AZ - Arizona Boy, 5, Gets Accused Of ‘Sexual Misconduct’

Original Article

06/27/2014

By Lisa Fogarty

_____, a kindergartner at Ashton Ranch Elementary School in Surprise, Arizona, was recently forced to serve detention for an unusual offense: sexual misconduct.

The little boy was playing on his school’s playground when another child instructed him to pull his pants down “or else he would do it for him,” reports Daily Mail. The child did as he was told, pulling down both his pants and underwear in front of other students.

School administrators responded to this incident by taking _____ to the principal’s office and forcing him to sign a document that labeled his actions as "sexual misconduct," according to the child’s mother.
- So what about the bully who told him to do this?

_____ says the school did not contact her immediately after the incident and that she only learned about it after her son was told to sign the paper.

“He’s a 5-year-old,” _____ said. “He does not know right from wrong yet.”

_____ says she fears the label will follow her son throughout school and that he only signed the paper because he was forced to do so. When she tried to appeal the school’s actions and have the document removed from _____’s permanent record, she was told it couldn't be done.

“My son is not a sexualized minor,” _____ told AZ Family. “I’m just heartbroken. That’s not my son.”

Dysart Unified School District representatives insist the school’s administrators were simply following the proper protocol when they took disciplinary action against the young boy. Indecent exposure is considered a form of sexual misconduct, according to their rules, and parents are not required to be at the school during the meeting that follows the incident, unless the child asks for them.

CA - Sex offenders should not be allowed in parks or beaches

Original Article

02/03/2014

By KAYLI CRAIG

In 2012 a law was passed that prohibited registered sex offenders from entering areas where children would likely be present. This in includes parks, playgrounds and beaches. However, according to ABC News the law was overturned in an appeals court in January 2014 because it was said to violate California’s state law.

It is clear the state of California and its cities are not doing all they can to protect the families and children of California by leaving them vulnerable to dangerous criminals.
- Most sexual crimes occur at the victims own home and by their own family, not at a park, playground or beach. If you wanted to protect the children then you'd watch your own family! Ex-offenders also pay taxes on these places and have just as much a right to be there as you do. If they cannot visit these places then they should not have to pay taxes on them!

In May 2012, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas released a statement explaining the conditions of the law that would be put into effect within 30 days. Under this law, if a sex offender entered one of these restricted areas, they would have been charged with a misdemeanor, facing six months of jail time and/or a $500 fine for each separate facility entered. Santa Ana was one of the first cities to pass their new ordinance laws and since then dozens of cities have followed.

However, now with the overturn of this law, registered sex offenders will be allowed in areas with a high population of children. Sex offenders have committed heinous acts and they should not be allowed into parks or beaches.
- So why don't you be a parent and watch your kids?  And not all "sex offenders" have committed "heinous" acts, so stop lumping them all into one group!

Many Americans will argue that there are different types of sex offenders and different degrees of their offenses.
- You are right there.

There are seemingly light hearted stories such as a 21-year-old man getting caught having sex with his underage girlfriend or the drunken person who urinated in public. However according to the law they may still have to register as a sex offender.

These individuals are the severe minority of sex offenders. According to list of offenders that provided by Megan’s Law, most offenders are the ones who have a sick and extremely dangerous attraction to little children.
- That is simply not true.  True pedophiles account for 10% or less of all the ex-offenders in this country.

Although it is obvious some offenders are more severe and violent than others, all restrictions should be the same whether it is putting their address and picture online or preventing them from entering certain areas if it means protection for the children.
- So then why don't we also treat all other ex-felons the same as well?  Put them all on an online hit-list so everybody who lives around them can know their past sins?  What sins have you committed you wouldn't want the world to know about?

Megan’s Law was started after 7-year-old Megan Kanka was raped and brutally murdered by her neighbor.
- True and we already have laws for murderers, so why do we need more laws named after dead children?

“The purpose of the law was to provide an awareness to parents,” Megan Kanka’s mother said. “We never said it was going to stop them from reoffending or wandering to another town.”
- And banning someone from a park or beach won't stop them from committing a crime at a park or beach, if that is their intention!

Although Megan’s Law was not necessarily intended to put restrictions on these offenders other than providing a map of their residences, allowing the sex offenders into tempting areas such as parks or beaches is simply not worth the risk involved.
- You are assuming children are "tempting" to all ex-offenders which is simply BS!

Allowing a registered sex offender to go to a park or the beach is similar, although more severe, to bringing an alcoholic to a bar. For a sex offender, the temptation would be a young child in a bathing suit at the beach. There is an undeniable temptation that arises within these individuals. If it can be avoided then it should be avoided at all costs meaning that the law needs to be put back into effect immediately.
- What a load of BS!  To some this may be true, but you are putting all ex-offenders into one group!

FL - So did the MOB get what they wanted in Port Orange?

Video Description:
At a city council meeting earlier this week, Port Orange residents and leaders attempted to tighten restrictions on where convicted sex offenders can live within the city.

See Also:

• Sex offender who lived near Port Orange school kicked out of house by uncle
• City Council meeting prompts Port Orange sex offender to move
• Port Orange votes to keep sex offenders far from children's gathering places
• Port Orange council members want to put targets on sexual predators, putting them and their families in danger!

FL - Port Orange council members want to put targets on sexual predators, putting them and their families in danger!

Original Article

They are just following in Sheriff Gordon Smith's footsteps and also Nazi Germany. This does nothing except place a bulls-eye on the offender and their family's heads. It's only a matter of time before someone with one of these signs is murdered, and will the Sheriff's department be held accountable for putting someones life in danger? We doubt it, Florida is corrupt and has a ton of sexual predator cops themselves! Send these folks an email letting them know what you think of this idea by clicking here.

01/23/2014

By Lacey McLaughlin

PORT ORANGE - By placing signs in front of sexual predators’ homes, a City Council member hopes to tell sex offenders they aren't welcome in Port Orange.

Vice Mayor Don Burnette said he is proposing a policy that would require red public notice signs be placed on city-owned right of way in front of the residences of sexual predators. The predator’s name would be included on the sign.

“We are not going to roll out the welcome mat for sex offenders,” Burnette said.

The signs would not apply to all sex offenders living in the city, only sexual predators. Of the 64 sexual offenders living in the city, four are sexual predators who have been convicted of a first-degree felony sex crime or two second-degree felony sex crimes.

“Not all offenders are created equally and it’s hard to distinguish who has done what,” Burnette said. “But sexual predators are more serious offenders.”

It’s unclear how the proposed policy will play out. Burnette plans to bring it up for discussion at the council’s meeting Tuesday.

Councilman Bob Ford said the signs may have unintended consequences.

“That is a heavy step that we’d have to think about very seriously,” Ford said. “How would you sell your house if you live on the same street as a predator? That would not do well for property values.”

The push for tighter restrictions for sex offenders comes after a neighbor’s discovery last week that _____, 46, was living across the street from Sugar Mill Elementary. _____, who was convicted of distributing child pornography by a New York court in 2004 and is not registered as a sexual predator, can live that close to the school because his conviction occurred before a state law creating stronger residency restrictions for sex offenders.

In response to the public outcry, council members unanimously approved an emergency ordinance that now requires all sex offenders moving into the city to live at least 2,500 feet from childcare facilities, schools, parks and playgrounds — 1,500 feet farther than state law requires.

Port Orange resident Margie Patchett brought the proposed policy to the attention of Burnette because she fears for the safety of her grandchild, who attends Sugar Mill. Patchett acknowledged the signs could turn offenders into targets for harassment but said it’s more important to protect children.

“I am more concerned about our children being a target as opposed to the sexual predators being a target if signs are placed in their front yards,” she said.

The North Florida city of Perry adopted a similar policy last year and placed a sign in front of the home of the only sexual predator living there, _____, who was convicted of sexual battery in 2009. Shortly after the city placed a sign near his home,_____ moved to Clearwater.

“These predators are already listed on public websites with their addresses,” Perry City Manager Bob Brown said. “It’s similar to that. We just wanted to make sure that people who are coming by know that a sexual predator lives there.”
- That isn't right either, and people have been murdered (Video) due to the online hit-list!

Jennifer Klein, a criminal justice instructor and researcher at the University of Florida, said several cities and counties in Florida are taking similar approaches to sexual predators. She said that recidivism rates for sex offenders are relatively low. A 2003 study by the U.S. Department of Justice reported that 5.3 percent of sex offenders were rearrested for another sex crime three years after being release from state prison.

“There are more offenders than sexual predators in most states,” Klein said. “When you place something like this in front of their house and mark them as an outsider, it’s going to be more difficult to re-enter society and find jobs.”

See Also:

• Port Orange sex offender moving after city council meeting

FL - Audit finds low recidivism, critiques reliance on inflated Static-99 risk estimates

Fragile Flower

Original Article

10/27/2013

By Karen Franklin, Ph.D.

Dan Montaldi’s words were prophetic.

Speaking to Salon magazine last year, the former director of Florida's civil commitment program for sex offenders called innovative rehabilitation programs "fragile flowers." The backlash from one bad deed that makes the news can bring an otherwise successful enterprise crashing down.

Montaldi was referring to a community reintegration program in Arizona that was derailed by the escape of a single prisoner in 2010.

But he could have been talking about Florida where, just a year after his Salon interview, the highly publicized rape and murder of an 8-year-old girl is sending shock waves through the treatment community. Cherish Perrywinkle was abducted from a Walmart, raped and murdered, allegedly by a registered sex offender who had twice been evaluated and found not to meet criteria for commitment as a sexually violent predator (SVP).

Montaldi resigned amidst a witch hunt climate generated by the killing and a simultaneous investigative series in the Sun Sentinel headlined "Sex Predators Unleashed." His sin was daring to mention the moral dilemma of locking up people because they might commit a crime in the future, when recidivism rates are very low. Republican lawmakers called his statements supportive of "monsters" and said it made their "skin crawl."

Black Swan

Montaldi's comments were contained in an email to colleagues in the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, in response to the alarmist newspaper series. He observed that, as a group, sex offenders were "statistically unlikely to reoffend." In other words, Cherish Perrywinkle’s murder was a statistical anomaly (also known as a black swan, or something that is so rare that it is impossible to predict or prevent). He went on to say that in a free society, the civil rights of even "society's most feared and despised members" are an important moral concern. A subscriber to the private listserv apparently leaked the email to the news media.

The Sun Sentinel series had also criticized the decline in the proportion of paroled offenders who were recommended for civil commitment under Montaldi's directorship. "Florida's referral rate is the lowest of 17 states with comparable sex-offender programs and at least three times lower than that of such large states as California, New York and Illinois," the newspaper reported.

Audit finds very low recidivism rates

Fear Mongering?

In the wake of the Sun Sentinel investigation, the Florida agency that oversees the Sexually Violent Predator Program has released a comprehensive review of the accuracy of the civil commitment selection process. Since Florida enacted its Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) state in 1999, more than 40,000 paroling sex offenders have been reviewed for possible commitment. A private corporation, GEO Care, LLC, runs the state’s 720-bed civil detention facility in Arcadia for the state's Department of Children and Families.

Three independent auditors -- well known psychologists Chris Carr, Anita Schlank and Karen C. Parker -- reviewed data from both a 2011 state analysis and an internal recidivism study conducted by the SVP program. They also reviewed data on 31,626 referrals obtained by the Sun Sentinel newspaper for its Aug. 18 expose.

All of the data converged upon an inescapable conclusion: Current assessment procedures are systematically overestimating the risk that a paroling offender will commit another sex offense.

See Also:

• FL - Review of Florida’s Sexually Violent Predator Program (09-23-2013) (PDF)

Read the rest of the article

Fear the Bogeyman: Sex Offender Panic on Halloween

Original Article

10/25/2013

By Andrew Extein

It can be said that sex offenders are the new bogeymen, mythical monsters invented to scare children into social order. People convicted of sex offenses, and subsequently placed on the public registry, are transformed into a concept of evil, which is then personified as a group of faceless, terrifying, and predatory devils. It would appear that this strategy is used to keep sex offenders at a distance, in turn keeping our children and families safe from harm. But in reality, such fantasy does just the opposite: ignoring the realities of sex offenses puts children, families, and adults at greater risk.

Halloween is a notable time to talk about sex offenders and the issues surrounding such labeling, as they conjure both legal realities and Jungian fantasy. Many cities and counties have enacted special laws that dictate what sex offenders are allowed to do and where they are allowed to be on Halloween, publicizing their identities and putting them at risk of harassment or worse. On a deeper level, Halloween enhances cultural fear, paranoia, and panic--a bad combination for sex offenders. Why have sex offenders become our "bogeymen," and why is this counterproductive?

The concept of the bogeyman has been around for centuries, with variations around the world. He is faceless, vague, and cloaked, yet undeniably terrifying. Parents instill the idea of the bogeyman in the minds of children to make them behave, or avoid dangerous situations. The sick beauty of the bogeyman is that he exists only in the mind, with every person imagining a different manifestation of the mythical figure. He is a projection of your worst fears, your scariest nightmares, and your most crippling anxieties.

The bogeyman is central to Halloween. The holiday is rooted in Christian tradition and folklore, and dates back for centuries in Europe. Halloween in the United States began in the 19th century with the Irish and Scottish migration. Jack-o-lanterns frighten evil spirits, trick-or-treating uses threats to get sweets, and costumes mock satanic figures. Halloween has evolved into a cathartic holiday that celebrates fear, indulges in horror, and helps us exercise our imagination. The personification of this fear takes many forms--witches, killers, vampires--but the central concept remains the same. Some fears are too scary to take such specific forms, and the result is the vaguely terrifying bogeyman.

Michael Myers

The legendary 1978 film Halloween puts this character front and center, stalking and terrifying Jamie Lee Curtis (and thereby generations of viewers) as a tall, masked man. As recently as this year, Universal Studios' Halloween Horror Nights includes a maze of terror called "El Cucuy", based on the embodiment of the Mexican bogeyman figure who has sharp teeth and knife-like nails. Clearly, this is a mythology that sticks with people, that creates a visceral reaction, and still incites fear in even the most savvy Halloween consumer.

American culture is steeped in moral panics. Puritanical witch-hunts, racial persecution, xenophobic internment, and institutionalization of gay men are all examples of misplaced solutions to deeply engrained cultural fears of difference. In the mid-1960s the concept of "stranger danger" came into prominence, dissuading children from interacting with unknown adults and feeding dormant fears of otherness. Adult males with an inexplicable interest in talking to children were specific targets of stranger danger, resulting in a new, vague bogeyman archetype. Comedic by contemporary standards, educational films were created and propagated in schools to make sure every child understood that adult men were not to be trusted--guilty until proven innocent, bad until proven good.

Over decades this archetype has grown, been fostered, and gained steam. It is deeply ingrained in the way families view the outside world. In the 1980s, this bogeyman, the one who bribes children with candy, took on a new, more specific form. Sex offenders were selected as the realization of moral panics about sex, stranger danger, and national paranoia. Over time, Americans have become well accustomed to the sex offender bogeyman. Despite any statistics, data, or examples that prove otherwise (low re-offense rates of 2-5%, the majority of child sexual abuse being enacted by a family member or trusted friend), we believe that sex offenders prove a serious threat to children and families. They remain dormant, anonymous, in our neighborhoods, just waiting for the right time to strike. Public online registries were created to satiate our appetite for sex offenders, to indulge in our darkest fears, and inspect all the bogeymen that haunt our fantasies.

Read the rest of the article

OH - Is Halloween law needed?

Original Article

10/23/2013

By MARGARET THOMPSON

Rumors of razor blades in apples, children walking by themselves on busy streets at night, strangers wearing masks - Halloween festivities can conjure up a parent's worst nightmares.

For the second year, Girard is hoping to eliminate some perceived risks by preventing registered sexual offenders from participating in the activities, but whether the ordinance will be effective in preventing reoffense has yet to be seen.

The Girard ordinance prohibits registered sex offenders from using exterior lights on their homes and opening their doors to trick-or-treaters on city designated trick-or-treat days. They are also forbidden from decorating their homes and yard for Halloween.

"The following regulations impose reasonable time, place and manner regulations and are rationally related to the advance the city's interest in protecting children and the general public," the ordinance reads.

"Obviously we can't do enough to protect our children," Girard Mayor James Melfi said. "We're taking that step to show people we are thinking. It sets the stage for more awareness."

Similar ordinances have been passed in municipalities across the nation, several weeks ago in nearby Orwell and several years ago in multiple Texas cities. Last year, Simi Valley, Calif., passed an ordinance similar to Girard's but with the additional mandate that offenders post a sign in their yards announcing that no candy will be passed out at their residence.

Fact Box

---

Most common Halloween violations:

• Theft - 32%
• Destruction or vandalism - 21%
• Assault - 19%
• Burglary - 9%
• Sex crimes - 1%

Source: Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment

The city was sued for encroaching on offenders' freedom of speech (Wikipedia) and ordered to remove the sign requirement.

Janice Bellucci, an attorney and president of the California Reform Sex Offender Laws group, led the lawsuit on behalf of the offenders. RSOL has state chapters across the country including one in Ohio. Bellucci said there is a common misconception nationwide that "once a sex offender, always a sex offender." She said, however, according to a study by the Department of Justice only 5.3 percent of offenders were found to recommit sex crimes within three years after being released from prison.

The study followed about 9,700 sex offenders, about 4,300 of whom were child molesters. Because of the low rate of reoffense, Bellucci said she believes the extra Halloween regulations are not effective and actually impose on the offenders' First Amendment rights.

Girard Law Director Brian Kren said the local ordinance was drafted to be "as respectful of peoples' rights as possible" even in the "limited circumstance" that offenders may attract children to their homes.

There are "no significant increases in sex crimes on or around Halloween," according to a study prepared for Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment. The study lead by Lynn University Associate Professor Jill Levenson Ph.D. drew conclusions by analyzing more than 67,000 non-familial sex crimes against children ages 12 and under. The study also concluded that any Halloween policies adopted during the 1997 to 2005 time period "appear not to have impacted the overall offense rate."

"You need to look at who it is that commits the crimes," Bellucci said, "93 percent of people who commit the crimes are not on the register. They are family members, teachers, members of the clergy, coaches and unfortunately in this time Boy Scouts leaders."

She said the Halloween ordinances are missing the target.

"In some cases these regulations give people a false sense of security. They think 'Oh, I am going to let my kids go out on their own.'"

When her children were young enough to trick-or-treat, she said she always made sure they were accompanied out of fear they might get hit by vehicles on the road. That is a well-placed fear, according to the CDC, since children are four times more likely to be killed in a vehicle accident on Halloween night.

Nevertheless, Melfi said Girard will uphold its ordinance even if it had never had a past incident in the city - home to six registered sex offenders.

"We're not taking that chance. That is her concern defending her clients as an attorney, ours is keeping our children safe," he said. "I don't think it's done anything at this time, but it's made an awareness."

Manufacturing Fear: Halloween Laws for Sex Offenders

Original Article

10/21/2013

By Emily Horowitz

In North Carolina, a sheriff tells parents to check the online sex offender registry before allowing children to trick-or-treat. In Montana, a town offers a "trunk-or-treat" event where kids can get Halloween candy from trunks of cars in a parking lot to avoid potential danger. In New York, "Operation Halloween: Zero Tolerance" prohibits sex offenders from wearing masks or costumes or answering their doors on Halloween, and, as a parole source says, "There is certainly nothing more frightening than the thought of one of these men opening their door to innocent children." In Oklahoma, a city council is considering an ordinance forbidding sex offenders from decorating their homes or passing out candy on Halloween. In Orange, California, sex offenders can't answer their door or have outside lighting on Halloween, but an additional ordinance requiring window signs saying, "No candy or treats at this residence" was recently revoked after attorneys argued it was a form of cruel and unusual punishment.

Why worry about sex offenders on Halloween? Research shows no evidence of increased child sex abuse on Halloween and no evidence that a child was ever a victim of sexual abuse by a stranger while out trick-or-treating. This makes perfect sense, because government data shows the vast majority (about 93%) of sex crimes against children are not committed by strangers but by family members or acquaintances. Recently, the afternoon talk show The Doctors examined the debate over the "No candy" signs, and the physicians agreed that the existing laws that barring sex offenders from decorating their homes, having their lights on, and answering the door are probably enough to keep kids safe without the additional signs. Nevertheless, the message to the audience was clear: special sex offender laws are especially important on Halloween.

These laws are the direct product of a culture marked by decades of irrational fears about children and safety on Halloween. Sociologists, such as Joel Best, have tried to understand the urban myths surrounding poisoned candy on Halloween. Media reports warning of potential dangers, such as razor blades in apples, first appeared in the early 1970s, and then spread via word-of-mouth. Best has never found a death or injury of a child on Halloween related to candy based on his decades of research -- and the only substantiated case involves a child deliberately harmed by his own father.

These myths rely on the premise that evil adults are waiting to harm innocent children on Halloween. The poisoned candy myths emerged during a time of increasing fear of crime was increasing and growing awareness about child abuse and child safety. Today, even the Center for Disease Control warns children to only eat pre-wrapped candy and to avoid all homemade treats. The implication is not just that there is a legitimate and genuine risk for poisoning -- after all, the Centers for Disease Control is a federal agency solely concerned with preventing disease and injury, and they are telling children unwrapped, poisoned treats are a real hazard -- but that buying pre-wrapped candy for children is a more caring and neighborly act than baking homemade cookies or giving out fresh fruit. In other words, the sterility of consumerism can keep us safe and sound.

Sex offender laws on Halloween are a natural outgrowth of the fear of a night of social disorder and grave danger, rooted in the belief that any law that can potentially protect children, or even one child, is a good one. Unfortunately, these laws don't protect children, nor do they make us feel safer about a child-centric holiday. Children are not at any special risk from sex offenders or sadistic neighbors out to poison them, and these laws increase fear and anxiety and remove fun and excitement. Halloween should be a night to meet neighbors and connect with community, and it is incredibly harmful to view the occasion as anything else.

In New York, a county executive argued in favor of Halloween sex offender laws because, he said, this holiday is, "a unique situation where children are literally showing up at the doors of sex offenders." When we think about Halloween in this absurd way, as a night of potential child-victims presenting themselves to the sex offenders all around, the only possible response can be sheer terror. Similarly, California's "Operation Boo" promises parents that police, "will enforce the traditional compliance checks on known sex offenders to make sure they're staying away from trick-or-treaters... special transient sex-offender curfew centers will be set up in some regions and targeted transient sex-offender compliance checks will be held in other areas." Would any parent read this and send their child out on Halloween alone? Although the purpose is to threaten and monitor the sex offenders, it contrarily highlights the threat of sex offenders to children. The idea that these programs will reassure parents is absurd. It reminds us that "predators" are everywhere, and, not only that, many sex offenders are homeless and roaming the streets... and possibly an even greater threat than the ones who might lure children into their homes.

Most sex offenders live with spouses, children, or parents, and these policies subject entire families to humiliation and actual danger. Almost 95% of sex offenders are first-time offenders and very few sex offenders are "predators" who prey on the children of strangers (one study found about 5% of sex offenders are dangerous to children -- and sex offenders include those convicted of streaking, public urination, consensual sex between minors, "Romeo and Juliet" scenarios, and, in some states, even men who visit prostitutes).

In the weeks before Halloween, local news stations feature safety tips and reminders about sex offender threat. These stories remind us that sex offenders are everywhere, and that Halloween is simply another opportunity for sex offenders to lure children into their homes. A story on a local Florida news station describes how there are "hundreds of sex offenders living among us," as if we are, literally, surrounded by a creeping and predatory alien force that is not human and not like us. The caption behind the anchor has a shadowed, dark male face branded with the words "sex offender" and "predator". The story tells us that while law enforcement is doing an enormous amount of work tracking these "offenders and predators", but parents have to also help keep children safe. One way to do this, they suggest, is by using mobile applications that allow parents create maps of local sex offenders. They can use this while trick-or-treating, because it shows which houses to avoid, as well as photographs and other details about the sex offenders in the neighborhood. Just like pre-packaged candy and consumer advocacy, technology and vigilance can keep our children safe from danger and uncertainty.

The false dichotomy of evil adults and innocent children and families prevents children from meeting their neighbors and becoming part of a community. Sex offenders are subject to more post-punishment restrictions than any other ex-offenders, and have lower recidivism rates. Halloween sex offender laws, and rampant media coverage of the threat of sex offenders on Halloween and throughout the year, is creating a neurotic and fearful generation of kids who grow up thinking they are helpless prey facing threats from real monsters. Children are safest when they know their neighbors, and Halloween is a good opportunity to meet others in the community. There are some actual threats to child safety on Halloween -- like an increase in pedestrian car accidents -- but sex offenders and poisoned candy aren't among them.

OH - Sex Offender Halloween Ban - Just the usual yearly mass hysteria!

FL - Experts: Social networking a "playground" for predators

Original Article

10/08/2013

By Isabel Mascarenas

TAMPA - Parents teach children at a young age to not talk to strangers, but it's a lesson that seems lost when it applies to the Internet, a place cyber crimes experts call a playground for predators.
- The term "predator" covers more than just sexual crimes! The Internet is also a "playground" for many other criminals as well, like identity thieves, spammers, hackers, hate groups, etc, but those don't stir up emotions like the sex offender hysteria. Technology is always exploited by people and always will. If someone is intent on committing a crime they will. Parents and schools should be teaching kids common sense and educating them on sexual abuse, privacy, security, etc, not fear mongering BS!

Every time a teenager turns on their smart phone, computer, iPod, Xbox, or any electronic device with Internet access, there are countless of places to travel to and meet people.

"All the bad people in the world have access to you if you have access to them ... With technology, it's becoming a target-rich environment for pedophiles, for people preying on children," says Detective Bill Lindsey with the Cyber Crimes Unit at the Pasco Sheriff's Office.
- Based on the true definition of pedophile, pedophiles are rare and not the norm like the media continually tries to make it seem.  Just because someone molests a child, that doesn't mean they are a pedophile!

Lindsey says one popular site is Meetme.com. It claims to have 90 million members as young as 13 years old. Until last year, users knew it as Myyearbook.com, described on Facebook as "a social networking site for teens." Members have live webcams, where Lindsey says predators solicit videos and pictures.

Lindsey says, "The kinds of adults that are getting on Meetme.com and meeting children are doing that with malicious intent."

Unlike sites such as Facebook that will match one up with mutual friends or interests, sites such as Meetme.com will recommend people based on where one lives. 10 News checked for sexual offenders and predators and found 314 within a 5-mile radius.

Lindsey says, "It's terrifying. Parents don't know how much danger their children are in."
- If the parents and schools were educating their children, then this wouldn't be much of an issue, now would it?

Lindsey says teens often give away too much information online, listing schools, interests, and hangouts, providing predators with a road map to them and to trouble.

"We've had juveniles who have met adults online because they were their suggested friends, and adults take advantage of that online relationship, set up meetings in person, and engage in unlawful sex with minors," says Lindsey.

"In my situation, he wasn't a predator. He was a normal guy who swept me off my feet. I fell in love with him," says 18 year old Alexis Carrascos. Her nightmare began when she is 16 years old. She says, "To think all this started online from me posting a little too much information."

When Alexis met her ex-boyfriend, she thought it was a chance encounter. Later in the relationship, she learned he stalked her on Facebook first through mutual friends and pictures she'd tag online while out with those friends.

Alexis says, "If I could go back and un-tag myself in all those locations I would. It could have saved me a lot of trouble, a lot of heartache, a lot of lessons I think I learned too early in life."
- You can as far as we know.

Alexis says three months into the relationship she learned her 17-year-old boyfriend was really 18, and she says he became aggressive. Alexis says, "He started being very pushy, very jealous, very controlling."

And she says he became very violent, from grabbing her to punching walls. The break up included a restraining order against him. "He would stalk me," she says.

Alexis says she needed therapy plus extra protection. Alexis started carrying a taser and a trained dog for protection. Six months after the relationship ended, she's learning to trust again. "I'm still very alert with who sees my things, who likes my things, who's my friend on Facebook or Instagram or whatever."
- This is how everybody should be.  Don't post personal information at all.

Her advice to teens is to use caution online. She says, "If you don't know them, don't friend them. You don't need to necessarily tell people where you are because it's so easy for a predator, anybody that looks like a normal person, to become a stalker, to become possessive or abusive, lead to something that you don't want."

Meetme.com says it has "zero tolerance for abuse" and has staff to monitor images posted 24/7, Lindsey says, "Meetme.com is the most proactive of the social media online at policing their own website. They make an incredible amount of complaints to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children."

Detective Lindsey and Alexis say that doesn't replace parents from keeping an eye on their kids' online activities.

Alexis says, "This generation, we're too friendly. We think no one is going to cause us harm."

Detective Lindsey advises parents to know their child's passwords and frequently review each account with them. Also, make sure each friend is someone they know. And don't stop at Facebook; he suggests checking all their online accounts, including messaging sites such as kik, Twitter and Instagram.

Friend Verifier - Facebook App Doesn't Work

We've installed and tested this application, and it doesn't work! Since ex-offenders are discriminated against on Facebook (See section 4, item 6), and elsewhere, many do not use their real names, and to be honest, neither should you! Even for those who do, it doesn't spot them, so this is another application which has good intentions, but is flawed and provides people with a false sense of security. We noticed they have other services, where you must pay, so, this is probably their way of getting to you, so you will use their other paid services, by exploiting the sex offender hysteria. When you allow the government to put criminal records online, it's only a matter of time before your personal records are also online. That is our opinion of course.

We posted a comment on their Facebook page, with a link to this post, and as expected, they posted the usual lies and slander, as seen in the photo below. This just shows the type of ignorance and biased people we are up against.

Click the image to enlarge, if needed

Video Description:
Friend Verifier is a Facebook App powered by Verify Anybody that allows you to scan your friends and pending friend requests on Facebook against the United States Sex Offender Registry.
- So what about all other criminal records?  Wouldn't you like to know if one of your "friends" is a serial killer or thief?

Video Link


Video Link

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