The village where half the population are sex offenders

The village where half the population are sex offenders

GOVTRACK.US - Easily track the activities of the United States Congress

GOVTRACK.US - Easily track the activities of the United States Congress

Motions filed for Ma'Lik Richmond

Attorney argues that sex offender classification is unconstitutional

STEUBENVILLE - An attorney representing Ma'Lik Richmond in his rape case in juvenile court is arguing a sex offender classification is unconstitutional because it subjects Richmond to double jeopardy.

Richmond, 16, of Steubenville in March was found delinquent of a charge of rape in connection with an incident involving an underage girl that happened last August.

Retired Juvenile Judge Tom Lipps sentenced Richmond and Trent Mays, 17, of Bloomingdale to a minimum of one year in a Department of Youth Services facility. Mays also was sentenced to another minimum of one year after he was found delinquent of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material for having a picture of the 16-year-old victim in an outgoing text message on his cell phone.

This was a letter sent to John Walsh....but I thought I should share it with everyone...

To: John Walsh
Have you ever considered that you are punishing innocent/undeserving people with YOUR crusade???  I was a victim from the time I was 5.  One of my abusers was a police officer.  When I told MY story it was ignored.  Why is that????  So over the years I have followed all of these changes.  What are the statute of limitations on these kind of crimes and should there even be one if one exists?  And are these offenders any more of a threat then someone who murders?  Oh, you say there are different levels of the offense? Shouldn't that apply to the sex offender?   I understand that sex offenders need to be monitored BUT I see to much misuse of the system and the law enforcers NOT doing their job and punishing the offender following the rules.  Where is their JUSTICE?  I am looking to change these laws to help keep the focus where it needs to be, THE CHILDREN!  I don't believe monitoring a person that has been mislabeled a SEX offender because he tapped a young girl on the shoulder a threat.  Monitoring this type of person is taking away from the people we NEED to be watching and monitoring.  THE PREDATOR.  The law named after son was implemented for just that, THE PREDATOR.  Not the person who had consensual sex.  I believe too much time and money are wasted on these types of people.  And lets not push aside all the problems Megan's Law has caused. What are we solving by publishing these people?  I'll tell you....NOTHING.  Murders to me are just as dangerous, yet they don't register. Why?  The fear and stigma of a SEX OFFENDER should be used for those committing those heinous crimes, not for frivolous and erroneous accusations.  I am starting a advocacy for those mislabeled offenders. I watched you on the View and love the new device, but what do you do for the people who can't afford them?  I would like help forming this advocacy.  I believe it will help everyone.  As a women that has experienced all sides of the law, I want to help change this bad misconception of certain sex offenders, and strengthen the laws for those who violate it.  I want to be the voice that I should have had.
I am looking for supporters.  Anyone willing to lend their voice to my cause?

No Justice: Sex Offenses, No Matter How Minor or Understandable, Can Ruin You for Life

No Justice: Sex Offenses, No Matter How Minor or Understandable, Can Ruin You for Life

90 Sex Offenders Might Become Homeless in Miami-Dade Next Week.

90 Sex Offenders Might Become Homeless in Miami-Dade Next Week.

Changes to Sex Offender Laws – Moving in the Right Direction?

The root of the ineffectiveness of the current laws is the tendency to base policies on our cultural disgust and fear of sex offenders rather than on a rational analysis of the best way to protect society. Empirical studies from Colorado and Minnesota show that residency restrictions have no correlation to lower re-offense rates, law enforcement agencies complain that bloated registries drain resources and hamper effective monitoring of more dangerous sex offenders, and countless examples exist of non-dangerous minor offenders whose lives have been deeply impacted or ruined by overly broad classification of sex offenders. However, the political will of the legislature is still being driven by public misconceptions, as several states consider imposing stricter requirements on sex offenders.

Oklahoma recently passed a law that bans convicted sex offenders from living with children. It sounds sensible—sex offenders were already restricted from living near schools—yet Oklahoma requires registration of those who commit indecent exposure (excluding public urination) or who crimes involving producing or distributing “obscene material,” which can include pornography depicting only adults. Pending legislation HB1193 would require an law enforcement agencies to notify the local newspaper of sex offenders designated as “habitual” or “aggravated.”

New York, which currently imposes no residency restrictions on sex offenders, is considering banning sex offenders from living within 1000 feet of a school, daycare or park. Even though 1000 feet is on the lower end of residency restrictions, this could be a difficult requirement in the New York City metropolitan area, especially for homeless offenders. Another proposal, S06073, could also have a disparate impact on homeless or transient offenders by requiring Electronic Home Monitoring (ankle bracelets) on offenders who fail to register two or more times. Homeless offenders are much more likely to have registration issues since they have no address to register, and often have mental health issues or other problems that limit their ability to comply.

A bill in Iowa would require nursing homes and assisted living facilities to conduct a sex offender registry check prior to the admission of any new tenants or patients, and then to notify all residents, the emergency contact of all residents, the facilities’ staff, and all visitors to the facility. While it makes sense to want to protect these more vulnerable populations, the nursing facilities covered by the bill have argued that this will impose an onerous burden on their time and resources.

Louisiana leads the charge in the current race to get tough on sex offenders, as Governor Bobby Jindal has made it one of the top priorities of his administration. He has already having signed legislation mandating longer prison sentences for sex offenders and authorizing chemical castration for rapists, in which hormone-limiting drugs are used to reduce libido and capacity for arousal. Although seemingly effective, chemical castration raises serious ethical questions when not undertaken voluntarily (it is reversible, unlike physical castration, but can pose serious health risks in some cases). And Louisiana isn't done—SB428  prohibits sex offenders from living within three miles of their victims and prohibits any form of communication with the victims or family members without their prior written consent. The goal of preventing traumatizing the victims is a noble one, but a three mile restriction in addition to the restrictions around schools and parks is going to create even more limited options, and in smaller towns could effectively result in banishment. Another popular proposal, SB442 seeks to ban sex offenders convicted of certain crimes (mostly involving minors) from social networking sites including Facebook. A legal challenge to a similar ban in Indiana has made the argument that this infringes on First Amendment rights by also preventing offenders from engaging in political, religious, or business-oriented activity on these sites, and a ruling is expected within a month.

The ideas behind these proposals are well-intented, and some could actually be good ideas within a more sensible overall regime. Yet as long as the registries remain bloated with low-risk offenders and our policies remain focused on punishment and stigmatization rather than prevention and rehabilitation, sex offender laws will continue to do more harm than good.

How Sex Offender Laws Fail to Protect the Public

Information Problems

Sex offender registries are perhaps the best-known aspect of sex offender regimes. Since the passage of the Jacob Wetterling Act in 1994, every state has been required by federal law to maintain a sex offender registry. By making the names and addresses of sex offenders readily available to the public, often with interactive maps, the goal is to empower people with information so they can take appropriate steps to protect themselves and their families.

However, this information does not really prove useful for enhancing safety. If there is a sex offender in your neighborhood, you can tell your kids to stay away from the creepy guy’s house, but that’s about it. Most sex offenders are not under house arrest, so unless you memorize every face pictured in the directory, you’re in the dark when you go to a public place. Furthermore, since most sex offenses are committed by first-time offenders who know their victims, not strangers who have previously been convicted, the registry could not have provided useful information for prevention in the majority of cases. However, this information is useful for community members who wish to engage in violent vigilantism or harassment of sex offenders. While most people don’t have much sympathy for sex offenders subject to harassment, innocent people have also been hurt due to mistakes or misunderstandings of the registry, such as this 78 year-old man who was beaten to death with a baseball bat because his name was similar to a convicted sex offender’s.

Another problem with some states’ registries lies in the overly broad classification of crimes as sex offenses. In at least ten states, you can earn the sex offender designation from fairly innocuous forms of public indecency like streaking, mooning, or urinating in public. None of the registries provide any factual details of the offenses, just the names of the crimes (and sometimes not even that). So if a registry lists the offense of indecent exposure, for example, the public has no way of distinguishing a high school prankster who streaks a football game from a creep who purposely goes to a playground and waves his member at children to achieve sexual gratification. Many registries also contain numerous purely statutory offenders who are often also minors at the time of the offense, such as a 17 year-old who engages in consensual sexual activity with his 15 year-old girlfriend. In many jurisdictions, this would be labeled “sexual assault against a minor,” which makes this person look like a greater threat than the circumstances suggest. By effectively diluting the sex offender registry with people who pose little threat to public safety, it is more difficult to identify and keep track of the high-risk offenders. California, as an extreme example, has the largest registry in the country with over one hundred thousand registered sex offenders. This is an overwhelming amount of information to sift through, and can make it appear a sex offender is lurking around every corner – just look at the map of Los Angles county. Rather than providing useful information, it just scares and furthers the misconception that the risk of sex offenses is increasing at an alarming rate.

Sex Offender Court Decisions: Judge overturns 15-year extension of sex offender'...

Sex Offender Court Decisions: Judge overturns 15-year extension of sex offender'...: Case to be appealed see HERE 7-15-2013 Kansas: Citing the U.S. Constitution forbidding more punishment for a crime already resolved,...

Sex Offender Court Decisions: Nevada Supreme Court upholds classification and re...

Sex Offender Court Decisions: Nevada Supreme Court upholds classification and re...: 7-26-2013 Nevada: The Nevada Supreme Court , in a split decision, has upheld the constitutionality of a law that requires certain juvenile...

Sex offender registry expansion approved by House

Sex offender registry expansion approved by House

Why are the federal prison beds for women in the Northeast going to men—while the women get shipped to Alabama?

Why are the federal prison beds for women in the Northeast going to men—while the women get shipped to Alabama?

Sheriff: Man killed couple because husband was sex offender

Sheriff: Man killed couple because husband was sex offender

Changing the sex offender laws again?

Sex offender registries were created as a response to several heinous crimes where the victim was attacked by an offender who had served time in prison and been released without the public's knowledge. The theory behind registries is that when people know where a convicted offender lives, they can take precautions to keep themselves and their families safe. These laws are suppose to be there to protect the children.  Unfortunately these laws aren't really making that big of a difference.

I see a lot of flaws in the registry program.  Starting with the prosecutors wrongfully charging an individual for sex crime.  This classification of crime should be used for serious sexual offenses.  Not pissing on the sidewalk.   The State and local law enforcement that fails to do their job and the wrong people pay the price.  

  What happens when a child lies and a persons life is now ruined forever?  Especially when there is no hardcore evidence and the attorney for the accused fails to look into the charge.  How many falsely accused sex offenders are there?  Yes, I know people are falsely accused of crimes all the time.  But it doesn't carry the stigma of a sex offender.

 Why in the world do we put people that commit certain sex crimes in the  sames category as a child molester and predators?

 Certain things we did years ago that were considered innocent and harmless, (such as having teenage sex).  How many people have had sex in their car and got caught?  This is now considered a SEX crime?!  If convicted you are subjected to the same basic rules as a predator.  Your face is on a sex registry, you must tell the sheriffs office of your whereabouts or face prison, and all because you had sex with your then boyfriend or girlfriend?   And lets not forget the falsely accused.  They do exist as well.  So now we have these people carrying a serious, life ruining label, who do not pose threat to anyone, living in shame,  Why is this? 

 Why are we wasting our time with these lower level offenders? People charge with sex crimes, that when truly evaluated, weren't sexual in nature at all.  Each case should be evaluated when it comes to SEX CRIMES, if this was done, we would find the registry system a lot less crowded, our tax dollars would go further,  and you would be viewing the faces of the people we really SHOULD fear? 

I don't agree with the way prosecutors go about charging someone with a sex crime when the evidence is not supporting such a charge.

 I believe the State of Florida uses the sex crime statute  way too much. They don't investigate the crimes properly and if the accused is represented by the public defenders office, chances are the will not be dealt with fairly. 

PLEASE, PLEASE remember, not all sex offenders have cases involving children. I don't believe that every time a heinous crime against a child happens and we change the laws that it should apply to ALL sex offenders.

So, today I sit and watch the news and read articles where we now are charging the same children the sex offender laws were put in place to protect, and making them sex offenders?!!!  REALLY!!!!!   Now how are people going to view these sex offenders......   There are serious changes to be made.  Let 

Tired of the injustice?.....Help us to change these laws.   

Louisiana removes sex-offender label from those who shouldn't have had it

Thursday, July 18, 2013

7-18-2013 Louisiana:

Michael A. Dodele, whose crimes had earned him a place on California's sex-offenders registry, was murdered by neighbor Ivan Garcia Oliver in November 2007, 35 days after Dodele moved into a mobile home in California's Lake County. Oliver, who was convicted of first-degree murder in 2012, never denied killing the man.

Instead, in a jailhouse interview with the Los Angeles Times, Oliver gave what amounted to a manifesto. His son had already been molested, Oliver explained. Then Dodele, whose name was on the registry, moved into the neighborhood. "Society may see the action I took as unacceptable in the eyes of 'normal' people. I felt that by not taking evasive action as a father in the right direction, I might as well have taken my child to some swamp filled with alligators and had them tear him to pieces. It's no different."

California listed Dodele's crimes as "rape by force" and "oral copulation with a person under 14 or by force." As for the oral copulation, it was the "by force" part that applied to Dodele.

"He was convicted of other bad things," a Lake County prosecutor told the Los Angeles Times, "but nothing involving a minor." Oliver leaped to the wrong conclusion. He isn't much different in that regard from most of us. We tend to assume that people on a sex-offenders list have hurt children.

I imagine that's why "Louise" was so quick to tell me what she hadn't done when we spoke in October 2011. "I've never molested a child," she said. Even so, "I can't even celebrate Halloween or go trick-or-treating with my kids." Louisiana's registration laws didn't distinguish between predators who had raped or otherwise exploited minors and desperate drug addicts who, like Louise had, peddled oral sex on the streets.

Nope. In Louisiana a sex offender was a sex offender was a sex offender. And all of them with the label were instructed to register their addresses and keep their distance from children.

That's why it was such a big deal last week when U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman approved a settlement that removes hundreds of names from the state's sex-offender registry. It was wrong in and of itself for the law to label prostitutes as if they were predators. But not everybody selling sexual gratification got the label. Only those who sold oral or anal sex. Those selling intercourse could get convicted repeatedly and never be labeled a sex offender.

In 2011, the Louisiana Legislature changed the law so that those convicted of soliciting oral and anal sex wouldn't have to register, but that didn't help people whose names were already on the list. Thanks to a settlement between the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Louisiana attorney general's office, those names will be removed.

Attorney General James "Buddy" Caldwell should have removed the names sooner, but as the Legislature was debating changing the law, an attorney from Caldwell's office said the state couldn't afford the $37,000 a year it might take to go back and remove the names of people like Louise, people who hadn't ever preyed on anybody. Caldwell continued his foot-dragging even after Feldman ruled last year that the state had no "rational basis" for putting people like Louise on its registry. In a December hearing, Feldman said, "I am incredulous and very concerned about why this process has been dragged out against the backdrop of politics for so long."

Louise had cleaned herself up from drugs and was a full-time college student when we spoke. But she was weary of all the obstacles she routinely encountered as a labeled sex offender. She had an upcoming court date after being charged with not registering as she should have. She later pleaded guilty to avoid going to jail.

But the label itself was its own kind of prison, not to mention an invitation for scorn and ridicule. Some people think they can do anything to convicted sex offenders, that people with that label can't be mistreated. They're wrong, of course. And Louisiana itself was wrong for ever burdening non-predators with that label. ..Source.. by Jarvis DeBerry

Another reason to fight

Here's the deal... in Texas law says that you cant admit evidence of past felony conviction during guilt/innocence phase of a criminal trial. Trial for failure to register as a sex offender does exactly that. so the rights of a person that has been found guilty whether admitted or convicted of a sex offense in a trial during failure to register can be objected and mistrial should and i say SHOULD because there are some judges that fear death of themselves and not their duty to uphold the law that they swore to protect will not admit that the trial of a person failing to register is in fact violating the rule that tainting the jury or court of conviction of past felony offenses during that said trial is in fact a violation of that persons right to a fair trial. Therefore a person being held trial for failure to register has been subjected to conflict of interest and should have their lawyer object. No other offense of this nature can be held in this perspective because no other offense requires public disclosure to this extent and anyone who thinks that i am full of shit should read criminal procedure before violating the natural civil rights of other human beings, whether you think i am one or not.

Signed,

one pissed free and law abiding sex offender

Nevada Rules Sex Offender Law Unconstitutional

Sex Offender Registry - What you may not know

FL - Sex offender talks to ABC Action News about his past

FL - Sex offender talks to ABC Action News about his past

Think about this.......

Sex offenders are treated uniquely under state and federal law as the only offenders whose punishment does not end once they have completed their court-imposed sentence. For many, the punishments they suffer after finishing their sentences are much harsher than those they received from a judge.

While the state's interest in monitoring the activities and limiting the contact with children of the most dangerous offenders is understandable, the law also makes it difficult for those who do not pose a risk of re-offending to re-enter society and attempt to re-establish their lives. Florida and other states need to recognize that not everyone who has been labeled as a sex offender poses the same risk to society and treating them all the same is a grave injustice.

One mans story......

In 1994, at the home of a 28 yr old women, sat some teenage boys about to celebrate their friends 16th birthday.  At the time, this women was under the assumption that these guys were at least 18.  And that the birthday boy was to hit his 18th as well.  They joked to the women to give him a birthday "GIFT".  By the next morning this 16 yr old had his first "OLDER" women experience.  It seemed a trendy thing to do back then.  This birthday gift actually turned into a long term relationship.

Several years later and some run ins with the law, this young man was finally 18. Lets call him Will. He had gone to the women and tried to end the relationship, but the women was mad.  Threatening and telling him "if I can't have you, no one will".  Will left anyway.

While sitting in jail awaiting his fate on other charges, this women comes out of no where with accusations he sexually assaulted her then 14 year old daughter.  The incident she described to the State Attorney was that this young man climbed through the girls bedroom window, tapped her on the shoulder and asked her to smoke a joint. The state charged Will with "lewd and lascivious act in the presents of a minor".  She testified in open court that the girl was devastated and scared she was receiving extensive therapy. There was never any kind of investigation, other then depositions taken by the state from the alleged victim, her mother (who was Will's lover from the time he was 16-18 years of age), and some of her live in associates, including a live in, legal aged,  boyfriend. 

So why was the state going with a sexual charge?  Why not endangering the welfare of a minor?  Since when is a tap on the shoulder and offering a joint a sexual act?  And why wasn't the mother charged with having sex with a minor?

NONE of these questions were EVER answered.  Will told his attorney he was not even in the house at the alleged time.  He had an alibi. BUT..........because he was suppose to be at a work release center and had absconded, his story was useless. No ones going to believe you, his attorney said, you weren't where you were suppose to be.  There was no physical evidence that Will was anywhere near the alleged victims home.  he was in another town with many witnesses.  No one was ever questioned. No DNA, FINGERPRINTS, NOTHING!  It wasn't brought up AT ALL!!!!!  Just the accusations from a scorned women and her coerced daughter.  I say that because this young girl was told by her mother what to tell people.  This girl was already going to therapy for other issues.  Her mother had 7 children and a different father for each.  NOTHING was looked into.  Will wasn't even aware of the repercussions and severity of the charge he faced from the alleged victim.  He was told.  Take the plea or your going to spend a very long time in prison.  With no help or guidance he took the plea.  His life would never be the same.

He became another young person lost in the already bogged down judicial system.  Most of these young people have no knowledge of the law.  They trust their Attorney is doing everything they can to help them, because they don't have any choice.  There should be more options for people faced with these overwhelming charges.  Was this fair......this man now has to register as a sex offender for a crime he didn't commit.  He will be view with disgust and loathing from society because a women lied????? Unbelievable!

 Then to make matters worse, you arrest him and charge him with failing to change his address and failing to report the change.   Each time Will moved he changed his address with the DMV and the sheriff's office, as he is suppose to do according to the rules of the statute.

Okay, now comes the most disturbing part of all......I received a  subpoena from the State of Florida.  As I am in deposition with the assistant state attorney and the defense attorney. The ASA want to know where Will laid his head every night........I responded by siting that the law "Residence either permanent or temporary is a place where a person abides, lodges, or resides for 5 or more CONSECUTIVE days".  She told me I was wrong.  That's not what the law said.  I found it very disturbing that this women defends society against sex offenders and predators and doesn't know the law!!!!!  You have hundreds of homeless sex offenders in the state of Florida and they are VERY hard to trace.  These homeless sex offenders and predators move about every day with no answering to the police.  They are suppose to call in EVERYDAY when you classify yourself as homeless.  How do they know where these people really are?  They can call from anywhere.  Especially now that the government supplies them with free phones.

Your going to try to lock up a person because he may or may not have spent every single solid night at his place of residence.  Is that what the law says?  NO!  Will stayed in compliance every step of the way.  I fault FDLE and the Sheriff's office with failing to do THEIR job and then want to punish innocent people for their screw ups.

We are taking this case to trail.  One that will waste the taxpayers money.  All because a uneducated ASA doesn't know her law.  She is wasting countless time on a clear case of a misunderstanding,  to possibly have a REAL predator/sex offender slip through because you didn't get all the facts straight.  How many others have suffered this same or similar fate?  I believe each case should be evaluated separately, and that the sex offender label not be used so liberally.  How can you put a one time sex offender, whose crime happened so long ago, with no new or repeated sex offense, in the same class as one who stalks and preys on our children??????

I'm making a stand and I'm making a change......  I want to be their advocate.