Never forget those who have died because of various sex offender laws.
Showing posts with label ( .News-Heads Up. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ( .News-Heads Up. Show all posts

March 29, 2017

Appeals Court Overturns Most Convictions Against Child Molester

3-29-17 New York:

Prosecutors said the case against 47 year old Shawn Vickers of Batavia was one of the worst cases of child molestation they had ever seen.

Three years ago, Vickers was convicted on five felony charges of child sex abuse. But now, a state appeals court has thrown out four of those convictions. The court ruled that Vickers was not tried on the charges for which he was indicted, even though he had agreed to the changes.

Vickers was originally sentenced to 100 years in state prison. But even with the most serious convictions in Genesee County tossed out, he remains behind bars for molesting children in Niagara County. ..Source.. by Dan Fischer

Read More of Article...

January 10, 2017

Has Judicial Watch Uncovered Yet Another Obama Admin Email Scandal?

1-10-17 Washington DC:

Many officials in the Obama administration, and not just Hillary Clinton, improperly used personal email accounts to conduct official business. And we are concerned that they will destroy these emails when they leave office this month.

For that reason, we asked a federal court to preserve the personal email accounts of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and other top officials. Judge Randolph D. Moss held a court hearing last week.

We had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking agency records in the personal email accounts used by Secretary Johnson, Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Chief of Staff Christian Marrone, and General Counsel Stevan Bunnell to conduct official government business (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:16-cv-00967)).

The lawsuit has already uncovered documents showing that Johnson and other top DHS officials were exempted from a strict ban placed on web-based personal email accounts despite heightened security concerns.

The order for the hearing follows a Motion for Preservation Order filed by Judicial Watch on December 22. In that filing Judicial Watch asked the court to issue a preservation order for the non-.gov emails of Johnson, Mayorkas and Bunnell because their departure from government service is anticipated upon the installation of the new administration and Homeland Security will no longer have any control over these individuals: ..Continued.. by Tom Fitton

Read More of Article...

October 5, 2015

2 local men caught in Chris Hansen child-sex sting in Connecticut

He's BACKKKKKKKKKKKK
10-5-15 Connecticut:

Two local men were arrested in a "To Catch a Predator"-style police sting over the weekend in Connecticut.

......., a 64-year-old from Brewster, and ...., a 32-year-old from Harrison, were arrested by Fairfield, Connecticut police during a sting run in conjunction with production of TV news reporter Chris Hansen's Kickstarter-funded project Hansen vs. Predator.

..... faces charges of enticing a minor, criminal attempt at second-degree sexual assault and criminal attempt at risk of injury or impairing the morals of a minor. ......... faces charges of criminal attempt at risk of injury or impairing the morals of a minor.

..... and eight others believed they were exchanging messages online with either a 13-year-old boy or a 12-year-old girl, including both sexually-charged messages and nude photos, The Connecticut Post reported. The "children" gave the men the address of a Fairfield home owned by one of Hansen's friends, and when they arrived were arrested.

According to Hansen vs. Predator's Kickstarter page, the former NBC news reporter plans to release episodes online. It says the new project will reflect changes in mobile technology, which allow predators to find children through social media.

..... is being held on $500,000 bond and is next due in Bridgeport Superior Court Oct. 20. .... is being held on $80,000 bond and is due back Oct. 28. ..Source.. by Matt Coyne

Read More of Article...

September 18, 2015

Should People With Criminal Histories Be Banned From Public Housing?

But not for those with sex convictions!
9-18-15 National:

HUD Secretary Juliàn Castro says the agency is reconsidering rules that make it difficult for ex-offenders to access public housing.

We often talk about the “three-strikes rules” that came about in the 1990s—“tough on crime” federal laws that remanded people convicted of three felony convictions to life in prison.

Only one strike is needed, in many circumstances, however, to get banned from public housing. The 1998 Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act, signed into law by President Bill Clinton, led to new rules from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on who could and couldn’t receive federal housing assistance. They gave local public housing authorities broad authority in using criminal histories to refuse people admission to public housing. Any sex offender is automatically ineligible; at one point, this included sex workers in Louisiana.

In San Francisco, an applicant who’s been convicted of violent crimes against people or property will not be considered by the local housing authority. Drug-related crimes can get you banned from receiving vouchers also. In many cities, you can get screened out or evicted just for having a family member with a drug conviction, and then prohibited from re-admission for three years.

Courts, of course, are far too generous in handing out convictions to African Americans in comparison to other races, especially for drug crimes. And hence, black people are the least sheltered from exclusionary housing policies.

A new report from the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights explains the costs of discrimination against the formerly incarcerated: 79 percent of formerly incarcerated people surveyed in the report said they were denied housing or determined ineligible for it; 18 percent of families surveyed had faced eviction, were denied housing, or became disqualified for public housing when an incarcerated family member returned. ..Continued.. by Brentin Mock

Read More of Article...

September 15, 2015

Teens and Sexual Abuse

9-15-15 National:

Sexual abuse can happen to any teen regardless of gender or sexual orientation. The abuser can be male or female. Different terms used to describe unwanted sexual contact of teens include
  • Sexual abuse: The abuser is a parent, stepparent, sibling, or other relative. The abuse usually happens multiple times. It is often difficult for the teen to disclose the abuse because it involves a family member.
  • Date/acquaintance rape: The abuser is the teen’s current or past dating partner, friend, or classmate.
  • Sexual assault: The abuser is usually a stranger.

..Continued.. by JAMA

Read More of Article...

September 14, 2015

Dad sues Facebook after 11-year-old shared photos and messages with men

9-14-15 Global:

The father of a young girl has sued Facebook for failing to enforce its age restriction policy after claiming his daughter was exposed to sexual predators when she signed up for an account at age 11.

The girl, from Northern Ireland and referred to in court documents as GS, signed up for multiple accounts, posted sexual pictures of herself and contacted men on the social network.

One of the men she came into contact with responded with equally inappropriate pictures, despite the existence of a restraining order forbidding him from contacting her.

Even though Facebook later removed the girl's accounts, lawyers for the family argued the social network had been "negligent" in its "duty of care" for her because it had no system in place to prevent underage users from misrepresenting their dates of birth - a situation that allowed her to return to the site multiple times while still under the age of 13.

The father's legal team said the account creation system was not sufficiently robust at the time and could have benefited from even a "simple" age verification system based around the uploading of passports or other official documents. Solicitor Hilary Carmichael said:
My own personal view is that Facebook isn't suitable for under-18s, but the company isn't even able to uphold its own policy of keeping under-13s out. An age check, like asking for a passport number, would be a simple measure for Facebook to implement.
According to the International Business Times, lawyers also argued that an 11-year-old girl is not capable of giving consent to "throw away her privacy rights" under the Data Protection Act 1998.

After four years of legal back and forth, the case was finally due to be heard in a two-week trial scheduled to begin last Monday in the Northern Ireland High Court. That was, as the Daily Mail reports, until the man and Facebook came to an out of court settlement involving an undisclosed payout.

It will be interesting to see if that news now opens the floodgates for more claims against Facebook from parents whose underage children have signed up to the social network and whether other such sites with poorly enforced age restrictions will also be at risk of potential court action.

As for Facebook itself, a spokesman said:
People have to be 13 to sign up to Facebook. When we become aware that someone is under 13 and they have therefore lied about their age, we remove their account.

Regarding this legal case, all the parties are bound by the confidentiality terms – including Facebook.
If you are a parent or guardian with concerns over an underage child accessing Facebook then there are a few options available to you.

The social network itself suggests showing the child how to delete their account, but also offers a form for reporting accounts belonging to anyone under the age of 13. The company says where an account is reported, along with reasonable proof that the user is underage, it will delete the account promptly.

If your child is over the age of 13, gaining access to an account or having it deleted is likely to prove tricky - due to privacy laws - but Facebook does offer this advice: ...Continued... by Lee Munson

Read More of Article...

August 17, 2015

My Best Friend Committed Suicide and I Later Found Out He Was a Child Molester

8-17-15 National:

On the one hand I have my best friend, the man I had loved like a brother. And then there was the man who was accused of molesting children.

Greg* (Name changed) was my best friend.

We had bonded over a shared loss. My boyfriend of three years had slept with the girl he had a crush on. It was rough for both of us, but misery makes for strange company sometimes and because of our mutual pain, we became friends. The best of friends.

At the end of a long work day, we would often sit in his office and talk about anything; work, home, our love lives or lack thereof. We had known each other for over a decade and there wasn’t much we couldn’t say to each other.

However, we were never romantically involved. Plenty of people thought so and we often bickered like an old, married couple but we never felt that attraction for each other. Instead I often tried to set him up on dates or to meet new people but he always declined and would instead encourage me to find that special someone in my life. He was a brother to me and I felt very protective of him.

Then something changed for the both of us.

I started taking classes and developed a friendship with a girl in my class. At the same time, Greg withdrew into himself and I honestly didn’t notice at first. I started having lunches with my new friend and other people.

In the beginning, I would invite him to join us but he always seemed to have an excuse. One of my last memories of Greg is seeing him walking away from me, down the street to get lunch, while I went the other way with a group of friends. A part of me wishes I had insisted he join us that day. Maybe it would have made a difference. Probably not.

A couple of months later, he didn’t show up for work on a Monday and everyone started asking me about him. I had no idea what was going on but I went out looking for him with another friend and that’s when things started to unravel.

I found out he had been arrested that previous weekend after being accused of inappropriately touching a young child. He made bail and assured everyone it was just a misunderstanding. Everything would be cleared up soon.

We looked everywhere we could think of that day but we never found him. I found out on Wednesday that he was dead. He had hiked into a wooded area not too far from his home and had taken his own life that previous Monday.

My world was rocked. I was in some serious denial. I didn’t want to believe the accusations and charges that were brought against him. And I learned later that week that the parents of the child that made the accusation dropped their complaint before they could have learned of my friend’s death.

I thought that just proved that it was a misunderstanding. Everything would have turned out OK in the end and my friend’s suicide could have been avoided if everyone had just understood that it was a mistake. Nothing bad happened. Everyone just over-reacted.

I mourned my friend for a long time and learned to deal with his disappearance from my life. I switched jobs, met a wonderful man who would become my husband and I moved on. Always thinking about and missing my friend though. Always wishing he could have been there to share those many milestones with me.

Then one day, 10 years later, I got a phone call that blew my world apart.

A young man who had been close to my friend when he was much younger was coming forward and saying my friend had molested him. Greg had befriended this young boy and had talked about him often to me.

They often played computer games and he took the young boy under his tutelage. I thought he was being a kind of “big brother” to him. I never thought it was anything but innocent.

Apparently this young man had grown up and was now dealing with what happened to him in the past. He blamed the people that were closest to Greg for allowing this to happen, though none of us knew.

None of us were aware this side of our friend could even have existed. I never found out what happened to the young man. I know he never formally made any accusations against Greg and since Greg was dead, we would never hear his side of the story.

However, as much as it pains me to do so, I believe those accusations. This time, over a decade later, I believe this young man and I also believe the young child that accused my friend so many years ago.

It all started to add up: the accuracy, the timing and the things I had learned about my friend in the years prior to this recent accusation. Things that I had previously written off at not important or misunderstood. Now those memories were surfacing and they made sense. I didn’t want to believe it but I knew in my heart… it was the truth.

On the one hand, I have my best friend. The man I had loved like a brother, who I had shared my secrets and desires with. The person I had been mourning for the last decade.

And then there was the man who was accused of molesting children. One of the sickest crimes I could imagine and something I just can’t find in me to forgive. I’ve been right there with other people saying “jail is too good for them” and “they should be made to suffer like their victims.”

How do I reconcile that with the man who was my best friend?

How can I miss him and wish he was still here and also be glad that he decided to take his life and not inflict any more pain on anyone else?

How can that be the same person I loved and mourned?

It’s been several years since that young man came forward and I still find myself thinking about Greg sometimes and then I think about what he has been accused of and it makes me angry. Angry at him. Angry at his accuser for making me confront this and even angrier at myself.

When I hear about someone on TV that has done horrible things I stop and think about that person’s family and friends. Did they know? Were they aware? This was someone they may have loved or trusted. Someone they never had a clue would turn out to be this horrible person. How do they deal with that? How do they cope?

My friend was a accused of being a child molester. He was accused of taken advantage of at least one boy that we are aware of and possibly ruining that young man’s life.

Am I glad he’s dead?

I really don’t know. ..Source.. by K Brannon

Read More of Article...

August 7, 2015

Sex offender escapes prison 'on a surf board' then paddles his way to freedom

When you think you have heard it all. Ahh good, prison now safe, they now prohibit surfboards as inmate property. Guess their Coast Guard was sleeping?
8-7-15 Norway:

Norway's Bastoy prison is situated on an island and has no fences covering its borders. The man made his escape after midnight

A jailed sex offender escaped from an island prison - by making his getaway on a surfboard, police said.

Norway's Bastoy low-security jail is often held up as key working example of the country's unique methods of treating prisoners humanely.

It is famous for not having any fences and allowing inmates to watch movies, go cycling and use local beaches.

But the cushy jail, which is situated on the remote Bastoy island, came a cropper when a crafty crook managed to get hold of a surfboard.

On Wednesday, at some point during the night, he crept past guards and sneaked into the sea.

The convict, in his 20s, took the flotation device and a plastic shovel, which he used as a makeshift paddle.

He sailed almost two miles until he reached the mainland and fled on foot.

Police are searching for the escaped convict but are convinced he is not a danger to the public.

Prison chief Tom Eberhardt said: “It sounds spectacular when it happens this way.

"But if it hadn’t been a surfboard, it could have been something else.

"It’s not so hard to find a floating device of some sort on the island.”

Bastoy prison holds 115 inmates, whose crimes vary from murder and rape to robbery or drugs.

And lags can often be seen tending to the organic farm situated on the island or sunbathing freely on its beaches.

However, despite the drama, officials insist the jail is still a 'safe and secure' facility. ..Source.. by David Raven

Read More of Article...

May 26, 2015

Is It Time to Revisit Sex Offender Supervision for Life?

5-26-15 National:

In the mid-1990s, Americans were shocked by several high-profile child victim sex offenses. In New Jersey, the abduction, rape and murder of seven-year-old Megan Kanka by a paroled sex offender who lived across the street horrified the state and spurred action by elected officials and state agencies.

In less than four months (warp speed for legislative processes), a package of bills was drafted, passed and signed into law.

These bills, known collectively as Megan’s Law, included sex offender registration, community notification based on risk level, DNA testing, exclusionary zones, enhanced sentences, post-incarceration civil confinement, and probation/parole supervision for life. As the technology developed, GPS monitoring was added to the community supervision for life in New Jersey and many other states.

With the exception of DNA testing, none of these provisions had any empirical evidence to support their effectiveness as public policy. This was, however, no deterrent to the rapid and widespread adoption of similar legislation by states, with the active encouragement of the federal government. It was clear that citizens, legislators and governors felt the urgent need to do something to protect vulnerable children from sexual predators.

These laws had intuitive appeal, and that was sufficient to justify their enactment..

While a few legal and policy advocates objected to some of the laws, citing the negative impact of exclusionary zones on the ability to find appropriate housing, of community notification on the ability to find and maintain employment, and the unfairness of civil commitment after a sentence of incarceration had been served, their objections had little impact—especially for civil commitment after the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act in 1997 in Kansas v. Hendricks.

Subsequent research has called into question the effectiveness of other aspects of Megan’s Law, including registration and notification, residence restrictions, enhanced sentences, and revised parole polices. (But as is so often the case, the evidence or lack thereof for the efficacy of a particular public policy has little impact on the longevity of that policy.

One popular policy is lifetime supervision with GPS monitoring. There is some indication that the Supreme Court may join the debate on this issue. The Court recently sent a request for appeal back to the North Carolina Supreme Court with instructions for further consideration and development of a detailed legal record about the case and the issues raised.

The case deals with an appeal to the Supreme Court by a sex offender who was placed under lifetime GPS supervision. The North Carolina courts rejected the sex offender’s appeals that the GPS monitoring was an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.

The Supreme Court’s per curium opinion in that case, Grady v. North Carolina (seems to indicate that the Court thinks that GPS monitoring is a search, and thus governed by the case law related to the Fourth Amendment and the prohibition on unreasonable searches. The Court recently ruled in U.S. v. Jones that the police practice of attaching a GPS monitoring device to a car without a warrant constituted a “search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.” ..Continued.. by William D. Burrell who is a regular blogger for The Crime Report. An independent corrections management consultant specializing in community corrections and evidence-based practices, he spent 19 years as chief of adult probation services for the New Jersey state court system, and taught (2003-2007) in the Department of Criminal Justice at Temple University in Philadelphia. He welcomes readers’ comments.

Read More of Article...

April 13, 2015

OPINION: Utah's white collar crime registry and finding justice in a court of law

4-13-15 Utah:

It was once said that justice is to the advantage of the strong. Looking at our legal system, it is hard to disagree. When the outcome is largely determined by who has the most money and the ability stay in the battle for as long as it takes, it hardly seems like justice. But then perhaps looking for justice in our legal system requires a deeper understanding of how it works.

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, was listening to the argument of a young lawyer who mentioned at several points in his argument that his client sought justice before the court. Justice Holmes listened as long as he could and then said not unkindly, "Young man, let me remind you that this is a court of law, not a court of justice."

A little ironic that the judge is called a “justice” of the court.

But perhaps not.

Whenever I need clarity in understanding a word, I go to my trusty 30 pound 1930s Merriam Webster dictionary. For whatever reason, it seems that there was a time when brevity was not the rule of the day and people went the distance in trying to convey meaning. And though I won’t find a definition for twerking, the solid, foundational words of our language are all there.

The definition of justice is long and varied. It is much more nuanced and complicated than what I think we envision or reduce it down to. It is more than a western movie and the execution of justice by good guys against bad buys. The definition includes words like truth, righteousness, punishment, rights, laws, rewards, disputes, and impartiality.

But when it comes to disputes, the laws of the land are what determine justice. Laws are the rules of engagement in civic life. They are really meant to protect: protect one from bodily harm, protect assets, protect property, protect against…fill in the blank. The person with the law on their side, who can argue it better than the other side, will more than likely win, i.e., get justice. Ignorance of the law has never been a legitimate defense, which is why people with money have lawyers.

But not everyone can afford to keep a lawyer on retainer. This is where legislators come in and establish laws that are meant to be safety nets to protect as many as possible. Just recently Utah passed H.B. 378, The White Collar Crime Registry. This bill created a white collar registry that is much like the sex offender list. The bill came about after a man gave $86,000 to an acquaintance who promised a 25 percent return on his investment. His acquaintance disappeared after the money was given.

This is not an uncommon practice in Utah which has a very high fraud rate, and I think it is noteworthy and about time that the state is doing something about it. In the future, people who are asked to invest in anything can check the registry first to see if the person asking for money is on the list for committing white collar crime.

I applaud the state for doing something about white collar crime, but I still find it reprehensible that there are two classes of criminals, as if white collar crime isn’t as destructive as violent crime.

It is often joked that a man in a suit with a briefcase can rip you off faster than a man with a gun. After what happened on Wall Street, it’s hard to disagree. And furthermore, that none of those bankers, investors, etc., went to jail, even more clearly demonstrates how lacking our justice system actually is. That being said, if we want real justice under the law, we need to seek to have laws established that go after the powerful as well as the weak.

I’m not sure if this registry will actually get the real white collar criminals, but it is a step in the right direction. If legislators can create 500 bills in one legislative session ranging from cow sharing to marijuana legislation, then certainly our lawmakers can draft laws that protect average citizens from being taken by swindling white collar criminals, both nationally and locally, and from Wall Street to State Street.

If there are no laws against gambling with others’ savings, 401ks, or investments; no laws against professionals taking advantage of those who have placed their trust in them, then the law will always be on the side of the deceitful criminal who doesn't look like one. And the unprotected will continue to meet the law rather than justice when they seek redress for the wrongs perpetrated against them.

Companies, banks, and special interest groups spend big bucks getting laws passed in their favor, we should be doing the same. Though we may not have the money, we do have the numbers - and numbers talk. Instead of waiting until legislation has been drafted to do something, we should go on the offensive and push for our own legislation - legislation that benefits and protects us. Then when we are seeking justice, we may just find it in a court of law. ..Source.. by Greta Hyland has a Masters degree in Environmental Policy & Management and has worked for the BLM and the NPS as well as for non-profit organizations. She is a regular contributor to the Utah Adventure Journal and is the Copy Editor at the Independent. She writes regularly on her blog about environmental policy issues affecting the southwest, as well as personal narratives about outdoor recreation and simple living. Her blog can be found at www.thesouthwestjournal.wordpress.com A Utah native, Greta is a consummate desert rat and loves exploring the southwest. She can be reached at editor@infowest.com

Read More of Article...

April 11, 2015

The controversy behind penile plethysmography: why it’s used on convicted sex offenders

4-10-15 New York:

After former NFL player Darren Sharper admitted to drugging and sexually assaulting nine women across four states, he accepted a deal to serve 20 years in prison and be on probation for life.

The most shocking consequence for the former safety for the New Orleans Saints?

He will be forced to undergo penile plethysmograph testing to measure his sexual arousal.

Many convicted sex offenders are required to undergo this testing, which involves strapping a pressure-sensitive device to a man's penis and gauging his reactions to stimulating pictures, video and audio, experts said.

Some experts said sex offenders' responses — especially to "deviant" material — could determine their likelihood of reoffending.

Others contest the merits of penile plethysmography because it's intrusive and not always accurate.

The test works by having sex offenders attach the device, which resembles an arm blood pressure cuff, to themselves in a separate room from a clinician at a doctor's office or in prison.

The device measures blood flow to the penis, either through changes in the volume or circumference, as subjects view stimuli that are tailored to their problems or fetishes, according to guidelines by Oregon's Department of Health.

Pictures and videos show people of different ages and genders partaking in various sexual scenarios and states of undress.

How often the test is conducted depends on the offender.

Orleans Parish Assistant District Attorney Christopher Bowman told the Daily News he could not comment on how this testing would be conducted with Sharper because he could not discuss open cases.

Some experts claim penile plethysmography can help stop sex offenders from acting on their arousal by pinpointing what they're subconsciously attracted to.

"Once an offender's deviant sexual arousal patterns have been identified, treatment interventions can be introduced which are designed to reduce or eliminate these deviant response patterns," the Council on Sex Offender Treatment wrote.

"Behavioral treatment teaches the offender the sequence of events leading to the commission of his deviant behavior and then provides the offender with specific methods to disrupt the offense cycle."

It's important to know what sex offenders' deviant fantasies are, especially because self-reporting can be inaccurate, they said.

"Those sex offenders with the most deviant phallometry patterns have been found to have the highest recidivism," the Council said, calling it "among the most successful" tactics.

But penile plethysmography can't go as far as conclude whether someone will reoffend, David Samadi, the chairman of urology at Lenox Hill Hospital, told the Daily News.

It does, however, provide useful information on the intensity of offenders' sexual arousal, which is often "off the scale" compared to "normal people," he said.

The testing, developed nearly 50 years ago, is also done on average men to determine their sexual health, especially after prostate cancer or surgery, Salamadi said.

In 2006, a court ruled the procedure was intrusive and a deprivation of liberty for sex offenders after a man convicted of child porn possession sued against having to undergo it as part of his supervised release.

One judge compared the test to something out of George Orwell's "1984."

Statistics on how commonly penile plethysmography is used were not immediately available. Samadi said it's rarely implemented nowadays although other reports say it's common.

Penile plethysmography is "not going to solve the whole problem" of sexual assault without providing sex offenders with psychological help, community support and supervision, Salamadi said.

But it can make people feel safer.

"I think that if you're planning to send sex offenders out there, in order to protect society, you want to make sure they've gone through therapy and are going to be safe," Samadi said. "It's just a small part of big picture." ..Source.. by Rachelle Blidner

Read More of Article...

April 4, 2015

How someone who didn’t commit a sexual crime can be forced to register as a sex offender

4-4-15 Michigan:

On June 13, 2011, Vincent Bosca and his teen son hatched a plan.

Bosca suspected that a group of teen boys had broken into his Sterling Heights, Mich., home where he was illegally growing marijuana. They had stolen drugs and and cash four days earlier, but Bosca didn’t plan to go to the police.

Instead, he and his son lured the 15- and 16-year-old boys back to the house with the promise of an ounce of free weed.

In a text message, Bosca summoned two other associates, Gerald King and Allen Brontkowski, to help with the scheme. “Bring a gun,” he told them, according to the Macomb Daily.

For several hours, Bosca, King and Brontkowski kept the four teens in the basement of the home. There, according to court testimony, the boys — classmates of Bosca’s son at Dakota High School — endured a campaign of terror.

They were threatened with sharp objects, including a circular power saw, and hit with the cover of a samurai sword; one of the boys was pistol-whipped, according to ABC affiliate WXYZ. None of the teens sustained serious physical injuries; but during the subsequent criminal proceedings against Bosca, King and Brontkowski, the families of the boys accused the men of creating lasting psychological trauma.

In 2012, Bosca was sentenced to nearly seven years in prison for the incident, which Circuit Court Judge David Viviano denounced as “appalling, offensive and illegal behavior.”

Bosca was also forced to register as a sex offender, a perplexing but not entirely uncommon occurrence.

There was no sex crime committed — that much everyone agrees on. But the law in several states, including Michigan, makes it possible for people accused of crimes that are not sexual in nature to be labeled as sex offenders for years — sometimes for life.

In Michigan, one such offense is the “unlawful imprisonment” of a minor.

Repeatedly, courts in other states — such as Georgia, Kentucky and New York — have upheld sentences that require registration in a sex-offender database for people convicted of certain nonviolent crimes, as long as they are specified in the law.

For that reason — and several others — a Michigan Appeals Court upheld Bosca’s sentence in a decision last week, rejecting the argument that his constitutional rights were violated as a result of the sentence.

But after nearly 20 pages of discussion about the legal justification for upholding the sex offender registration requirement in Bosca’s sentence, a panel of three judges acknowledged that “the number of pages that were required for us to properly articulate that conclusion” gave them “pause.”

“There nonetheless remains something troubling about the fact that defendant, while an offender who may properly and constitutionally be required to register in furtherance of the purpose of [Sex Offenders Registration Act], is deemed a ‘sex offender’ even though the offenses of which he was convicted, including the offenses for which he is required to register, as well as the conduct underlying them, were wholly non-sexual in nature,” the judges wrote.

And they went further to recommend that the state legislature do something to rectify the fact that a person can be labeled a “sex offender” for committing a crime that has nothing to do with sex.

One possible solution, they wrote, could be to clarify the law’s title to make it something more reflective of its actual intent — for example: “Child Offenders and Sex Offenders Registration Act.” Or, they suggested, lawmakers could better define sex offenders in the law, or perhaps create two databases, to separate sex offenders from child offenders.

Bosca’s lawyer, Lawrence Katz, told The Washington Post that he had hoped the court would “correct this disservice to the general public, which is mislead into believing that individuals who committed no sexual offense at all are sex offenders.”

With the stigma and, in some cases, life-altering restrictions that come along with that designation, much is at stake, Katz said.

“No non-sex offender would appreciate the requirement of having to register as a sex offender,” he said.

But, as the court noted, laws aren’t unconstitutional just because they are “undesirable, unfair, unjust … inhumane” or just plain old counter-intuitive. So Bosca’s conviction stands and he’ll remain registered as a sex offender until 2027 — unless Michigan lawmakers take the appeals court’s advice.

Katz said that he intends to recommend that his client petition for leave to appeal this latest decision. ..Source.. by Abby Phillip

Read More of Article...

April 1, 2015

'Mob' Detains, Threatens Photographers Because Single Adults Are Probably All Pedophiles

4-1-15 National:

To live in the US is to live in a nation of fears -- most of them, irrational. The Department of Homeland Security -- the eerily nationalistic-sounding phoenix that rose from the ashes of the World Trade Center -- has done all it can to turn Americans into government informants, where they're encouraged to turn in complete strangers for suspicious activities like not packing enough clothes or purchasing cookware.

The DHS fears nothing more than a person armed with a camera. If any citizen aims a lens at public transportation, infrastructure, certain manufacturing plants or government buildings, they're assumed to be practicing the dark art of t___.

T_____ is only one of the nation's collective fears: one so seldom realized that the amount of attention paid to it by a vast number of government bodies is almost laughable.

Another fear that is almost inversely proportional to the amount of attention paid to it is child victimization, especially kidnapping and pedophilia. From a young age, parents and educators drill into kids' heads that all strangers are inherently dangerous. This is somehow supposed to protect children from abusers despite the fact that nearly 90% of abuse is committed by someone the child knows and trusts -- family members, child care providers, neighbors, close relatives, family friends, etc.

This hysteria over child sexual abuse has reached the point that being an unaccompanied adult (especially male) in an area frequented by children is considered inherently suspicious. Toronto's Legoland exhibit turned away a 63-year-old Lego fan simply because he wasn't accompanied by a child. The stated reason for this bizarre policy? To "protect the children." Likewise UK's Puxton Park, which turned away a 53-year-old man for the same reason. The explanation given by the park's director for its stupid policy is equally stupid: ..Source..This is a MUST Read..

Read More of Article...

March 27, 2015

Lox, bagels, juice and sex offenders: Why I invited two pariahs into my home

3-27-15 New York:

Sunday morning at 10 found me slicing the tomatoes and arranging the cheese platter. My husband was setting up the chairs. At 11, the doorbell rang. And so began my very first sex offender brunch.

What exactly is that? It’s a brunch where I invited my friends in the press to meet my friends on the sex offender registry: Josh Gravens, 28, and Galen Baughman, 31. I’ll tell you their crimes in a sec, but first let me explain why this issue interests me.

As founder of the book, blog and movement Free-Range Kids, I am always trying to figure out, as the subtitle of my book says, “How to raise safe, self-reliant children without going nuts with worry.”

I like programs that actually help kids avoid abuse, such as teaching them the three R’s: Recognize (that no one can touch where your bathing suit covers), Resist (kick, scream, run) and Report (tell me if anyone is making you uncomfortable, and I promise I won’t be mad at you).

The three R’s make kids safer and take away an abuser’s biggest asset: a child’s silence.

What I learned through my research, though, is that one thing not making kids safer is the public sex offender registry. Study after study keeps showing two things: First, that “stranger danger” is a myth. The vast majority of crimes against kids are committed by people they know.

Second: In New York State, as elsewhere, there’s been no difference in the number of sex offense arrests before and after implementing the public sex offender registry. And yet, it is very scary to send your kids outside once you see a red dot locating a sex offender on your neighborhood map.

The problem is that the registry is cluttered with people who don’t actually pose a threat to children. So while it’s easy to think “dot= monster,” many registrants are actually teens who had sex with other teens, people who urinated in public, men who visited prostitutes, etc.

A study by the Georgia Sex Offender Registration Review Board, for instance, found that of the 17,000 people on the state’s registry, just over 100 were “predators” compelled to prey on kids. But, of course, all 17,000 dots look alike.

Which brings me to my brunch.

Through my research, I’d met Josh and Galen.

Josh is a Texan who was visiting New York last week. At age 12, he played doctor with his sister. His sister told their mom, their mom called a counseling center to ask what to do, the counselor was a “mandated reporter,” and Josh ended up in juvenile prison for 31/2 years. His “therapy” there consisted of sickening things like acting out sex acts for the therapist. Josh was still a virgin!

Ever since he got out, he has been on the registry, even though his sister has long forgiven him. I wanted my guests to meet him.

I wanted them to meet Galen, too. When Galen was a 19-year-old opera student in Indiana, he met a young man, 14, at a friend’s family party. They started emailing. When the 14-year-old’s mom found out her son was writing to a gay teen, she took his computer to the local district attorney, who gave it to a cop.

The cop continued the online conversation, pretending to be the 14-year-old. He asked Galen to send him gay teen porn, and when Galen complied, he was arrested for distributing kiddie porn. On Galen’s personal computer, cops found evidence that he’d had a sexual encounter (once) with a different 14-year-old. The emails showed it was consensual, but this still constitutes rape.

He went to prison for nine years.

They told their stories to my reporter friends as we ate our brunch. Then everyone went their separate ways, filled with carrot cake to die for, and a new skepticism about just who we label a “sex offender.” ..Source.. by Skenazy is host of the reality show “World’s Worst Mom” on Discovery Life Channel. She is also a public speaker and founder of the book and blog “Free-Range Kids.”

Read More of Article...

March 15, 2015

Porn and the patrol car—one cop’s 2 hour-a-day habit

3-15-15 Illinois:

"Taxpayers... do not pay you to watch pornographic images."

Pornography, though prevalent in the modern world, still isn't the sort of thing one expects to see while waiting in traffic behind a cop car. That's especially true at the busiest downtown intersection of a wealthy Chicago suburb like Wheaton, Illinois, best known for being the home of an evangelical Christian college once attended by Billy Graham.

But pornography is exactly what an irate Wheaton resident named Robin said he witnessed. On the morning of September 18, 2013, while sitting in his conversion van and waiting for a stoplight to change, Robin found himself directly behind Wheaton Police squad car 359. The height of his seat gave him a perfect view through the rear windshield of the squad car, and he could see the car's mobile data computer displaying "scrolling pictures of completely naked women."

The light turned green, the cop turned onto Main Street, and Robin drove home to fume for more than a week. He refused to report the incident because he didn't believe the police would actually investigate one of their own, but on September 27, after urging from his wife, he fired off an e-mail to Wheaton Mayor Mike Gresk. (Ars Technica acquired all relevant documents about the case from the city and the police department through a public records request.)

"Dear Mayor Gresk," it began, "I was trying to forget about this, but haven't been able to forget waiting behind a Wheaton Police car at the corner of Main and Front a few days ago and watching the 'officer' watching porn on his laptop. Very revealing. It certainly inspires me to pay my taxes for servants like this..."

On September 30, a City Hall employee forwarded the message to Wheaton's police chief, Mark Field, and an internal investigation began the next morning. Lieutenant Robert Miller of the Patrol Division took an official complaint from the angry resident and then began pulling records to see if the story held up. According to the duty roster, the day watch occupant of squad car 359 at the time of the complaint was Officer Thomas Sommerfield, an $87,000-a-year patrolman with more than 20 years of police experience.

Would a veteran officer like Sommerfield really have pornography showing on his squad car's laptop as he drove around town? A simple search would show whether Robin's story had its details right. Each city-owned police car comes equipped with an automatic vehicle location (AVL) system that uses GPS to log and report the car's location at all times.

Miller pulled the AVL records for squad car 359 and scrolled to the time and date of the complaint. Bam—on September 18 at 9:37am, squad car 359 was at GPS coordinates 41.86488 -88.1068, the corner of Main and Front streets in downtown Wheaton. The squad car had stopped there for three minutes before turning onto Main Street, exactly as the complaint had alleged.

Sommerfield was at that moment on patrol in car 359, his usual vehicle. Contacted by radio, he was asked to take his car out of service when he ended his shift at 3:00pm. The vehicle was secured in a parking lot at the Public Works department overnight.

The following morning, October 2, Miller sent Sergeant William Murphy over to Public Works to pull the car's onboard computer and its Verizon wireless data card. The devices were then placed in evidence locker #41 at the police department. ..Continued.. by Nate Anderson

Read More of Article...

March 11, 2015

Sex offenders go under the radar in federal witness protection program: IG

See also: Sex offenders see continued admittance into federal witness protection
3-11-15 Washington DC:

Sex offenders who entered the federal witness protection program were sometimes given waivers so they did not have to register as a sex offender in their new life, federal investigators said Wednesday, raising concerns that law enforcement officials didn’t do enough to protect citizens.

The watchdog stressed they found no instances of sex offenders given waivers committing further sex crimes, but warned that officials “did not utilize safeguards to protect and notify the public and law enforcement about the risk these individuals posed.”

In a heavily redacted report released Wednesday, the Justice Department’s inspector general said they were concerned that the agency had not “taken sufficient steps to mitigate the threat posed by program participants, including sex offenders, who commit crimes after being terminated from the program.”

Registering as a sex offender is supposed to serve as a deterrent for committing further crime. It includes requirements that sex offenders tell neighbors of their conviction, and also requires that they stay away from certain areas, such as school zones.

Without these safeguards in place, investigators warned it was easier for relocated offenders to commit sexual crimes again. Though there were no examples of the offenders given waivers committing more crimes, investigators noted that there have been instances of other people committing further sexual offenses during their time in the witness protection program, or WitSec.

The Justice Department said they were reviewing the problems found in the investigation, and the IG said it considered the matter closed — though some of the changes that might be made were redacted in the report.

A response from the Justice Department said they consider admitting sex offenders into WitSec only in “extraordinary cases.”

Witnesses are subject to an intensive vetting process and only accepted if “the need to admit the witness and family members outweighs the risk to the public and the relocation community.”

No witness has ever been relocated because of their sex offenses, the department said, but only because they were “a witness of a serious offense or organized crime.”

Since its creation in the 1970s, WitSec is estimated to have protected nearly 18,000 witnesses and family members. The program is run by the U.S. Marshals Service and was the subject of the 2008-2012 television show “In Plain Sight.” ..Source.. by Phillip Swarts who is an investigative reporter for The Washington Times

Read More of Article...

March 5, 2015

Rapist Lynched After BBC Rape Documentary Aired

3-5-15 India:

A day after the BBC showed a controversial documentary on the gang rape of a woman in Delhi, a convicted rapist has been pulled from his prison cell and beaten to death by an angry mob in India. The mob broke into the prison in the northeast Indian state of Nagaland Thursday, dragged him out and lynched, him while dozens of onlookers recorded it all on their cell phones.

Reports say he was pulled out of the prison in the northeast Indian state of Nagaland on Thursday. Local media reports the crowd marched for miles toward the jail and tore down its gates. An angry mob of hundreds then stripped him, beat him and hung him, killing him in the process, Al Jazeera reports. They then reportedly dragged his body through the street using meat hooks.

The Indian government had ordered the BBC on Wednesday not to air a documentary on the infamous gang rape. But the network published a letter later Wednesday declaring it intended to broadcast “India’s Daughter”, but not in Indian territories. The video has since become available on online video platforms, like YouTube and Vimeo. ..Continued.. ....

Read More of Article...

February 16, 2015

Sex offenders often targets as California prisons see high rate of homicides

While California has always been the state with the HIGHEST number of sex offenders killed or murdered (See 2012 and before. See 2013 to current day) , as to prison murders, obviously some are not published.
2-16-15 California:

Shortly after 2 a.m. on April 6, 2010, a guard at Salinas Valley State Prison noticed Alan Ager’s cellmate trying to stuff something under a mattress. It was Ager, blood trickling from his mouth and a cloth noose tied around his neck.

The convicted child molester died 10 days later without regaining consciousness, his death earning his cellmate a second life sentence.

California state prison inmates are killed at a rate that is double the national average and sex offenders like Ager account for a disproportionate number of victims, according to an Associated Press analysis of corrections records.

Male sex offenders made up about 15 percent of the prison population, but accounted for nearly 30 percent of homicide victims, the AP found in cataloging all 78 killings corrections officials reported since 2007, when they started releasing slain inmates’ identities and crimes.

The deaths — 23 out of 78 — come despite the state’s creation more than a decade ago of special housing units designed to protect the most vulnerable inmates, including sex offenders, often marked men behind bars because of the nature of their crimes.

In some cases, they’ve been killed among the general prison population and, in others, within the special units by violence-prone cellmates. Officials acknowledge that those units, which also house inmates trying to quit gangs, have spawned their own gangs.

Corrections officials blamed a rise in the prison homicide rate on an overhaul meant to reduce crowding. As part of the effort, the state in 2011 began keeping lower-level offenders in county lockups, leaving prisons with a higher percentage of sex offenders and violent gang members.

Violence and homicides won’t decline unless the state goes well below the prison population level set by the courts — 137.5 percent of the system’s designed capacity, said James Austin, president of the JFA Institute, a Washington, D.C., consulting firm that works on prison issues.

“Until the state gets its prison population below 100 percent of capacity, you’re going to have this,” he said.

Overall, 162 California prison inmates were killed from 2001 to 2012, or 8 per 100,000 prisoners, double the national average over the same time period and far higher than that of other large states, including Texas, New York and Illinois, according to federal statistics.

Officials in Oklahoma mainly blamed gang violence for giving that state the nation’s highest long-term prison homicide rate, 14 per 100,000, although a quarter of its inmate homicide victims in the last decade had convictions for sex crimes.

In California, from 2012 to 2013, the most recent years for which data were available, the rate rose to 15 per 100,000, according to a report by a federal court receiver, though corrections officials said the number of deaths dropped last year.

Department spokeswoman Terry Thornton would not comment on the possible reasons for California’s long-term trend of inmate homicides.

The problem is most acute with sex offenders. Last fall, the corrections department’s inspector general reported that so many homicides occurred in the “increasingly violent” special housing units reserved for vulnerable inmates that the department could no longer assume that inmates there could peacefully coexist.

The report looked at 11 homicide cases that were closed in the first half of 2014, and found that 10 victims were sensitive needs inmates. Using corrections records, the AP found that eight of them were sex offenders.

The inspector general recommended the reinstatement of a policy dropped 15 years ago that required potential sensitive needs cellmates to fill out a compatibility form before they are housed together and that inmates with a history of violence toward cellmates should be housed alone.

Thornton said the report led to an ongoing review of the policy of housing most prisoners, including vulnerable inmates, two to a cell.

Experts said the state could better protect sex offender inmates by separating them into their own facilities. Prison gangs, though made up of inmates often convicted of heinous crimes themselves, have long made it a practice to target sex offenders.

“They’re going to clean up anybody on that yard with ‘hot charges,’ ” said former inmate Todd Siefert, referring to any crime against a woman or child, including a sex offense. The very lowest rung is reserved for child molesters.

Seifert said he was confronted by white supremacist inmates less than a half-hour after he arrived at the California Institution for Men in Chino in 2004 and was severely beaten by a half-dozen fellow inmates even though his sex crime involved an adult woman.

Corrections department spokesmen in Illinois, New York and Texas said the targeting of sex offenders is not considered a problem there. Some states have stricter protocols for keeping sex offenders away from other inmates.

Those participating in Maine’s rehabilitation therapy program are housed separately and none have been injured or killed in the decade it has been in existence, said Dennis McNamara, executive director of The Counseling and Psychotherapy Center Inc., which runs the program.
What about this case of a Maine Prison murder: 3-2014 Convicted sex offender stabbed to death in prison
However, only about 11 percent of the state’s inmate sex offender population is in the treatment program, corrections spokesman Scott Fish said in an email. Of four Maine inmates killed behind bars since 2001, two were sex offenders.
I guess there is another not in my files: 2009: ME- Inmate's death ruled a homicide
In Massachusetts, state policy calls for sex offenders to be placed in a “therapeutic community” that offers intensive treatment aimed at changing their behavior, preventing relapses and preparing them for eventual release.

The state had a high-profile inmate homicide in 2003, when John Geoghan, a former Roman Catholic priest whose sexual abuse conviction sparked a widespread abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, was killed by a fellow inmate who claimed he was chosen by God to kill pedophiles.

Adding to the problem in California, the department identified nearly 100 gangs that formed in sensitive needs units, said Matthew Buechner, a special investigator who trained other corrections officials on problems with prison gangs until he retired last fall.

In Ager’s case, the 5-foot-4, 135-pound inmate was kept in special housing when he first entered the prison system at San Quentin but was housed with general population inmates soon after his transfer to Salinas Valley because officials there decided he didn’t need extra protection.

Ager, 63, was housed with Clyde Leroy Beaver, a convicted murderer who has spent the last four decades in prison. Beaver pleaded guilty to murder in Ager’s slaying and got another life sentence that Ager’s son considers essentially meaningless.

A federal judge ruled in March that Ager’s family failed to show that prison officials acted with deliberate indifference.

“The very day they let him into the yard, he was filing complaints, ‘Get me the hell out of here,’ ” said Ager’s son, Daniel. “ ‘This is not safe. I’m going to get killed out here.’ ” ..Source.. by Don Thompson

Read More of Article...

February 15, 2015

North Carolina: Hundreds of Federal Prisoners Legally Innocent, Some Still Incarcerated

2-15-15 North Carolina:

Following a 2011 federal appellate court ruling, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) initially tried to delay the release of federal prisoners who were wrongly convicted in North Carolina. The government later announced that it would halt such tactics, but has continued to oppose challenges filed by some offenders who are legally innocent.

The DOJ’s actions followed a review of prosecutions in three federal courts in North Carolina. DOJ spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said “many more” cases could surface when all of the state’s federal court cases are examined.

The prisoners were convicted of possessing firearms in what the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held was a misapplication of the sentencing criteria, a circumstance unique to North Carolina due to the state’s system of “structured sentencing.” Adopted by the state legislature in 1993, the system mandates that the maximum prison term for any given crime is based on the offender’s criminal record. As a result, sentences for even minor crimes can extend for years if a defendant has numerous prior offenses.

Federal law provides that anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year in prison is considered a felon, and thereby prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition. However, that provision of federal law, as imposed by North Carolina federal courts, conflicted with the state’s structured sentencing.

For example, an offender convicted of a minor crime in a North Carolina state court – writing a bad check, for example – would be considered a felon under federal law if his or her prior record was serious enough to warrant a prison sentence longer than a year. Federal courts proceeded under the notion that if one person convicted of writing a bad check was considered a felon, then all offenders convicted of writing bad checks were felons ... even if a defendant’s record warranted a sentence of less than one year under the state’s structured sentencing system.

For example, an offender convicted of a minor crime in a North Carolina state court – writing a bad check, for example – would be considered a felon under federal law if his or her prior record was serious enough to warrant a prison sentence longer than a year. Federal courts proceeded under the notion that if one person convicted of writing a bad check was considered a felon, then all offenders convicted of writing bad checks were felons ... even if a defendant’s record warranted a sentence of less than one year under the state’s structured sentencing system. Consequently, offenders found in possession of a firearm were charged with violating federal law even if their prior state offenses should not have been considered felonies.

The Fourth Circuit held in August 2011, in United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc), that federal courts had been misapplying the law. Only those offenders who could have actually faced a prison sentence of longer than a year, the appellate court held, should be considered felons under federal law. As a result, scores of federal defendants should not have been prosecuted for being felons in possession of a firearm, because they didn’t meet the legal definition of “felon” at the time they were charged. ..Continued.. by Derek Gilna

Read More of Article...

February 13, 2015

Former corrections attorney says she purposely dropped bombshell

2-3-2015 Nebraska:

LINCOLN, Neb. — Sharon Lindgren knew exactly what she was doing when she dropped a bombshell into her testimony during a legislative hearing on prison scandals in September.

The former corrections attorney was subpoenaed to testify before a panel of state lawmakers investigating several prison controversies.

Why, Lindgren was asked, did she think the state Department of Correctional Services failed to heed a 2013 Nebraska Supreme Court ruling, State vs. Castillas, on how to calculate certain sentences.

“I’d mentioned Payan,” she told the committee chairman, Sen. Steve Lathrop.

“Mention(ed) what?” he asked. “State vs. Payan,” she replied.

It was a 2009 Supreme Court ruling that putting sex offenders on lifetime supervision constituted punishment and should be decided by a court, not the corrections department. After the ruling came out, two corrections attorneys — lead attorney George Green and Kathy Blum — met with three lawyers from the attorney general’s office to decide how to proceed.

“What was reported back to me from that meeting was they were told — Kathy and George were told and they both confirmed this — that, oh , it’s a decision in a criminal case,” Lindgren, under oath, told lawmakers. “It doesn’t really cover what the department can or cannot do, so just keep on doing it, which sounds very similar to the position that was ultimately taken in Castillas.”

“Do you tell me this because the culture is to ignore the Supreme Court?” Lathrop asked Lindgren later.

“At least it was my understanding the AG’s office advised the department to ignore the Supreme Court or to not apply the Payan case,” she reiterated. “I think it’s just blatant … a blatant violation of the inmate’s rights.”

Lindgren had long opposed the department putting offenders on lifetime supervision, believing it to be a criminal sanction beyond the department’s scope of duties. She wasn’t shy about making her opinions known to others. That’s probably why she wasn’t invited to the meeting with the AG’s office, she said in an interview Thursday.

Putting a person on supervision could mean they’d have to wear a GPS ankle bracelet, have their travel limited, have interaction with children (including their own) restricted, she said.

Lindgren wasn’t in the meeting but says Blum and Green went in hoping the department could stop putting people on supervision. Blum and Green declined comment.

She feared the practice could be a violation of sex offenders’ civil rights and could create a liability to the state and corrections employees. By the time she was hauled to the Capitol to testify about what she knew about prison problems, she and Green had resigned rather than be fired for their roles in the Castillas sentencing screwup.

She decided to go public about how the Payan situation may have contributed to a corrections culture in which people thought it was OK not to heed Supreme Court rulings. And when Lathrop asked her a question about the culture, she had her chance.

“I have spoken to anyone that I can think of,” she said. “George is fully aware of my views on this. Kathy is fully aware of my views on this. I have not been at all shy about saying we need to do something to get this resolved because it’s wrong. The AG’s office told us the case doesn’t apply and we’ll wait until … it’s very similar to what you’re hearing on Castillas. It’s a criminal appeal. It doesn’t deal with you … what the department is doing and so wait until you get a decision.”

Green later buttressed Lindgren’s testimony, saying, “I don’t know if it was a culture. I do know that, you know, what Sharon Lindgren said about the sex offender registration statute, that that had been the advice of the attorney general in that situation, but I wouldn’t say that it was a culture within the Department of Corrections.”

Green and Lindgren’s testimony infuriated former Attorney General Jon Bruning, who called their allegations utterly laughable, patently ridiculous and offensive.

“We would never give them advice to ignore the Supreme Court,” he said a day after they testified.

The two attorneys’ reputations were tarnished by the Castillas mess, and few reporters took much notice of the bombshell they dropped in the hearing because so many other scandals were swirling.

The state had lost at least nine court challenges and the Supreme Court had issued two more rulings making it clear only juries had the right to put people on lifetime supervision.

But nothing changed until 12 days after Lindgren decided to go public with her allegations. Finally, the solicitor general, who works for the attorney general, sent corrections a letter saying 32 sex offenders should be released from lifetime supervision.

Internal documents and emails obtained by Nebraska Watchdog and reported Monday appear to buttress Lindgren’s allegations. Key among them is a June 2009 letter Green wrote to former Assistant Attorney General David Cookson following up on their meeting. In it, Green says he agreed with points made during the meeting and that the department would continue assigning sex offenders to supervision. Lindgren called that a “cover your ass letter.”

Neither Bruning nor Cookson has returned calls seeking comment, but Cookson told the Omaha World-Herald Thursday he advised corrections to follow the Supreme Court ruling, and they ignored his advice.

Asked Wednesday whether the corrections department agreed with the attorney general’s advice on how to respond to the ruling, corrections spokesman James Foster referred to the documents and said, “There was a difference.”

Lathrop has called for a federal investigation into the matter. ..Source.. by Deena Winter

Read More of Article...