have followed all the procedures we were supposed to. We can’t go back and change what happened.”

Berrien County Jail employs both male and female jailers on each shift, and male jailers are not supposed to have contact with female inmates, according to Brogden.

The incident is still under investigation by the GBI, according to Brogden.

Former officer sentenced in sex assault - Antoniak Gets Probation

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

04/24/2007

Former Omaha Police Officer Scott Antoniak has been given five years probation for his conviction of sexually assaulting a prostitute while on duty. He was found guilty of First-Degree Sexual Assault earlier this year and sentenced on Tuesday.

In addition he was ordered to perform 250 hours community service; must see psychologist; must register as a sex offender and must write a letter of apology to the women involved as well as Chief Thomas Warren and the police department.

Violation of any of the terms would make him subject to up to 50 years in prison.

The charges were related to an incident in 2005.

The woman says Antoniak stopped her, discovered a warrant for arrest and gave her a choice between pointing out drug deals, providing him with oral sex or going to jail.

The former officer faced up to 50 years in prison in the case.

Belinda Corleyturnipseed lives in the neighborhood Antoniak was working when the incident happened and says, "I felt he abused his power and it's detrimental to our community as a whole."

Antoniak's attorney, Mike Fabian says, "Scott Antoniak underwent a number of psychological evaluations and tests. All showed Scott to be no or low risk to society."

Assistant County Attorney John Alagaban helped prosecute Antoniak. He says Antoniak's sentence is within the guidelines laid out by state law but the county attorney's office will examine the Judge Joe Troia's decision.

Former Detention Center Counselor Sentenced For Sexual Assault

View the article here

Why not the maximum like the average Joe would get?

04/24/2007

GOLDEN - A former counselor at a juvenile detention center here was ordered to serve three years in prison for sexually assaulting a child, authorities said.

Heather Rose Robbins, 30, of Englewood, Colo., learned her sentence Monday in a Jefferson County courtroom. She had pleaded guilty Jan. 29 to sexual assault on a child and unlawful sex in a penal institution, both felonies.

The 16-year-old male victim reported to police that there were five or six sexual encounters between May 2004 and August 2005. The teen said he and Robbins also communicated by telephone and letters on her days off.
- So that would've made this kid to be 13 or 14 years old at the time.

Police said Robbins' job as a security officer also included counseling supervision and security operations.

The victim also said he and Robbins communicated in letters and by telephone on her days off from the center.

Robbins' prison sentence was to be followed by 10 years to life on intensive supervised probation, Russell said.
- She should be on the sex offender registry for LIFE like everyone else!!

Pinal detective resigns over sexual encounter

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

Why do we not see any of these cops on the media? Maybe protecting the "corrupt good ole' boys?"

04/24/2007

MESA — Officials dismissed charges in a police investigation after they discovered a detective with the Pinal County Sheriff's Office had a sexual encounter with an alleged victim of a sex crime, according to an internal affairs report.

The report, obtained by the East Valley Tribune this month, shows that the Sheriff's Office learned of the May 15 encounter in October and began investigating Detective William P. Langan.

Langan submitted a letter of resignation on Nov. 6.

In the report, the Sheriff's Office determined the detective had a sexual encounter with a reported rape victim after the arrest of her husband.

The case against her husband was dismissed because of the encounter, according to paperwork filed Nov. 14 in Pinal County Superior Court.

The report says Langan first met the woman at an advocacy center, where she underwent a sexual-assault examination. Langan told an investigator that the sexual encounter took place about two weeks after the arrest when he went to her home to talk about the dynamics of domestic violence.

"She just . . . indicated that, you know, she needed a hug or something," Langan told the investigator. Langan said the woman began kissing him and removed part of her clothing.

"I think, at that point I should have gotten up," he told the investigator. "I shouldn't have even done anything, but I did. And then one thing kind of led to the other and then we did have sex."

The woman's account slightly differs. She told the investigator that Langan had made comments about her beauty and asked her if she liked to look at pornography.

In 2005, Langan was working on an investigation into child pornography when he met a woman who later told a detective that Langan made attempts to seduce her. The report says Langan's actions reduced the state's chances of prosecution in that case.

Good or Evil vs. Sick or Well - Gonzales' SORNA rule will overflow US prisons

View the article here | Other articles from this author

04/24/2007

Of course I know why none of the politicians are questioning US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on the “Interim Rule” called SORNA which he has been bragging about as his great crime fighting contribution.

But the timing of it with the comment period ending next week on April 30, 2007 compels me to do the right thing by bringing this sneaky, under-handed move by Gonzales to everyone’s attention. And to go one step further and urge that we make an outcry to put an end to all his initiatives in progress.

Somebody must be the watchdog of our Constitution and stand up against all the ridiculous fear and hatemongering that the Republican party thinks is going to work to build their party and create more law enforcement jobs across the country.

So I guess that once again it falls to me to sound the alarm on something that will have devastating effects on millions of lives, most of whom had nothing to do with molesting a child. SORNA is an end run cooked up Gonzales and cohorts, no better than criminals in office for political purposes only and it needs to be halted immediately.

Yesterday’s news in Oklahoma and Florida where newspapers carried articles that this sex offender hysteria isn’t working out in their states.

In Kentucky today, sex offenders won a lawsuit after a judge ruled that residency restrictions are nothing more than a "political placebo." link.

It's good that the impracticality of monitoring people who had nothing to do with a violent crime against a child is becoming more apparent. But the destruction of families such as those in the Duke Rape Case is shattering to a young person, even when justice is finally served which is extremely rare.

Most people who read my column don’t know any actual child molesters. The snatch-and-run type is just a big bogeyman scare tactic that Republican politicians have dreamed up for the most part. About 50 children per year are actually killed by a severely mentally ill child molester according to statistics from the Bureau of Justice. About one child per state, yet such laws are merely vengeance on the mentally ill and do nothing to prevent the mental illness, costing billions and taking away from other programs which really do benefit ALL children.

More than 93% of child molestation cases that are actually real and not the result of a nasty divorce or child custody dispute occur within the circle of family and friends. About half the “child molesters” are under the age of 18 years old which means that kids are being destroyed for life, a counter-productive practice that is more mean-spirited as mistakes than the mistakes they may have or may not have made.

In California, we don’t have tiers, so the minor violations such as urinating in public, mooning, and indecent exposure are lumped into the same category and child murder. It’s ridiculous and it’s a huge lie told by people who were elected to office to serve the interests of law enforcement labor unions and that who ugly-machine bureaucracy.

Unlike another other junior prison reformer who has taken dirty money to promote and lobby for the pornography industry, as a mother and grandmother I would never take one dime to that kind of sleazy work. I believe that exposure to pornography at a young age worsens the problems. Next year, 2008 marks my 40th year as a California journalist and while I do truly love the First Amendment, I would never take tainted money to promote pornography.

What I am standing up for here is the Constitutional rights of mostly young men (some women) who are being destroyed for life by a political party that pretends to want to limit government and build families. What hypocrites! There are more than one million women and children connected to a “sex offender” in California alone who are on the verge of having to live under a bridge. We have little or no justice in our state with the prison guard’s union buying all the legislative votes and putting them into office. I am here for those women and children who are at risk of being forced to live under a bridge or having their family members attacked over false and/or ridiculous allegations.

Until injustice knocks on your own door, it probably isn't real that a minor act can destroy your son or daughter for life. But the goal of the Republican politicians is to keep these prisons stocked with fresh humans by any means possible. All it takes to be swept off for life and marked with the Scarlet Letter is an accusation. There need not be any evidence, DNA, witness or anything solid.

We even have sentences being extended in prison because the mentally ill masturbate in their cells. No kidding, the district attorneys in California are prosecuting mentally ill prisoners and there is a CDC rules change hearing coming up on May 7 to impose even harsher rules that mentally ill people who should be in hospitals, not prisons, won’t be able to follow.

I don’t want to get too far off topic in this particular column, what I am asking everyone to do to help prompt an investigation into SORNA, a harsh, ridiculous, deceitful “interim rule” is write to National Level Journalists at the Washington Post, New York Times, so they can see that what Gonzales is bragging about is nothing that any American should be proud of doing.

Expanding government and destroying more families for life when retributive justice does nothing to protect children. These are certainly not the Republicans of my father's day. Who are these people in power over us anyway and why the heck are we allowing them to be there?

Below is a sample letter that I’ve drafted for you. Please word it in your own language and send it today in a large red, white and blue envelope. Of course nobody is going to vote on this because Gonzales has the total power to pass something this horrible all on his own, even though he is thoroughly disgraced.

But we need to mark the record that some patriots cared about justice and objected to SORNA and the hatemongering that it promotes.

Besides the letter to Washington D.C., please reach out to the journalists who have courage to call out wrongs. My educated guess is that we certainly aren’t going to find courage for this first demand for an investigation into SORNA in a politician. It is very good news that politicians of both parties have scorned Gonzales, now he can know what that feels like although his crimes in perverting justice are much worse than some of the other "perversions" he’s persecuting to please the President and members of his own party.

It is very good news that CNN reports that the Vermont Senate has called for the Impeachment of Bush and Cheney. It would be a good idea to stop all critical legislation since we do not have trustworthy leaders running the country, and we can start with SORNA which appears to be an end run around the regular process of deciding something so important.

Here’s the letter which I drafted on the run, there are so many stupid bills coming at us that we don’t which hole in the dam to plug first and so many people not helping out there who should be as their liberty goes up in smoke. Our UNION people are posting and writing but when we are protesting an issue on the national level, it takes tens of thousands of people participating to be noticed. On the State level it takes a few thousand. There is a big difference. So pitch in, all women and children should matter and nobody should be banished from society because they’re mentally ill. This destruction of families must stop now.

We could all use a lot more healing and restorative justice and bigger emphasis on prevention to put an end to this witch hunt mentality meant to scare voters into building the bureaucracy. Don’t fall for it and fight back with your pen and your vote. If you subscribe to my daily newsletter and live in California, you are already learning to become a real activist for change instead of just a complainer. An eighth grader can stand up for their liberty if they can write seven sentences, and so can you!

The entire call to action is posted here.

Begin Call to Action

You are objecting to an interim rule created by the now disgraced US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The rule if passed into permanent law will affect every sex offender in the United States and the one million women and children in California connected to them.

Please send your letter via priority mail today or tomorrow in a red, white, blue envelope so we feel like a force on the receiving end. The cut off date is April 30, 2007. Please also post comments to national level journalists who are currently missing this important change in the law done by a criminal trying to save himself - Gonzales. A sample letter for you to post online to journalists follows the sample letter that goes to David Karp, Senior Counsel. Power of numbers is the only prayer we have of being heard. Just do YOUR share.

David J. Karp, Senior Counsel,
Office of Legal Policy,
Room 4509,
Main Justice Building, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20530.

To ensure proper handling, please reference OAG Docket No. 117 on your correspondence.

You may view an electronic version of this interim rule at Regulations.gov. You may also comment via the Internet to the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy (OLP) by e-mail to: olpregs@usdoj.gov or by using the Regulations.gov comment form for this regulation. When submitting comments electronically you must include OAG Docket No. 117 in the subject box.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Rogers, Director, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking; Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, 202 514-4689.

David J. Karp, Senior Counsel
Office of Legal Policy, Room 4509
Main Justice Building
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20530.

Re: OAG Docket No. 117

Dear Senior Counsel Karp:

Please allow me to voice my grave concern and opposition for the Interim Rule issued as a result of the Adam Walsh Act (AWA) and SORNA by Attorney General Gonzales. This law will allow double jeopardy which is legal only because federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction are separate. A person can now be punished by both the federal; and state government for the same violation of registration. Every state has a registry in place and this is certainly a duplicate effort and an excessively expensive and unnecessary law.

A great many people who have moved on with their lives and living law abiding and productive lives will now be re-exposed with the retroactive clause of SORNA. This is tantamount to the Salem witch hunts only now it is the families of sex offenders who will brought down with this draconian and vindictive law. This is cruel and unusual punishment, not public safety as SORNA will show places of employment in the Federal Registry which will be an open invitation to the fear and hate mongers to protest their places of work and/or physically attack them.

Posting places of employment in a federal database will stand in the way of any sex offender in California (and the nation) from being able to earn a living, no matter how minor their crime. This is completely counterproductive to the goal of reintegrating ex-felons back into society as self supporting, productive citizens. The Attorney General has said that SORNA's applicability will be to "virtually the entire existing sex offender population". Clearly the intent is cover "virtually" everyone, but there is no mention about whether Congress specifically limits what he can do. Why was this left out?

Please consider the effect this will have on the one million women and children attached to a sex offender when they cannot earn a living. Current laws have forced a group of people to live under a bridge in Florida. This is an excellent example of how this law will further affect the offenders and their families. They are unable to work and support their families or themselves The one time sex offender is lumped together with the violent sexual predator. In California, there are already laws in effect to handle the truly high risk offender and considering all sex offenders one and the same is simply not right or just.

The tiny fraction of a percentage of sex offenders who are guilty of raping and/or murdering a child are mentally ill and they belong in places of healing. They are the people who need to be removed from society for the purpose of public safety, but even this should be done in a much more healing manner, as they are most often severely mentally ill.

More than 90% of sex crimes involving a child occur within families. No registration, residency restriction or monitoring system will stop these crimes. This law is targeting an entire group of people and only a fraction of the group would possibly be stopped from a crime. We are so scared that those people who have been convicted of sex offense will re-offend, but look at the statistics.

The Department of Justice states that the average rate of recidivism is 5%, one the lowest rates among all felonies. It is an invented lie that has been perpetrated to the public that sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated and that they have a high rate of recidivism. This is simply not true. Our conservative leaders are constantly preaching about building the family and knocking the liberals for not having stricter morals, but laws such as this are destroying families over mental illness. It's barbaric, opportunistic and political grandstanding at its worst.

SORNA can be passed as Federal Interim Rule because Congress empowered Attorney General Gonzales, whose character is now being assassinated to do so. All of his initiatives should simply be cancelled. He has proven not to be trustworthy and everything he has touched is now tainted, including SORNA. He most likely wrote this rule anticipating he would need the support of fellow Republicans over the firings of the Attorneys. How can it be a good rule when Conservatives are so hell bent to over punish the severely mentally ill in order to build political careers and Gonzales so desperately needs their support. The fact that SORNA touches so many millions of lives in a destructive manner makes it as much, if not more important than the other probes.

In addition, the Attorney General fails to point out anything relative to Sec. 117 (Duty to Notify Sex Offenders of Registration Requirements and to Register) which places a requirement on him (and his office). Notification is a basic tenet of due process, is it not? Why was this left out of the Interim Rule? This is an ill conceived, poorly thought out Rule and I ask that it be struck down before we allow the invented hysteria that has pervaded our country continue to destroy families. A child is 40 times more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than a sex offender. Why are these people being ostracized, forced to live in exile and banishment, on the streets of our FREE country? This is all too reminiscent of the nightmare of Nazi Germany. That is a frightening state of affairs for our country. SORNA should be discarded immediately

Rev. B. Cayenne Bird

UNION

Make your letter express your view and the impact on your own life or that of people whom you love, do not simply copy my letter word for word. Where's the focus on prevention and healing of the mentally ill? There are many issues not mentioned here. Please copy me on what you wrote

Please mail in a red, white and blue priority mail envelope by Tuesday night so we feel like an army because we all mailed within 48 hours of one another. Get your family members to write. Thank you for fighting for your liberty by standing up for yourself and others.

Here’s some photos of but a few of our past campaigns over the last decade. The page is being updated but you can see the thousands of hours our UNION members have invested fighting for everyone’s rights. Imagine if the 3 million people connected to a prisoner in California all voted. Better yet, imagine if they brought 20 other people to vote. We’d have none of our current problems.

If you’d like to subscribe to my daily newsletter and learn how, when, where to fight back focused on a few California campaigns at a time, please sign up here. Most of the news you see out there was written by someone who reads the UNION Daily interactive newsletter.

1union1.com

Rev. B. Cayenne Bird
UNION
P.O. Box 340371
Sacramento, Ca. 95834
http://www.1union1.com

Senate passes version of Jessica's Law

View the article here

Legalized murder. I do not believe in the death penalty for anyone, regardless of their crime. Murder is murder.

04/24/2007

AUSTIN
— The Texas Senate on Tuesday passed its version of "Jessica's Law," a get-tough measure on sexual predators that includes a possible death penalty for those who are twice convicted of raping children under 14.

"I can think of no more solemn duty than the protection of our most innocent and vulnerable citizens," said Sen. Bob Deuell, the Greenville Republican who sponsored the measure.

The bill creates new categories of sexually violent offenses against children under 14, breaking out new categories for crimes committed involving kidnapping, date rape drugs, deadly weapons and cause serious bodily injury. Such crimes, or any aggravated sexual assault on a child under 6, automatically carry a minimum sentence of 25 years in prison.

A second offense carries life in prison or the death penalty.

The bill also enhances punishments for most sex crimes against children and extends the statute of limitations for prosecution.

"We want to deter people. We don't want victims. But if a crime happens, we want to give our prosecutors the tools to make convictions," Deuell said.
- When will people ever realize no matter how tough on crime, all the zero tolerance, all the registries in the world will not prevent a murderer from murdering, a thief from stealing, a dealer from dealing, a user from using, a rapist from raping....accusations on any sex crime, child abuse, or domestic violence will literally nail your butt to the wall! No DNA has to be present, No violence has to be present..... HEARSAY ALONE IS LITERALLY NAILING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE WALL BECAUSE THESE LAWS ARE BIASED.

The bill is named Jessica's Law after Jessica Lunsford, a Florida girl who was abducted and killed. More than a dozen states have passed versions of Jessica's Law to crack down on sex offenders, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry deemed passage of a child sex offender bill a legislative emergency.

Texas' version would make it the sixth state to allow some child sex offenders to be sentenced to death.

Critics have questioned whether the death penalty is constitutional in cases where the victim does not die. In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the death penalty in a Georgia rape case. Louisiana has one inmate on death row in a child sex crime, but the case is still subject to appeals in state and federal courts.

Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, the only dissenter in the 30-1 vote, questioned whether the state should expand death row at a time when post-conviction DNA testing has exonerated people who went to prison for crimes they did not commit.

Just two weeks ago, the Senate hosted two men who served 27 years in prison for sexual assault but were later cleared by DNA testing.

"All of us have to make tough choices, but at some point we have to decide where do we draw the line on something that's politically right but morally wrong," Ellis said. "I'm for the death penalty, but I think it would be nice if we had a system where we got the right one."

The Texas House passed a different version of Jessica's Law last month that also includes the death penalty in some child sex cases.

The House bill allows broader use of the death penalty for two convictions of a newly classified crime, "continuous sexual abuse of a young child," defined as more than one sex act committed against a victim younger than 14 over a period of 30 days or more.

The Senate bill creates the same crime but would carry a sentence of up to life in prison after a second offense.

Victim advocates have warned that the death penalty could do more harm than good if they lead perpetrators to kill victims who may be the only witness to the crime.

They also warn that long minimum sentences could make it harder for prosecutors to get victims to cooperate if the perpetrator is a family member. Most sex crimes against children are committed by family members or friends, victim advocates say.

A statement issued by the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault said the longer sentences are unlikely to serve as a deterrent against sex crimes.

"In reality, sex offenders are some of the most manipulative, intelligent and predatory of all violent criminals. Harsher punishments will not prevent Texas children, men or women from falling victim to sexual violence," the group said, adding that lawmakers should spend more money on victims' services. "The Legislature's work on sexual violence is not complete."

Sheriff sued for demanding that sex offender move

View the article here

04/24/2007

Habersham County Sheriff DeRay Fincher will be in court today, April 24, to face a challenge from a convicted sex offender he ordered to move.

Today's hearing is based on documents recorded April 12 in Habersham County Superior Court by attorney Bill Oliver on behalf of offender James E. Craig. It is scheduled to be heard by Chief Judge Ernest H. "Bucky" Woods III.

In enforcing Georgia law 42-1-15(a), which prohibits a convicted sex offender from living within 1,000 feet of a daycare facility, Fincher's office found by GPS that Craig, 42, lives too close to Little Blessings Academy, a nearby daycare facility.

On April 11, Woods issued a temporary order stating that Fincher is temporarily enjoined from proceeding against Craig in enforcement of provisions of the law that restricts him from living within 1,000 feet of a daycare facility.

"The court finds that [Craig] raises legitimate questions regarding the applicability of the statute," the order states. "Therefore, the status quo should be maintained until the issues can be heard or until there is an applicable ruling by Federal Judge Clarence Cooper of the Northern District of Georgia, before whom this court understands there to be a related matter."

"I'm enforcing the law as it applies," Fincher said Monday. "He's less than 500 feet from the daycare center and the law says he has to be at least 1,000. It's not even close. He's more than 500 feet off."

But Oliver asserts that sex offender registration laws did not exist in Georgia at the time Craig was sentenced and that Craig's "conviction" under a general court martial is not such a conviction as defined under the state law relating to sex offenders.

In court martial proceedings at Fort Richardson, Alaska, in 1998, Craig was found guilty of two counts of committing indecent acts upon a female under the age on 16; of committing an indecent act upon a male under the age of 16; and obstruction of justice on or between Aug. 8, 1996, and Sept. 15, 1996, court documents contained in the suit against Fincher show.

Craig was confined for eight years, and was released from the service with a dishonorable discharge, the document states.

Suspected Arsonist Sentenced Today

View the article here

Good, another vigilante off the streets.

04/24/2007

36-year-old Mastic resident Donald Keegan was sentenced this morning in Riverhead for plotting to burn a residence that housed registered sex offenders. Judge Barbara Kahn sentenced Keegan to seven years imprisonment for pleading guilty to attempted arson in the second degree as well as three to nine years in prison for second degree conspiracy. Keegan will also get five years post release supervision on the attempted arson charge.

Keegan was a Suffolk county employee and a part-time landscaper who lived less than a mile from the residence he planned to burn down. An undercover investigation by the district attorney’s office led to Keegan’s arrest in September. Detectives recorded Keegan’s plans to burn the residence on surveillance cameras. Keegan had paint thinner and a road flare in the front seat of his Mustang when detectives arrested him. A pit was found in Keegan’s home where tests were run to see how quick paint thinner burns.

The sex-offender home at 115 Eleanor Avenue had risk-level three sex offenders, which, according to Megan’s Law, are the most likely to repeat their offenses. Residents and community leaders protested the residence, which was near a school. After Keegan’s arrest, state officials ordered the eviction of the residents. Despite her outrage at the location of the residence, Parents for Megan’s Law founder Laura Ahearn did not approve of Keegan’s plans. “It’s completely unacceptable what Keegan did,” she previously told the Long Island Press, adding that he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Where Victims' Rights Go Wrong

View the article here

04/23/2007

Since 1981, the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime has dedicated a week in April to recognizing crime victims' rights. The week -- this year's observance began yesterday -- is usually marked by rallies, candlelight vigils and other activities intended to promote victims' rights and to honor crime victims and those who work on their behalf.

Victims deserve the recognition that this week provides, and they deserve sympathy and compensation for their losses. But I am increasingly concerned about what I believe they do not deserve, which is the right to serve as de facto prosecutors, a practice that is quietly insinuating itself into the legal system.

Our desire to increase victims' rights is closely related to our national obsession with being "tough on crime." While this mantra makes for good political rhetoric, it often leads to illogical and irrational criminal justice policies. Being "tough on crime" has led to harsh mandatory minimum sentences in federal drug cases that have disproportionately punished minorities. It has resulted in first-time offenders serving life sentences even though their crimes involved no weapon and resulted in no physical injuries; in 6-year-olds being arrested for tantrums at school; and, worst of all, in innocent people on death row.

Courts have increasingly become more cognizant of the rights of victims. In 1996, restitution became mandatory for a variety of federal crimes. In 2002, Congress provided the victims of violent crimes and sexual abuse the right to speak at a defendant's sentencing, even though courts already had latitude in any kind of case to permit victims to speak at sentencing or to receive information from victims before sentences were imposed. And last year, the issue reached the Supreme Court in a murder case in which the victim's supporters had attended the trial wearing buttons that displayed a picture of the victim (the court avoided addressing whether such conduct is prejudicial).

The latest manifestation of our "tough on crime" policy comes in the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which will implement the 2004 Crime Victims' Rights Act. One U.S. district judge ruled that the statute renders victims "independent participant[s] in the proceedings" and "commands that victims should be treated equally with the defendant, defense counsel, and the prosecutor."

Under the act, victims have the right to be heard in court on questions of bond, plea agreements and sentencing, and they have the right to confer with prosecutors about a case. If victims are unhappy with how a prosecutor or trial court has treated them, they are permitted to seek relief in the U.S. Court of Appeals, and the appellate court must rule on their application within 72 hours (an unprecedented remedy).

Thus, under the act, victims at a minimum become a member of the prosecution team and, indeed, have significant leverage over the professional prosecutors. The president and many in Congress support an amendment for crime victims' rights that would incorporate several of these points into the Constitution.

While we may support the notion that victims' rights should be at least as strong as those of defendants, within the context of the criminal justice system these rights are mutually exclusive. Any rights provided to the victim must come at the expense of the rights provided to a defendant. Indeed, providing the victim with a role in the prosecution assumes a crime has been committed, despite the bedrock constitutional proposition that the accused is presumed innocent.

When we turn victims into members of the prosecution team, we distort a process, so carefully constructed more than 200 years ago, that eschewed vigilante justice or prosecution for personal ends in favor of prosecution by the sovereign with significant rights afforded to the accused. We expect prosecutors to make decisions about whom to prosecute and what types of sentences to seek based on myriad considerations, including, but far from limited to, the interests of victims. Where victims play a controlling role in the prosecution, the consideration of those factors no longer focuses on what is best for society but rather on what victims need or want as "justice."

I sympathize with individuals victimized by criminals. I understand their anger, outrage and desire for vengeance, particularly when faced with the kind of malevolence displayed last week at Virginia Tech. Securing assistance and compensation for victims is an unquestionable priority, and we need to promote healing to the greatest extent possible.

But the criminal justice system cannot focus on the victim; rather, it must follow its rich tradition of protecting society as a whole, ensuring that justice is achieved in accordance with the Constitution. As we appropriately focus on improving the plight of crime victims this week, let's not forget about the plight of the falsely accused or of the criminal justice system itself.

Sex Offenders Leaving Iowa

View the article here

Another reason the registries are bloated and contain people who are not necessarily still living there. They move from state to state and are left on the state registry of the state they left, thus it makes the registries bloated, because they get paid for the number of people on it.

04/24/2007

The number of sex offenders packing up and leaving Iowa has nearly doubled in the last four years. One reason is the state's 2,000 foot residency law. It prohibits offenders convicted of sex crimes with a child from living near schools or day cares.

"I've been sleeping out at the rest stop for a year and a half, sleeping in a tent, sleeping in the bathroom, sleeping in my car," says Ben Groves. Ten years ago, when he was in high school, Groves had a sexual relationship with an underaged girl. He served three years in prison and has been listed on Iowa's sex offender registry ever since.

After moving his wife and five kids from place to place, Groves says his only option is to leave Iowa. He's packed and ready to move to Illinois, where the residency law is only 500 feet from a school or day care. His family will stay here for the time being.

Officials with the Iowa Department of Public Safety says sex offenders who move out of state are still required to register with them. Twenty seven percent or about 1750 sex offenders currently live outside of Iowa.
- So now, you have to register in Iowa and the new state you live in, each year or more. Thus wasting tons on money driving from state to state. What if you've moved to 10 different states, do you have to drive back to all 10 each year or more than once per year? This is insane. Just more reason to show they try to get you to violate the law.

Bill that trapped teen is misused

View the article here

This article is not from me, which it looks like it is, but is not.

04/23/2007

In the mid-1990s, as a then-state representative, I introduced a bill designed to increase punishment for the most horrendous of acts against children. It was entitled The Child Protection Act of 1995.

Despite being in the Republican minority, I was close friends with the then-governor, speaker and lieutenant governor, all of whom were Democrats. My bill sailed out of the House and reached the state Senate.

In the Senate the bill hit a snag. The chairperson of the committee to which the bill was assigned wanted a bill to raise Georgia's age of consent from 14 to 16 years of age. Although I am not assigning blame, the bill became victim of the ultimate legislative "Catch 22," in which one bill couldn't pass without the other.

When the bill came to the House floor for final approval, many bright minds such as then-state Rep. Roy Barnes and former Speaker Tom Murphy expressed concerns that young people, much like in the current case of Genarlow Wison, might be sentenced to the harsh 10-year prison term originally intended for blatant and extreme cruelty and abuse of children. Ultimately, most members came to believe that the language was vague enough to give leeway and that no prosecutor would ever so abuse the statute and its true legislative intent.

Years after I left the legislature, I learned certain prosecutors were using the bill as a "catchall" to win cases in which an older teen had consensual sex with an underaged teen. The legislature addressed that problem a few years ago, but the bill was not retroactive for cases like Wilson's.

In Wilson's case, the jury determined he was not guilty of rape. Instead, the underage sex combined with the involvement of oral sex triggered the more stringent portion of the legislation. Sadly, legislators advocating that no relief be given to Wilson and others showed their colleagues an uncensored version of a tape Wilson and his friends made of the "party" at which the sexual encounter occurred. Distasteful and sickening? I would imagine so for those who watched. Irrelevant? Yes. Wilson was cleared of rape by the jury.

Ironically, former Lt. Gov. Pierre Howard, who defeated me in the 1990 general election, joined me in an effort to convince legislators that it was not our intent to send young people to jail for 10 years.

We both feared that many of those prosecuted and convicted under the law often come from disadvantaged or minority homes where the family unit and its guidance is sometimes not available to young men, much less the resources of a strong legal defense.

Apparently there remains some opportunity to review Wilson's case through the judicial process. I want to make it clear that this column is not designed to place unfair pressure on officials who might be involved. I trust they will do what is right in the end.

But for years now, I have tried every way in the world to point out that the ultimate determining factor in applying legislation is the legislative intent. And the Wilson case result was not our intent.

Former state Rep. Matt Towery of Atlanta is a syndicated columnist and CEO of InsiderAdvantage, a political information and polling firm.

Critics rake inaction on offender law

View the article here

04/24/2007

Legislators need to fix a law that does more harm than good, some say.

Iowa sheriffs and prosecutors on Monday blasted lawmakers for failing to roll back a controversial and politically charged law restricting where sex offenders can live.

"They're just afraid to take action, and the people of Iowa should be ashamed," said Story County Sheriff Paul Fitzgerald. "It's absolutely politics at its worst."

A legislative subcommittee examining possible changes to the state's sex offender statutes will meet at 8 a.m. today to mull what some hope will be a compromise before the end of the legislative session.

Earlier this year, the bipartisan panel heard during a series of public meetings from a number of groups - sex offender experts, statewide law enforcement associations, prevention experts and victims - who uniformly criticized the state law banning sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools or child care centers.

Residency requirement laws, which have been passed by more than 20 states - often in the wake of high-profile child sex crimes - poll well with the public, researchers say.

But law enforcement officials and other experts counter that the restrictions offer the public a false sense of security. Iowa and other Midwestern states, they say, have found that many more offenders tend to lie about their living arrangements or cease reporting their whereabouts altogether.

Several lawmakers said Monday that they thought the Legislature ultimately would pass a measure prohibiting registered offenders from entering "safe zones" around schools and other places where children gather, as well as other law changes. But Senate Minority Leader Mary Lundby of Marion said Republicans would resist any attempt to repeal the 2,000-foot law, which went into effect in 2005. Lundby said her belief is that people do not support such a move.

"My message hasn't changed since the beginning of the session," she said. "We will support additional spending for monitoring (sex offenders) and additional assessment, but people across the aisle don't want them in their neighborhoods, period."

Lundby said Republicans do support better assessments of sex offenders, so that anyone convicted of a relatively minor crime can be pulled off the sex offender registry.

"If they are not pedophiles or people of concern to society, then get them off the list," she said.

In spite of pledges by legislators to let the public know earlier what the final legislation for sex offenders would be, several conceded Monday that Iowans might not know what legislation, if any, will pass until the body's final hours. The session is scheduled to end Friday.

"I think people are concerned about political liability," said Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal of Council Bluffs. While legislators in both parties worked hard this year to come up with a measure that "focuses the administrative resources of the state on things that will actually enhance public safety," Gronstal said, "some people are primarily interested in pursuing a political advantage."

Corwin Ritchie, executive director of the Iowa County Attorneys Association, said he was "astonished" that a repeal had been dubbed by some as out of the question.

"There were about five weeks of testimony presented by knowledgeable Iowa people who work with sex offender issues," he said of the subcommittee's work. "There was not one, not one shred of evidence presented that the residency law provides safety for children. In fact, there was a significant amount of evidence presented that the law might actually decrease child safety. Even the clear evidence that enforcement of the law is wasting valuable law enforcement resources has had no effect."

Fitzgerald and other sheriffs said they, too, were upset that legislators might fail to act after some of Iowa's largest law enforcement and prevention groups, as well as 64 counties and cities, lined up in support of a repeal. Groups even pledged to stand with lawmakers at election time to confront any political backlash, he said.

"But by refusing to take a stand, it almost makes them looks like they're coddling sex offenders," Fitzgerald charged.

Clay County Sheriff Randy Krukow, president of the Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association, said he hoped "common sense would prevail" by the end of the legislative session.
- Common sense does not exist when it comes to politics.

Attorney nabbed in sting

View the article here

Seems like an attorney would be smart enough to not do this. Guess not!

04/24/2007 Man arrested on online solicitation of minor charge

An attorney for the U.S. Department of Agriculture was arrested in Quanah last week on charges of online solicitation of a minor.

The Texas Department of Public Safety revealed that David Kurt Warner was arrested April 17 by the Texas Rangers, Hardeman County Sheriff's Office and the DPS Motor Vehicle Theft Service. Investigators allege that Warner had traveled to Quanah from the Dallas area expecting to meet a 15-year-old female.

Trooper Daniel Hawthorne, DPS spokesman in Childress, said the operation was spurred by members of a volunteer group called "Perverted Justice." The group helps law enforcement agencies catch online predators and is featured on NBC's "Dateline: To Catch a Predator" show.

"This is not one of the big ones where 'Dateline' was involved," Hawthorne said.

Warner is a resident of Carrollton, Texas, according to a news release. Hawthorne said the group had begun having online conversations with Warner a few weeks ago, and contacted the Texas Rangers. Warner was arrested April 17 in a "residential setting" in Quanah, according to the release.

Warner was booked into the Hardeman County Jail and bond was set at $100,000. Conviction of online solicitation of a minor is a third degree felony.

MT - Lawmakers at impasse on sex offender bill

View the article here

04/21/2007

HELENA - Montana's version of "Jessica's Law," which would toughen penalties for some sexual predators, stalled in a conference committee Friday after lawmakers disagreed on whether to include those convicted of incest.

State senators argued the bill's 25-year, mandatory minimum prison sentences were meant for only the most dangerous sex offenders. Because the vast majority of such crimes are committed by relatives, they said including incest would cast too wide a net and subject less dangerous criminals to the harsher penalties.

House members said incest should be included because it goes to the very heart of sex crimes.

"There is nothing more insidious than twisting a care giving, family relationship into an opportunity to take advantage of a kid," said House Minority Leader John Parker, D-Great Falls.

The panel continued negotiations until Monday after a lengthy and sometimes contentious hearing. Rep. John Sinrud, R-Bozeman, stormed out at one point and Rep. Penny Morgan, R-Billings, revealed she had been sexually abused by an uncle.

"What the hell kind of conference committee is this?" Sen. Gary Perry, R-Manhattan, asked during a break after Sinrud walked out over testimony about sex offender treatment.

Revising Montana's sex offender laws has been an important issue this legislative session. Both chambers crafted versions of "Jessica's Law," named for a 9-year-old Florida girl who was kidnapped, raped and murdered in 2005. Perry's Senate bill _ which is being debated by the committee was touted as a narrowly focused bill that emphasized treatment and only targeted the state's worst sex offenders.

The House version, sponsored by Sinrud, was supported by Jessica's father, Mark Lunsford, and placed more emphasis on stricter penalties.

Much of Friday's hearing centered on whether to fund treatment for the most dangerous sex offenders. Sinrud said such treatment would be useless.

"I don't believe these people can be treated for anything," he said.

Sinrud added the state's limited sex offender treatment budget would be better spent on less dangerous offenders who could change their behavior.

Perry and Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, said they would be doing the community a disservice by paroling a sex offender without treatment.

Committee members eventually agreed to exempt sex offenders serving life sentences without the possibility without parole from treatment.

The panel also changed the bill to allow judges to make exceptions to the mandatory minimum sentences in certain cases.

The bill is Senate Bill 547.

Wife of sex offender hounded from estate after neighbours discover husband’s past

View the article here

04/23/2007

THE wife of a sex offender from Whitehaven has been hounded out of her home after neighbours discovered her husband’s past.

Keith Hinde’s wife was threatened by residents near their home in Grammerscroft, Millom, after they found out Hinde’s background.

It was even alleged that during his stay on the estate Hinde had babysat for local children whose parents had no idea that he was on the sex offenders’ register.

Sally Atkinson, who lives two doors away, said: “We had no idea about his past when they first arrived. Everyone on the estate was friendly towards them – he even babysat for local families. But then we learned of his past.”

In January this year Hinde was jailed for 18 months and banned from ever having anything to do with children after being found guilty of abusing a woman with learning difficulties. After the case police had to move his family from Whitehaven to a safe house in Millom to avoid ‘hate’ repercussions.

A judge at Carlisle Crown Court said at the time of his conviction he was “extremely concerned” that, while 43-year-old Keith Hinde had no previous convictions for sex crimes, he had been criticized in official reports for “inappropriate behavior with children”.

The court heard that in 2001 he was found not guilty of gross indecency with a boy.

As a result Hinde was banned indefinitely from having unsupervised access to anyone under 18, banned from living in any house with young people in it and banned from working with children.

He was also ordered to register with the police as a sex offender for 10 years.

Acting Detective Inspector Cliff Walker said: “Cumbria Constabulary are fully aware of Keith Hinde’s offending history and status. On his release from prison he will be subject of the appropriate monitoring processes in accordance with current legislation.

“We are aware of recent issues surrounding the housing of an individual in the Millom area, this individual has now been relocated due to some community tension.

“Cumbria Constabulary and Probation Service work with other agencies to put in place measures to protect the public when offenders are housed in any community by ensuring such offenders are identified and managed. Public protection is the absolute priority.”

DI Walker said that it was the police and other agencies that decided to move Mrs Hinde from her home and that she had not asked to be moved.

Senin, 23 April 2007

Teen sent to DYS for rape

View the article here

This is insane in my opinion! Kids do this!

04/23/2007

NEWARK — While an independent psychological evaluation concluded a 13-year-old who raped a 4-year-old girl is amenable to rehabilitation in the community, a magistrate placed him with the Department of Youth Services for at least a year.

The teenage boy was adjudicated delinquent of felony rape and gross sexual imposition by Magistrate Christopher Strefelt in November. Since then, the boy has spent more than 40 days in the multi-county juvenile detention facility.

The teen was found guilty in Licking County Juvenile Court of the first- and third-degree felonies involving incidents with a 4-year-old girl that occurred between June 21 and July 15.

But before sentencing him, Strefelt ordered the boy to undergo a sex offender assessment. The teen’s family also paid for an independent evaluation to explore alternate placement to Ohio Department of Youth Services.

After Columbus psychologist William Friday testified his evaluation concluded the teen could most likely be rehabilitated in the community, Strefelt sentenced the teen to a minimum of one year of incarceration on the rape count and a six-month minimum term on the gross sexual imposition charge.

The evaluation completed by Friday included three sessions with the teen and interviews with numerous adults who have contact with him.

“I believe he is able to be treated within the community,” Friday testified. “He’s reasonably safe in the community, and I’m reasonably sure he wouldn’t re-offend.”

He said the 27 primary issues for someone convicted of sexual abuse were evaluated and the teen didn’t show signs of re-offending.

Eric Yavitch, the boy’s attorney, also argued the teen would pose minimum risks if counseled in the community.

Even though Strefelt found the teen guilty, he has not yet admitted his actions.

The mother of the victim said she just wants the teen to admit what he did and get help.

The teen is appealing Strefelt’s findings. He did not speak on his own behalf before being sentenced.

The teen was ordered not to have contact with the victim or her family.

Judge Robert Hoover said previously this type of mental evaluation is ordered in almost all of the juvenile cases involving sex offenses.

Where should sex offenders live?

View the article here

04/23/2007

Tampa, Florida - Judy Cornett's says her son was molested, and she wants a tighter leash on sex offenders. Following the death of Jessica Lunsford and the arrest of John Couey several local governments increased the barriers where sexual predators can be and live. Cornett says the child molesters and the pedophiles need to have as many restrictions as possible to save our children.

However, the State has a different view. The Secretary of the Department of Corrections says sexual predators have right to live somewhere. He adds while local governments are trying to protect the most vulnerable people by adding further restrictions where the sexual predators live, it actually makes it harder to keep track of them.

The Regional Director of the Department of Corrections, Cliff Rowan says no one is being soft on them, but they have to stay somewhere otherwise they will disappear.

Rowan says it is already happening. Just look at the Department of Corrections sexual predator web site and see how many are listed as absconded, meaning no one knows where they are.

And then there is the situation in South Florida where this probation officer is checking sexual offenders who are forced to live under a bridge because restrictions makes it impossible for them to live anywhere. State Senator Dave Aronberg says it doesn't make sense. Aronberg they are desperate, they are angry and they hang out with other sexual predators and feed on each others anger. Aronberg says he doesn't see how this helps public safety.

And as things get worse expect more of them to disappear. But as sexual predators continue to prey on children and continue to be arrested as they were in a Polk county sting earlier this month, victims and their parents continue to push for more restrictions.

Collier deputy fired after probe reveals sexual images on his Web site

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

04/19/2007

For about seven years Collier County sheriff’s Deputy David E. Rich, a motorcycle enthusiast, maintained a Web site chronicling his and his wife’s experiences at outdoor motorcycle events.

The Web site, which he said was meant only to be viewed by friends but had more than 50,000 hits, contained an online message board and photos of people having a good time at the events.

But in December, Rich, 38, was fired after an internal investigation revealed the Web site not only contained photos of people having innocent fun, but also of nude women and women performing oral sex. Also, during a separate investigation stemming from a failed polygraph test, Rich admitted to having witnessed online pornography involving minors, authorities said.

Rich, who is now employed with the private investigation firm Ortino Investigations, described the Web site as a “hobby-type fun thing,” and said the photos of women engaging in oral sex were posted inadvertently or were overlooked, a Sheriff’s Office report shows. And he said in an appeal that polygraph tests are extremely subjective and claimed the examiners who administered the test had a conflict of interest.

The investigation into Rich’s Web site began in July when the Sheriff’s Office received an e-mail from someone identified only as “Deputy Dan” who directed authorities to Rich’s site.

Is this the type of person who you employ?” the letter writer asked.

When investigators opened the site they saw a photograph of a Florida motorcycle license plate licensed to Rich. The site also had a link to a page containing a collection of thousands of photographs, the investigation revealed.

Several of the photographs depicted nudity and oral sex. Others showed Rich with women in various stages of dress, from exposing their breasts to nude, the report said.

“I will volunteer and say that there’s, looking at that, there’s some pictures I did not realize that were not that, that really should not have been on this site,” Rich told investigators.

Rich told investigators that he placed warnings on the site to indicate the images were only appropriate for adults, designed the site to trigger parental software and used software to prevent search engines from pointing to his site, authorities said.

When investigators asked if he thought the site was appropriate for a member of the Sheriff’s Office, Rich replied, “Wouldn’t it be under the First Amendment protection?”

He told investigators he had the site for seven years.

“I think it’s OK,” he said.

Rich told investigators he loved his job, was proud of working at the Sheriff’s Office, and intended to work there for 25 years, the investigation revealed.

“I’m willing to work with whatever needs to be done to make it acceptable,” Rich said of the Web site.

While the investigation into the Web site was under way, a separate investigation was being conducted into Rich’s inability to pass a polygraph examination question regarding viewing underage pornographic material on the Internet.

In March 2005, Rich, who worked in the jail, took a polygraph examination as part of a request to move to road patrol. The examiner, Cpl. Scott Walters, asked Rich if he had ever viewed or been in possession of any types of child pornography since his hire date on August 19, 2003.

“Not intentionally,” Rich said.

Rich told investigators that he would go online looking for movies and clips he could watch with his wife.

“There’s a lot of things I’ll download, just doesn’t do anything for me, so I trash it, you know. Put it in the delete file and erase,” Rich said during an interview.

At one point Rich told investigators that he clicked on a video called “My Teenie Wife,” that may have indicated it contained images of a 15-year-old, according to the investigation.

“I was downloading ‘My Teen Wife.’ I think I trashed it. I think I trashed the whole thing,” Rich said during his first examination.

When the examiner asked if he actually opened the video, Rich said he didn’t remember.

“I tend to think no. I have no memory of the content,” Rich said. “I remember seeing one clip of a girl and a boy, I should say male and female. ... If the title said 15, it would have been a curiosity thing.”

Rich also told investigators he viewed an online movie called “My Girlfriend and I,” featuring two “high school”-age girls engaged in a pillow fight and kissing each other, and a video titled “Teen Prostitute Video,” where the girls appeared to be at least 18, the investigation revealed.

When asked again if he’d ever seen any pornography depicting people under 18, Rich said. “I’m sure I have. I’ll say yes.”

Determining if someone is over 18 is sometimes hard to do, Rich told investigators.

“I don’t know how old someone is because 18 years old and 17 years old is a fine line,” he said. “However, it is a legal line.”

Rich said he never intentionally sought out underage pornography, the report indicates.

“I wouldn’t want to leave an impression on someone else further down the line of people who are going to read this, to think that I’m out there searching out, physically searching, typing in the terms ‘15-year- old woman’ or ‘young wife,’ or any of those things,” Rich said.

“I’m searching with something else and that’s coming up. And like I’m trying to say apparently is that I finally said, ‘Fine, let’s see what it is,’” he said. “For me to physically take the mouse, or the touch pad on the computer, move the cursor up and click on it is obviously an intent for me to see exactly what it was after it had been brought there by other means that I was not trying to do.”

Rich failed a second polygraph with Walters and then went to Fort Lauderdale for a third polygraph with a company called Deception Control Inc. The examiner in Fort Lauderdale, Lou Criscella, said that Rich displayed “significant reactions indicative of deception,” the internal investigation said.

On December 26, Rich, who earned $49,169 a year at the jail, had his appointment withdrawn based on the totality of the two investigations, for “immoral, unlawful or improper conduct,” the Sheriff’s Office reported.

Rich was not arrested or charged with a crime.

“I will say that if the case is released to the media, and the sheriff does not have some sort of hard, concrete evidence, then there will be some suits filed against the department — his department,” Rich said in the report.

Rich appealed the decision on Jan. 9. In his appeal, Rich argued that Criscella was not an “independent examiner” because he and the first examiner, Walters, used to work together. His appeal was denied on March 23, the Sheriff’s Office reported.

In an e-mail to the Daily News on Wednesday, Rich said he did not want to be interviewed because he feared being misquoted or having his statements taken out of context. In the e-mail Rich stated the Sheriff’s Office wouldn’t accept his offer to have the agency inspect his computer, waited until after his termination to inspect his agency-issued laptop, and failed to interview any of his co-workers, friends or his wife.

“Also consider that I was, and still am, the webmaster for the Collier Deputies FOP,” Rich wrote in his e-mail. “It was well known that I was involved in attempting to unionize the CCSO, and had just been elected to the Executive Board of the Collier Deputies Lodge of the FOP.”

During the interview Rich told investigators that he had brain surgery as a child and had significant memory problems.

“I have medical evidence that I should not have been polygraphed,” Rich wrote in the e-mail. “I have a statement from a longtime polygrapher that my polygraph results could not be relied on, and also from Cpl. Scott Walter, CCSO polygrapher, that doubts the findings of my polygraphs. These are all in my file.”

Rich started working with Ortino Investigations around the time of his appeal, said Victor Ortino, who owns and manages the firm. Ortino recently announced his intention to run for Collier County sheriff in 2008.

Ortino said Rich is a “good guy” who denied viewing child pornography.

I am confident that he is not a child molester and does not view child pornography,” Ortino said.

If the Sheriff’s Office was really concerned about Rich’s behavior, the investigation would have been resolved in a much shorter period of time, Ortino said.

“If you have a person who did something illegal, you’re going to jump on that right away,” Ortino said. “Within 30 days you’re going to have that resolved.”

Birmingham officer fired after arrest in sex assault case

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

04/20/2007

A Birmingham police officer charged earlier this week with sexual assault has been fired, the department announced this evening.

North Precinct patrol officer Perry Young, 35, had resigned early on Wednesday but rescinded that decision hours later. He had been on paid administrative leave.

Young is charged with first-degree sodomy. He was arrested and jailed Sunday evening after being accused of sexually assaulting a 19-year-old woman while on duty.

The assault happened in the 300 block of Second Terrace North on April 15, police said. The victim, who was possibly being questioned by Young for an outstanding warrant, later reported the assault to Young's supervisors at the North Precinct.

Investigators said they recovered evidence from Young's patrol car and from the site where the incident reportedly happened.

Lake County deputy arrested for alleged sex with two girls

View the article here | Courtesy of BadCopNews

Yet another cop and a short news article, as usual!

04/23/2007

LAKEPORT - A Lake County sheriff's deputy is in custody tonight for allegedly having sex with two girls.

Thirty-five-year-old Derik Navarro has been arrested on suspicion of unlawful sex with a child between the ages of 14 and 15 and sodomy with a minor. Prosecutors say he faces 18 felony and two misdemeanor counts in the case.

Navarro was placed on suspension from the sheriff's department January 23rd when the allegations first surfaced, and he was fired last week.

Authorities say one girl was 14 when the alleged sexual misconduct began in May 2005, and it continued through May 2006. Details of the second case are not immediately available.

Navarro could not be reached for comment.

Ky. sex offenders win case

View the article here

Finally a judge who sees the BS for what it is, BS!! AMEN!!!

04/21/2007

Judge says new rules don't apply retroactively

COVINGTON - Eleven Kenton County residents have beaten charges that they violated Kentucky's new sex-offender law intended to prevent them from living within 1,000 feet of a playground, school or day care.

Kenton District Judge Martin Sheehan ruled Friday that the new restrictions do not apply to people convicted of their crimes before the amended law took effect last year.

"If what we seek is to protect children from sex offenders, how do we accomplish that aim by imposing a 1,000-foot residency restriction ...?" Sheehan wrote. "If the offender is still permitted to visit and linger in such areas for protracted periods, so long as he does not sleep there, what actual protection have we provided our children?

"In truth, residency restrictions appear to be little more than a political placebo, offering false comfort to pacify the public's fear of sex offenders."

Court observers said prosecutors would likely appeal. Kenton County Attorney Garry Edmondson did not return phone messages seeking comment.

"This is a ruling in the right direction," said Beth Wilson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky. "We have long argued that the new law ... does nothing to enhance community safety. It effectively banishes people from their communities."

Registered sex offenders frustrated in finding an eligible place to live have found themselves fighting it in court across the state.

A Fleming County jury recently found a registered sex offender guilty but ordered no jail time or fine, said Tom Griffiths, regional manager for Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy. In another incident, a charge was dropped against a Mason County sex offender when he agreed to move.

In reference to Sheehan's ruling, defense lawyer Don Nageleisen called the order "the most courageous judicial decision in the last 10 years." He said Sheehan followed the law even if it meant making a politically unpopular ruling.

Nageleisen, who represented one of the 11 men, challenged the misdemeanor charges against his client on several constitutional grounds.

Sheehan didn't strike down the statute. He ruled that legislators passed a punitive law after the fact - a violation of the state and federal constitutions. Prosecutors had argued that the restrictions were not further punishment, but a civil plan designed to protect children.

"The public both fears and hates sexual offenders, the political pariahs of our day," Sheehan wrote. "This prevailing public animus has resulted in the enactment of increasingly harsh measures. Our courts, the public's last line of defense for civil liberties, have been quick to join the mob, twisting and controlling prevailing case law with an eye on the ultimate goal of approving harsher and harsher laws, while simultaneously glossing over significant concerns and constitutional challenges."

Pointing out that someone could be placed on a sex offender registry for just possessing child porn, Sheehan even suggested an alternative system. He cited a plan used in Nebraska that evaluates each offender's risk of re-offending before deciding where he can live.

The judge also questioned a common belief that sex offenders are likely to exploit the children of the neighbors. The 36-page order cited numerous studies or recidivism rates of inmates.

Sheehan wrote that problems in Kentucky's law were exacerbated by the lack of a legal definition of a playground. He said Kenton County's patchwork of small cities could each strategically position a few swing sets throughout their borders to ban sex offenders from residing anywhere within their cities.

"An area within which sex offender residency is permitted today could be converted to an off-limits area tomorrow simply by the opening of a playground, school or day-care facility," Sheehan wrote, adding that the law has no grandfather clause.

"In fact, the harsh reality of a lack of legal housing available to sex offenders subject to residency restrictions is already striking home in at least one jurisdiction," Sheehan wrote.

He said less than two years after Miami enacted a 2,500-foot residency restriction, sex offenders are living under expressway overpasses because there is no other legal housing available.

Welcome to the Matrix

View the article here

This is old I know, but for some reason it just popped up in Google Reader, so I'm posting it here.

07/09/2004

Inside the Government’s Secret, Corporate-Run Mega-Database



Madeleine Baran gives us the deepest look yet inside the massive corporate-government database called Matrix, a record surveillance system civil libertarians consider a grave threat to privacy and a public hazard.


In what civil liberties advocates call the most massive database surveillance program in US history, the Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange, or Matrix, continues to compile billions of records on law-abiding citizens and receive federal funding, despite public outcry and suspicion.

A Florida-based company, Seisint, Inc., created the database shortly after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 by combining the company’s own commercial databases with law enforcement records.

Now law enforcement officials in participating states can comb the database to investigate ordinary crimes and terrorist threats. Matrix contains an unprecedented amount of information: current and past addresses and phone numbers, arrest records, real estate information, photographs of neighbors and business associates, car make, model and color, marriage and divorce records, voter registration records, hunting and fishing licenses, and more.

For example, a user could identify all brown-haired divorced male residents of Minneapolis who drive a red Toyota Camry and are registered to vote. The data can then be displayed in "social networking charts," showing connections between individuals, photo line-ups and "target maps," according to internal Seisint documents obtained by The New Standard after a Freedom of Information Act request by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). One of the documents boasts, "When enough insignificant data is gathered and analyzed…IT BECOMES SIGNIFICANT." (original emphasis)

Seisint sells database access to individual states. Sixteen states went through a pilot program, but after negative media coverage and concern from citizens, politicians, and even law enforcement officials, all but Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Ohio have decided to stop using Matrix.

The states that remain show no signs of bowing to public pressure. In Florida, law enforcement and government officials have become progressively more involved in the inner workings of Matrix. The supercomputers that hold the data are housed in Seisint’s Boca Raton offices, guarded by Florida state police. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement acts as "Security Agent" for the system, even outside the state.

The federal government also plays an active role. In January 2003, Florida Governor Jeb Bush met with Vice President Dick Cheney to demonstrate how the program could be used by law enforcement, and to request additional funding. The Department of Justice gave Seisint $4 million in grants in 2003. The Department of Homeland Security also provided $8 million to help run Matrix, and, last year, assumed "managerial oversight and control" of the database, according to the agreement between the DHS and Seisint.

Civil liberties advocates claim that the Matrix is amassing records on ordinary people that, in a worse case scenario, could be used to track "suspicious" individuals, and to round up those likely of committing a crime -- before any crime has occurred. Matrix officials dismiss these claims, arguing that the database is just a faster way to locate criminals and terrorists.

Bill Shrewsbury, vice president of Seisint, puts it simply. By using Matrix, he said, "You stop bad people quicker before they hurt someone else. It’s that simple. There’s no secrets here."

But the project remains under suspicion from civil liberties and privacy advocates who have expressed a number of serious concerns, including whether the database is used to conduct "data mining," a process by which data is searched to identify potential criminals or terrorists before any crime is committed. Also of concern is the company’s secrecy about precisely what kind of data Matrix includes and how vulnerable the data is to being stolen, altered or misused by hackers.

Seisint officials have repeatedly denied that the Matrix is used for data mining. Instead, they say, the Matrix is used to locate potential suspects immediately after a crime has occurred. For example, in a child kidnapping case, Matrix could quickly identify all men with sex offender status living in a certain area who drive a car of a particular make and model.

"Its not like I leave at night, and I’ve asked the system, ‘Hey, find me a terrorist,’ and I come in the next morning and it has ten potential terrorists," said Mark Zadra, Chief of investigations and Officer of Statewide Intelligence for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

However, according to the documents uncovered by the ACLU, Seisint has also used data for exactly that purpose. Three days after 9/11, Seisint created a "terrorism quotient" to identify potential terrorists in the general population. Matrix was still in the development stage, but company officials used "Seisint artificial intelligence," billions of public records, and public Federal Aviation Administration information -- information Matrix now contains -- to conduct the search.

A January 2003 slide presentation by Seisint lists some of the criteria for identifying potential terrorists: age and gender, "what they did with their driver’s license," either pilots or associations to pilots, proximity to "dirty addresses/phone numbers, investigational data, how they shipped, how they received, social security number anomalies, credit history, and ethnicity."

According to Seisint’s presentation, an initial search revealed 120,000 individuals with a "High Terrorist Factor" score; Seisint gave the list of names to the INS, FBI, the Secret Service, and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Slides from the presentation state that it led to "several arrests within one week," and "scores of other arrests." Who was arrested, and whether they were convicted of or even charged with any actual crime remains unknown.

In addition, the company claims to have identified five of the 9/11 hijackers, after the fact.

Christopher Calabrese, program counsel for the ACLU’s Technology and Liberty program, questions the usefulness of the search. "They conducted a search based on information about what already happened," he said. "If it weren’t so deadly serious, it would be silly."

He added, "Somebody speculates on a potential event, and adds another level of speculation," he said. "What types of activities would be necessary to execute this type of event? Those people are then de-facto suspects of a crime that has never happened, and that only exists in someone’s imagination."

Zadra dismissed these concerns. "We’re not profiling anybody," he said. "Law enforcement has been going through this process for decades."

Shrewsbury tried to distance the terrorist search from Matrix. "We don’t use that component at all," he said. "It’s not on Matrix at all." However, the basic information that was used to conduct the search is still available on Matrix, and there is no way for the public to know if such searches are being conducted.

The types of data included in Matrix have also worried civil liberties and privacy activists. Finding out what exactly is in the database has been almost impossible. While the company states on its website that Seisint does not own magazine subscription lists, telephone calling records, credit card transactions or credit report trade line data, the company has refused to open its operations for verification after requests by Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and the ACLU.

Company officials insist that the data is all publicly available, and that Matrix is just compiling previously available data in a central source. "Since it’s public data, my name is in there. Your name is in there," Zadra said. "It’s just information we already have access to."

However, the company’s own documents state that, "The associative links, historical residential information, and other information, such as an individual's possible relatives and associates, are deeper and more comprehensive than other commercially available database systems presently on the market."

Calabrese of the ACLU said using the term "public records" is a misnomer. "It’s not at all clear what that means," he said, adding that Seisint seems to consider commercially available data to be "public information," though most of the public does not have access to this data.

In addition, although Matrix currently operates in only five states, it has driver’s license information from 15 states, motor vehicle registration from 12 states, Department of Corrections information from 33 states and sexual offender information from 27 states, according to Seisint documents.

In some cases, states have sold the data to Seisint. For instance, according to the ACLU, Ohio sold its driving records to Seisint for $50,073 two years ago. In other cases, Seisint has presumably purchased this information from commercial databases, where driver’s license data is readily available.

Zadra said Matrix continues to use that information in its searches, even if it is not obtained directly from a particular state government. "We’ve had a lot of states that said, ‘I won’t participate in Matrix,’" Zadra told The NewStandard. "I say, ‘You are a Matrix participant because you sell your motor vehicle and criminal information anyway.’"

The security of these billions of records has been among the most persistent concerns of privacy advocates. If a hacker gained access to the database, the information gained could be used for dozens of potential purposes, ranging from simply locating an individual to selling Matrix data to businesses for marketing purposes.

Although Seisint officials argue that its data is safe, and note that the supercomputers are housed in a secure room outfitted with motion detectors, cameras, an alarm system, and an armed guard, many privacy advocates also remain concerned that the data could still be vulnerable.

They argue that the extensive office security overlooks the main issue. The data, they say, is most vulnerable in the police stations around the state where it is used on a daily basis. In Florida, 1,000 law enforcement officials have access to the Matrix, and privacy activists are concerned that the data there could be hacked or physically stolen. Zadra dismissed these concerns, insisting that one would need a login ID and password to access the system, and that all system activity is logged.

"Step back and think about the scope of this," Calabrese said. "One thousand [access] licenses, spread out around the state, using the Matrix for God knows what."

Lee Tien, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit privacy advocacy organization, argues that the majority of security problems come from "people on the inside, not people on the outside," and that Seisint does little to prevent this. "I think the presumption has to be that it’s not secure," he said. "Systems that have a lot of people who can have access to the data are inherently not secure, just based on the numbers."

The ACLU is attempting to pressure the five remaining states to end their contracts with Seisint; but even if this happened, the information it compiled would still exist. "Even if you knocked it out completely, it would be pretty easy to reconstruct," Calabrese said. "You can’t put the genie back in the box."

In the meantime, Zadra attempted to reassure worried citizens. "I could misuse any one of hundreds of [other] databases," he said. "Granted, [Matrix] would make it easier and faster because I could get it all out of one space." He paused, then added, "We’re using it for investigative purposes only."