Indiana: My Prison

The following was sent to us via the "Tell Us Your Story" form and posted with the users permission.

By TJ420:
I was convicted of "Sexual Misconduct with a Minor" in mid 2001. I was 23 and my girlfriend was 17. Legal age of consent in Indiana is 16. I was sentenced to 6 years of prison time. I did 6 months in the county jail, 2.5 years in prison, 5 years probation, and 10 years on the registry. Finding a job wasn't easy at all, and I have several years experience as a welder, auto-body technician, roofer, and machine operator. Pretty much, the only jobs I could find were "under the table jobs"! In most cases, as soon as I said something about being on the registry, I was booted out the door, got the "we don't have anything at this time!", or not given the chance to explain the situation! My 10 years on the registry completely sucked! I dealt with it, though it was extremely hard at times. Many times I contemplated ending my life. I always thought twice about it though. I have 2 kids and a wife, so I knew that was NOT an option! I am still with the woman I got this charge over and we have 2 kids together. After being let off the registry after 10 years, it took another 3 or 4 months to get myself removed from other random private/public registries.(to anyone who only has the 10 year registry, when you're released, make sure you check the internet for other registries!) I have since got a really good job as a welder/fabricator. I am, however, confined to the state of Indiana. The reason I say this, is because, if I move to another state, I have to re-register as a sex offender for another 10 years, or in some cases, for life. That's the case for most states that I have researched. I think I have paid my debt to society, plain and simple! I have not re-offended and have no reason to, I work everyday, and I support my wife and kids. I look at it like this; dating a younger woman may have been a mistake/wrong in some peoples eyes, but in mine, well, we're still together and have two beautiful, very smart kids, and my wife is 100% faithful, as am I! And I will say this, Indiana's SO rules and regulations are the most lenient of the 40 some states I researched, in my opinion, that is.

WI - Freed, but still in jail: New limits on sex offenders leave them in care of sheriff

Original Article

So he's done his time but because he couldn't find a place to stay, behind bars, he will remain behind bars? That is just so wrong!

02/08/2014

By Stephanie Jones

RACINE - _____ is supposed to be free. He’s not.

_____, a convicted sex offender, served his time and was supposed to be released from the New Lisbon Correctional Institution on Jan. 28. He was released on schedule, but his release was not to freedom. It was to the Racine County Jail. There was nowhere else for him to go.

“It was a rather depressing situation,” he said about finding out the jail was his only housing option. “All I wanted was a place to live.”

Municipal ordinances have become so restrictive on where registered sex offenders like _____ can live in the county that state officials have directed the jail to hold him. It’s not clear how or when he’ll get out.

This is a new problem resulting from recent sex offender ordinances and it’s concerning, said Lt. Dan Adams of the Racine County Sheriff’s Office.

No options

In early January, _____, 59, was planning on moving into a transitional residence in the 2100 block of Racine Street in Mount Pleasant. Then those plans changed when the Mount Pleasant Village Board passed an ordinance Jan. 13 greatly restricting where sex offenders can live. That ordinance came on the heels of similar ordinances passed in Racine, Sturtevant and Caledonia.

Mount Pleasant’s new ordinance effectively eliminated the home _____ had lined up, which is near a church.

“That was the last oasis,” Adams said about the Racine Street residence. “Then the ordinance passed. Now we are in this predicament.”

It’s not an issue that other released prisoners face, he said, because they have alternative shelters where they can stay that sex offenders cannot.

Staying at the Homeless Assistance Leadership Organization shelter also is not an option for sex offenders. Because families and children stay at the shelter, they don’t accept sex offenders except for particular circumstances such as if there is an 18-year-old who had a relationship with a 17-year-old, said Stephanie Koeber, HALO’s family program and child care director. She didn’t know offhand of any other place that will take sex offenders now.

“It’s definitely a population that is underserved,” she said.

Past mistakes

_____ doesn’t try to justify the mistakes he made, he said. When he committed his first offense in 2000, he was living in Indiana with his wife and five children. He used to write articles for the Elkhart Truth’s sports department, he said, and he owned his own business that sold new and used equipment to fire departments.

Then he started an online relationship with a person who he thought was a 14-year-old boy, he said. He drove from Indiana to Racine County to meet the boy at the McDonald’s by Interstate 94 at 13343 Washington Ave. It turned out it was an undercover agent, and _____ was taken into custody.

Years later after he was released from prison for that crime, he ended up arrested again in 2007 after he was caught looking at a website at the Racine Public Library called “Barely Legal.” He said it turned out some of the photos were of teens under 18. He admits it was a stupid decision, although he claims he thought they were adults.

What’s next?

Now, after being released again, _____ is on extended supervision and he has a GPS monitor on his ankle, which he said he may have to wear for the rest of his life. His first goal is to find a job so that he can afford housing, he said Thursday while seated at the Department of Corrections Division of Community Corrections office in Sturtevant, with a notebook filled with possible job leads.

That is where he spends the day for the most part. _____ said his day starts with breakfast at the jail, then he gets a packed lunch and is transported to the Sturtevant corrections office, where he spends time looking for jobs until he is transported back to the jail before dinner. He is required to return to jail each night, Adams said.

Joy Staab, a spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, said for sex offenders who warrant special notifications to law enforcement, the current policy is to “utilize jail in lieu of homelessness.”

This is a statewide policy, she said, although she did not know if it is occurring anywhere else outside of Racine County.

“As a result of local ordinances restricting where sex offenders can reside, housing options can be very limited for sex offenders,” she said.

Another man at jail

According to the Sheriff’s Office, one additional sex offender in _____’s situation also has been housed in the Racine County Jail since Tuesday. Both men are listed in jail online records with their “hold reason” as “homeless sex offender.” It’s not clear how long the offenders will have to stay in jail, Adams said. The state will pay for the jail stays, he added. “I think there is some concern about what comes next,” he said. “There has to be some alternative solution because I don’t think this can be sustainable.”

In the two weeks since _____ was released from prison, he hasn’t had any luck finding work, he said. Until he gets a job, he doesn’t know how he will be able to afford rent, he said, and with the transitional facility no longer an option, he is not sure when he will be able to finally spend a night outside jail.

If he had money in the bank, possibly he could find someplace that the ordinance would allow a sex offender to live. But he doesn’t, and he is not sure where he could find housing.

“I’m not trying to look for sympathy. I don’t expect that,” he said. But he said, “I did my prison time. Give me an opportunity. Allow me to try to put my life back together.”

See Also:

• (02/25/2014) Homeless sex offender given temporary housing

IN - Homeless sex offenders to be out in the cold

Homeless Shelter

Original Article

02/06/2014

By Douglas Walker

MUNCIE - A Muncie pastor is seeking the public’s help in trying to find shelter for a small group of convicted sex offenders who are soon to lose their nightly home.

Steve Graves, pastor at Fountain Square (Facebook) and Industry United Methodist (Facebook) churches, said Thursday the men have been told they can no longer stay at a Christian Ministries shelter at 401 E. Main St.

That’s due to state law that forbids those convicted of some sex-related crimes from living within 1,000 feet of places frequented by children. In the case of the Main Street shelter, that would apparently apply to a small downtown park, the Carnegie Library and a daycare facility, Graves said.

“We don’t question the law,” the pastor said, adding he was “baffled” as to why state officials apparently feel they have no responsibility to help the men survive.
- If the law is wrong you should question it!

The edict that effective Sunday, the men can no longer stay at the Main Street shelter came not from Christian Ministries, but from state officials.

Graves said he is aware of the low regard many citizens have for convicted sex offenders, and that their proximity can be troubling, especially for families with children.

“But we’re a society that believes in redemption, and second chances,” he said. “We’re still human beings.”
- Not anymore!

Graves said because of the stigma of their crimes, the men have difficulty finding work, and that the residency restriction complicates their efforts to find lodging. In recent weeks, weather conditions have made the pursuit of overnight shelter a life and death proposition.
- We wonder if that is their goal, to have ex-offenders die?

“Desperate people will do desperate things,” Graves said.

The pastor at first thought as many as eight offenders would be left without lodging beginning Sunday, but four of the men have since found at-least temporary lodging.

That leaves Graves — and those who have come to his assistance, including Paula Justice, Mayor Dennis Tyler’s administrative assistant — two more days to find a place for four men to stay.

Graves is asking anyone with a property that could be used — essentially any structure with heating that would not violate the 1,000-feet restriction — and where cots could be set up to give the men a place to sleep.

The pastor can be contacted at (765) 228-7404.

“They don’t expect the Taj Mahal,” he said. “Just a roof over their head.”

Graves became aware of the men’s plight through a convicted sex offender he met through his church, _____.

_____ was convicted of child molesting in Grant County in 1995. The former Marion resident has since returned to prison for parole violations, and two convictions — also in Grant County, in 2003 and 2008 —for failing to register as a sex offender.

He became a Muncie resident through the efforts of the state Department of Correction, who allowed him to stay at a “DOC Assist” facility — for recently released sex offenders with nowhere else to go — in the Old West End neighborhood. (A DOC official said recently the department was no longer operating any DOC Assist homes in Muncie or Delaware County.)

After his eligibility to stay at the Powers Street house ended, _____ for a time lived under the East Jackson Street bridge. The church congregation later bought him a tent to live in, but this winter has not been conducive to tent residency.

He has done some part-time work at the two churches where Graves ministers, and is hopeful his Social Security pension — for a mental disability — will be restored.

For now, though, his primary concern is having a place to sleep on Sunday night.

“The system is messed up, big time,” _____ said on Thursday.

While Graves’ priority is finding a place for _____ and the other three offenders to stay in the short term, he said efforts must be made to solve the residence issues for offenders on a long-term basis.

“This is a community problem,” said Graves.

The Muncie pastor is no stranger to trying to solve government-related problems — or to dealing with convicted criminals, for that matter.

Before he entered the ministry seven years ago, Graves worked both as an administrative assistant to then-Gov. Evan Bayh, assigned to health and human services, and as a probation officer.

IN - DOC ends local lodging for sex offenders

Brad King

Original Article

01/27/2014

By Douglas Walker

State Department of Correction officials say they are no longer sending recently released sex offenders to Muncie houses

MUNCIE - The Indiana Department of Correction is no longer operating "DOC Assist" homes in Muncie's Old West End neighborhood.

The Star Press reported last June that two adjacent homes in the neighborhood — at 927 S. Elliott St. and 612 S. Elliott St. — for the past two years had been used by the DOC as temporary housing for recently released sex offenders from 11 Hoosier counties who had nowhere else to go.

Concerns raised by the article prompted a sometimes heated meeting last July 24 involving DOC employees, local officials including Mayor Dennis Tyler and Delaware County Prosecutor Jeffrey Arnold, and Old West End residents.

Those living near the houses said they were unhappy they had not been told about the "DOC Assist" program — or the proximity of sex offenders to their families. Tyler, noting the Muncie houses were the only such facilities in the 11-county district, said he didn't want the Old West End viewed as a "dumping ground" for offenders.

In an email exchange with The Star Press on Friday, Victoria Fafata, supervisor of the DOC's 11-county New Castle Parole District, confirmed there were no longer "DOC Assist" facilities in the Old West End, or elsewhere in Muncie or Delaware County.

She also said there were no such houses for recently released offenders in Blackford, Henry, Jay or Randolph counties.

Brad King, president of the Old West End Neighborhood Association (Facebook), said Friday that "neighbors in the area feel bit of a relief," but said they were also concerned about "residential opportunities, job opportunities and support networks for the paroled sex offenders in Muncie and Delaware County."

King, who moderated the July meeting with DOC officials, said it was "never the intention of the neighborhood association to shut down this housing opportunity, but to make sure everyone was aware, safe, compliant with the law and situations like this were as transparent as possible."

Tyler on Saturday said he was "really happy for the Old West End residents."

"I know they felt like a dumping ground," he added.

The mayor said communities have a responsibility to provide opportunities for those released from prison, but said having Muncie as the destination for so many out-of-county sex offenders had troubled him.

The Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry would make it appear the Old West End — with general boundaries of Franklin Street to the east, White River to the north, Kilgore Avenue to the west and the railroad tracks to the south — still has what many would consider more than its fair share of released sex offenders.

The registry map shows 29 such offenders living in the neighborhood, but the registry's accuracy has been questioned. Offenders are shown living at the addresses at which they most recently registered, and in some cases are listed as still residing there years after they have departed.

The registry still shows nine offenders living at the Powers and Elliott houses. However, at least four of those felons have returned to prison, and three others are apparently the targets of arrest warrants. (The owner of those houses, Calvin Gilliam, at times continued to rent those apartments to offenders who were no longer participating in the "DOC Assist" program.)

The vast majority of offenders listed as living in the Old West End were convicted of sex offenses outside of Delaware County, and in some cases, out of Indiana.

For example, of five offenders listed as living in the same apartment house in the 700 block of West Jackson Street, only one was convicted of a sex crime in Delaware County. The other four were convicted, respectively, in Elkhart, Hamilton and Wayne counties, and Michigan.

Authorities have suggested some felons have settled in the Old West End in part because it for the most part lacks facilities — including schools, parks and daycare centers — that some sex offenders are prohibited from living near.

NY - Sex Offenders and Social Media in New York State

Our Comments:
The law is lumping all ex-sex offenders into one group, the worst of the worse, and that is why it's unconstitutional. Probation / parole can already set guidelines on who can do what, so this is just another un-needed law made by some politician who is exploiting fear, children and ex-sex offenders to help their own careers.

It is time for the people who took oaths to defend the Constitution, to do so!!!!!

And we are also sick and tired of the biased media, who are suppose to report all the facts, and not their own personal hate and biasness, using the term sex offender, child molester, pedophile and predator as if they are all the same. THEY ARE NOT! So stop misusing the terms. It's reporting like this why the hysteria is still going strong, but maybe that is your goal in the first place?

Video Description:
Criminal Defense Attorney Thomas Carr of Albany, NY discusses New York State laws pertaining to Sex Offenders and Social Media.

A federal judge in Chicago said it is unconstitutional for states to ban all sex offenders from social media sites. The ruling came after an Indiana sex offender who was no longer on probation challenged a state law.

It was a very, very broad ban, if you were a sex offender you couldnt register and you couldn't be on Facebook, said Thomas Carr, a partner with Tully Rinkey PLLC.

In 2008, New York enacted the Electronic Security and Targeting of Online Predators Act (e-STOP). Authorities have since used provisions to take thousands of sex offenders offline. E-STOP requires offenders to register their email addresses, screen names and social media accounts with the state. The information is then provided to social media sites that request the data. New York only prohibits some sex offenders from using the websites as part of probation requirements.

More than two dozen social media websites, including Facebook, ban sex offenders as part of their Terms of Service. The federal ruling does not apply to the sites because they are private companies.

Some sites do not have an outright ban on sex offenders and do not cross-check the information on the state database with their usernames, which is why experts continually suggest parents take steps at home to monitor computer, gaming and smartphone use.

Were always concerned about safety for kids and this is concerning. it really highlights and makes it more important for a parent to be involved with the kid's online presence, said Andy Gliplin, Director of Program Services at CAPTAIN Youth and Family Services. Really take advantage of the parental controls that are out there with a lot of the sites, gaming consoles, and different access points to the internet.

IN - Community speaks out about social network ruling

Original Article

01/24/2013

By Holly Campbell

LAFAYETTE (WLFI) - An Indiana law banning registered sex offenders from using social media sites like Facebook and Twitter was found unconstitutional by a federal judge.

"I think a lot of that falls into the parents responsibilities, but then what do you do for those children that don't have parents involved. I think it is wise for the community to try and protect them," Rochelle Jones of Lafayette said.

Last June U.S.. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt upheld the law saying the state has a strong interest in doing just that, protecting children. Pratt said social networking provides sexual predators the ability to prey on children.
- It also provides a way for scammers to target victims and ruin their lives as well, or gang members to recruit new children into their gangs, or thieves to find when you are or aren't home, but we don't see you passing laws to prevent that.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the class-action lawsuit on behalf of a man who served three years for child exploitation. They appealed the June ruling and agree with the most recent ruling that the law was too broad.

"Indiana has already made it a crime to engage in, as I said, not only solicitation just sort of succeeding in doing something horrible but even inappropriate communication with children that's already illegal, so what you're asking is that we are going to make any contact with social media illegal and that's just too broad," Indiana ACLU Legal Director Ken Faulk said.

Just last week a Crawfordsville man was arrested for seven felony counts of sexual misconduct with a minor after using social media to make contact with the minor. According to court documents, 53-year-old [name withheld] met a 15-year-old boy on Facebook. He committed sexual acts at least 6 times with the boy over a span of 18 months. [name withheld] was not a registered sex offender.
- So punish the individual not an entire group!

IN - Facebook Sex Offenders Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

Original Article

01/23/2013

By CHARLES WILSON

INDIANAPOLIS - An Indiana law that bans registered sex offenders from using Facebook and other social networking sites that can be accessed by children is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The 7th U.S. Circuit of Appeals in Chicago overturned a federal judge's decision upholding the law, saying the state was justified in trying to protect children but that the "blanket ban" went too far by restricting free speech.

The 2008 law "broadly prohibits substantial protected speech rather than specifically targeting the evil of improper communications to minors," the judges wrote.

"The goal of deterrence does not license the state to restrict far more speech than necessary to target the prospective harm," they said in a 20-page decision (PDF).

The judges noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has also struck down laws that restricted the constitutional right to freedom of expression, such as one that sought to ban leafleting on the premise that it would prevent the dropping of litter.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ruled in June that the state has a strong interest in protecting children and found that social networking had created a "virtual playground for sexual predators to lurk." She noted that everything else on the Internet remained open to those who have been convicted of sex offenses.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the class-action suit on behalf of a man who served three years for child exploitation and other sex offenders who are restricted by the ban even though they are no longer on probation.

Courts have long allowed states to place restrictions on convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences, controlling where many live and work and requiring them to register with police. But the ACLU contended that even though the Indiana law is only intended to protect children from online sexual predators, social media websites are virtually indispensable. The group said the ban prevents sex offenders from using the websites for legitimate political, business and religious purposes.

The ACLU applauded the decision.

"Indiana already has a law on the books that prohibits inappropriate sexual contacts with children," including penalties for online activities, ACLU legal director Ken Falk said. "This law sought to criminalize completely innocent conduct that has nothing to do with children."

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said his office would review the ruling before deciding on the next step.

Federal judges have barred similar laws in Nebraska and Louisiana. Louisiana legislators passed a new, narrower law last year that requires sex offenders to identify themselves on Facebook and similar sites. A federal judge struck down part of Nebraska's law last October.

IN - Deputy (Benjamin Farson) arrested on child porn charges

Benjamin Farson

Original Article

09/28/2012

INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) - Greenwood police officers arrested a Marion County Sheriff’s Office deputy on Friday after police say they discovered he had child pornography on his home computer.

Benjamin Farson, 29, has been with the Marion County Sheriff’s Office for three years. His arrest prompted his termination by the department.
- So much for "innocent until proven guilty!"

The Greenwood Police Department began investigating Farson on Sept. 14. Investigators said Farson distributed child porn from his Johnson County home.

Officers arrested Farson while he was working at the Arrestee Processing Center in Indianapolis. He was questioned at the Marion County Jail before being taken to the Johnson County Jail.

Marion County Sheriff’s Office officials said Farson did not commit any crimes while on duty.

Lawyer for molested teen says former cop’s defense is ‘morally repugnant ... legally deficient’

View the article here

It's because he's blaming the victim. This is a MAJOR SLAP ON THE WRIST!!!! It's called CHILD MOLESTATION, and how come he's not on the sex offender registry, served prison time (maximum) and suffer all the other punishment other average citizens charged with the same would face! Where is the outrage over this? Is it because he's a COP?

04/20/2007

LA PORTE -- The attorney representing a woman who was molested by a former Michigan City police officer at Elston Middle School several years ago says the officer’s lawyer is trying to place the blame on his client rather than accepting the guilt.

Attorney Doug Bernacchi asked in a motion filed in La Porte Circuit Court Tuesday that Judge Tom Alevizos should throw out several defenses proposed by Gary James’ attorney in a civil suit filed by the woman.

According to the motion, Bernacchi says that James is trying to shift blame to the victim, which in essence, he said, claims that she’s at fault for allegedly consenting to her own molestation.

James’ defense, therefore, is in direct opposition to his earlier criminal-court guilty plea of sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class D felony.

“James’ defense is not only morally repugnant, it is legally deficient,” Bernacchi said in the documents.

Bernacchi even makes light of one of James’ defenses. Regarding the defense that the minor knew “the dangers, hazards and risks,” Bernacchi said that sort of claim is more suited for a slip-and-fall case.

But James’ attorney, Peter Boyles, said this morning all that he is doing is providing all available defenses that could be afforded to his client.

“I want to protect my client. It would be malpractice to not raise them. The defenses may apply to some,” he said.

The woman filed a $30 million civil lawsuit against James in circuit court March 14. Boyles contends the suit contains “allegations that go beyond what was alleged in the criminal proceeding,” prompting him to file a 25-page response.

In the criminal case, James was convicted of touching the now-18-year-old-woman, then 14, her in inappropriate ways and kissing and fondling her without permission.

The Michigan City police chief and police department and the Michigan City School Board are also named as defendants in the civil suit. The suit claims the school board was negligent and did not act in good faith.

The teen is identified only as Jane Doe in the suit.

In the criminal case in La Porte Superior Court 1, James pleaded guilty in 2005 to sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class D felony, in a plea agreement after being originally charged with a Class C felony. James was sentenced to spend 15 weekends at La Porte County Jail.

Additionally, he was put under probation and had to attend counseling, and was ordered to pay $3,206 in restitution and $50 a month in ongoing prescription costs for the woman.

James resigned from the police force after his arrest on the criminal charge.