Decision made over requirement that paroled sex offenders post signs on Halloween

10-27-15 California:

Sex offenders on parole will not have to post a sign on the front door of their home on Halloween.

A compromise was reached Monday afternoon between the state's Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and a group that challenged the requirement.

10News was in court as state attorneys decided the sign requirement would not be enforced, prompting the plaintiffs to rescind its temporary restraining order request.

Earlier this month, the group California Reform Sex Offender Laws and a sex offender on parole filed a lawsuit in San Diego federal court that contested the CDCR's requirement.

Janice Bellucci, attorney for the plaintiffs, said, "CDCR's requirement that all parolees post a sign on the front door of their residence violates the First Amendment because it compels speech ... The sign requirement also places in significant danger the lives of sex offenders and those with whom they reside."

According to CDCR, the sign requirement is part of "Operation Boo," which the department conducts every year at Halloween. "Operation Boo" has the stated purpose of protecting children as they trick or treat.

"The sex offender plaintiff in this case was convicted of a single sex offense before 1985 that did not involve a child," Bellucci said. "The plaintiff has not committed or been convicted of a sex offense for the past 30 years and yet CDCR is requiring him to post a sign on the front door of his home. This is a solution without a problem."

Bellucci said CDCR's sign requirement is based on "myth" not facts.

"The facts are there are no reports in California of a sexual assault upon a child who goes trick or treating," Bellucci said.

10News learned the plaintiff's lawsuit is still pending despite Monday's decision. ..Source.. by City News Service

---

CDCR Withdraws Halloween Sign Requirement Statewide

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) today announced in federal district court its decision to withdraw a statewide requirement that sex offender parolees post a sign on the front door of their residences on Halloween. Immediately following that announcement, CA RSOL withdrew its request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO).

“This is a significant victory for more than 10,000 registered citizens and their families,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “They are no longer faced with the risk of significant injury.”

CA RSOL and plaintiff John Doe were represented in court by three attorneys — Janice Bellucci, Chance Oberstein and Alex Landon — who are also members of the CA RSOL board of directors. CDCR was represented by an attorney from the Office of the Attorney General as well as a representative of CDCR.

The plaintiffs in the case alleged that CDCR’s sign requirement violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because it was speech compelled by a government agency. CDCR levied the Halloween sign requirement for the past seven years, even requiring homeless registered citizens to post signs on their sleeping bags, tents and vehicles.

“We are grateful to plaintiff John Doe who showed up, stood up and spoke up,” stated Oberstein. “Without him, we could not have filed this lawsuit.” by CA RSOL

---

Federal judge rules sex offenders do not have to post ‘no trick-or-treating’ sign

AN DIEGO - A Chula Vista sex offender along with his attorney, sued the California Department of Corrections Sex Offender Program "Operation Boo". Specifically a mandate to post a sign that reads “We do not participate in trick or treating” saying the requirement is unconstitutional and makes the parolee a target. On Monday a Federal judge agreed.

Halloween is around the corne and the Bledsoe family says it is a fun time to dress up and go door to door looking for candy.

“A little penguin and she wasn’t born yet…” Said mother of two Ashley Bledsoe.

But while they are thinking about the goodies and costumes, law enforcement is concerned about preventing the real life monsters from taking part in the annual trick or treat tradition.

For that reason, The California Department Of Corrections has had its long running Halloween safety sex offender program called “Operation Boo”. The

Bledsoe family say it’s a great program.

“Absolutely, I think the more information you have the better you can safeguard your children,” said Ashley Bledsoe.

But attorney and activist, Janice Bellucci along with her colleague attorney Chance Oberstein challenged one of the program’s requirements.

Both say the CDCR’s program is fine overall, but they object to the sign requirement which they argue is unconstitutional and puts the parolee in danger. On Monday a federal judge agreed with them. “It makes them sitting ducks really.” Said Bellucci.

Bellucci filed the suit after she says her client, a registered sex offender in Chula Vista, was told to post a flier on his home on Halloween saying, "We do not participate in trick or treating."

“Of all days during the year to put a sign on the door, this is when people are normally out creating mischief but sometimes it gets worse than mischief. It gets more dangerous than mischief. So unfortunately we’ve had registered citizens who’ve been murdered for no other reason because they’re on the sex offender registry.” Said the founder of California Reform Sex Offender Laws, Janice Bellucci.

According to the "Operation Boo" website, requirements for sex offender parolees include a 5 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew on Halloween. Their lights must be off so they don't attract children, and they can’t put up decorations or even open their door except to law enforcement. However, the site makes no mention of having to post the sign.

But the Bledsoes disagree saying the judge’s decision is not in anyone’s best interest. Brian Bledsoe who is the father of two girls is upset at what he calls the sex offenders victory. “I mean you have to protect your children, and if that makes you a target you shouldn’t have committed the crime to start with. I mean you’re on the list for a reason.”

The judges decision leaves all the other requirements of Operation Boo in place but puts a temporary restraining order on the Department of Corrections so they can’t levy the sign requirement on any registered citizen this Halloween.

FOX 5 reached out to the department of corrections and did not get a response. by Maria Arcega-Dunn

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Lawsuit Challenges CDCR's Halloween Sex Offender Policy

see also: Sex Offender Says Making Him Post Warning Signs on Halloween Violates His Rights

UPDATED 10-26: HALLOWEEN SEX OFFENDER LAW HEARING TO BE HELD OCT 26 (Press Release)

10-15-15 California:

California’s “Operation Boo,” the state Corrections Department program that requires registered sex offenders to post signs on their front doors on Halloween, is being challenged in court.

The suit was filed by an advocacy group called California Reform Sex Offender Laws, which argues that Operation Boo makes registered sex offenders “sitting ducks” for predators.

“There are zero reported sexual assaults of children while trick-or-treating in California – zero,” says attorney Janice Bellucci, the group’s president, who's seeking a temporary restraining order before this year’s Halloween. ”So as far as we can tell, this is a solution without a problem.”

Bellucci says the state is applying the sign requirement to all sex offenders – even those whose victims weren’t children, and even if their crimes weren’t recent. The plaintiff in the suit is a registered San Diego County sex offender who committed his offense against an adult 30 years ago. He’s on parole now for a drug conviction.

The Corrections Department says it has yet to be served with the suit and therefore has no comment. ..Source.. by Ben Adler

---

CDCR Lawsuit Expanded, TRO Hearing Set October 26

A lawsuit challenging CDCR’s requirement that registered citizens post signs on the front door of their residences on Halloween has been expanded to include an individual in Los Angeles. Similar to the original plaintiff in the case who lives in San Diego County, the man in L.A. was told by his parole officer that he must post a sign on the front door of his home.

“Both plaintiffs believe their lives will be in danger if they post a sign on the front door of their homes,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “They also fear that members of their family could be harmed.”

The lawsuit, as amended on Oct. 19, alleges that CDCR is levying the sign requirement against registered citizens on parole as a blanket restriction regardless of when they were convicted, whether their offense involved a minor and their risk of re-offense. According to Dr. Karl Hanson, a PhD psychologist who has conducted re-offense research for decades, an individual convicted of a sex offense is very unlikely to commit another offense if he has not done so within 17 years.

“We have recently learned that in the recent past CDCR required registered citizens who were homeless to post Halloween signs on their sleeping bags, tents, vehicles and hotel rooms,” stated Bellucci.

According to PhD sociologist and author Emily Horowitz, “There is no research that sex offenses increase on Halloween, no evidence that sex offenders target children on Halloween and, in fact, no evidence that a child has ever been a victim of sexual abuse by a stranger while out trick-or-treating.”

An application for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) was filed in this case on Oct. 15. CDCR must respond to the TRO application by Oct. 21 and the plaintiffs may reply to that response on Oct. 22. A hearing on the TRO application is scheduled in San Diego for Oct. 26. by CA-RSOL

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Which Halloween Health Hazards Are Factual? Which Are Just Scary Stories?

October 2015:

A Parent Asks
This year my 10-year-old son plans to go trick-or-treating with his friends without my supervision. What Halloween health hazards have been reported? What are some Halloween safety tips?

The Parent Coach Advises

Participating in Halloween is popular among children of all ages. In 2013, the estimated number of potential trick-or-treaters—children aged 5 to 14 years—in the United States was 41.2 million.1 The age at which it is safe for a child to trick-or-treat without supervision should be determined on a case-by-case basis based on the child’s maturity level and the maturity level of the other children in the group. A 2011 national survey found that 12% of children under the age of 5 trick-or-treated without adult chaperones, and only 35% of parents talked to their children annually about Halloween safety concerns.2

Reported Halloween Health Hazards

Pedestrian Injury. While many parents worry about strangers and candy that has been tampered with, the true danger during trick-or-treating is pedestrian injury. Halloween is ranked as the No. 1 day of the year for child-pedestrian accidents and fatalities. One analysis of data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System3 found that 115 child-pedestrian fatalities occurred on Halloween from 1990 to 2010. This average of 5.5 pediatric fatalities per year on Halloween is more than double the average of 2.6 pediatric fatalities on all other days of the year. The group at highest risk is 12- to 18-year-olds, who accounted for 32% of the fatalities, followed by the 5- to 8-year-old age group at 23%. The majority of these fatalities (60%) occurred during the peak trick-or-treating hours between 5 pm and 9 pm. The deadliest hour of trick-or-treating was from 6 pm to 7 pm. The drivers of the vehicles involved in one-third of the accidents were young adults between the ages of 15 and 25 years.

Tampered Candy. The fear of candy that has been tampered with is media-driven and is a common concern among parents nationwide. The results of a 2011 Harris Interactive poll showed that 24% of parents with children under the age of 12 years worry about poisoned treats.2 To date, five reported deaths have been linked to Halloween candy: two in the 1970s that eventually were attributed to the direct actions of family members rather than strangers, one when a child ingested heroin that a relative had stashed among the candy, and one when a father murdered his son with cyanide-laced Pixy Stix candy in order to collect on a life insurance policy. Other fatalities in 1978 and 1990 later were determined to be associated with preexisting cardiac disease and natural causes. The 2001 case of a 4-year-old in Vancouver, Canada, who died a day after ingesting trick-or-treat candy was widely reported in the news media. After police ordered children and families across the area to dispose of their Halloween candy, it eventually was determined that the cause of death was streptococcal infection unrelated to Halloween candy. ..Continued..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sex Offenders Left Out of Halloween Law Lose Fees

5-16-2013 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS (CN) - A group of convicted sex offenders who fought back when Missouri tried to restrict what they could do on Halloween are not entitled to legal fees, the 8th Circuit ruled.

Under the 2008 Halloween Statute, Missouri said that every Oct. 31 all registered sex offenders would have to avoid "all Halloween-related contact with children," post a sign saying that there was no candy at their homes, and spend most of the night in their houses with the outside lights off.

Six individuals who had previously been convicted of sex offenses challenged the rules as unconstitutional, but the law was in force on Oct. 31, 3008, after the 8th Circuit tossed an injunction .

That year, Missouri charged Charles Raynor with violating the Halloween Statute, but a circuit court dismissed the charge because it found that the law violated the state's prohibition on retrospective laws since Raynor's conviction predated enactment of the Halloween Statute.

Later the Missouri Supreme Court considered Raynor's case with another sex offender named in the court documents as F.R.

The federal court stayed its consideration of the six offenders' case pending the conclusion of the state-court case. In January 2010, a majority of the Missouri Supreme Court concluded that the Halloween Statute violated the state Constitution as applied to Raynor.

Since enactment of the Halloween Statute also predated the convictions of any of the anonymous plaintiffs in the federal case, Missouri conceded that it would be unconstitutional to prosecute any of them, and the case was dismissed as moot.

The court ordered the John and Jane Does to bear the costs of the federal action, but found that they were entitled to about $22,000 iin attorneys' fees as prevailing parties.

A three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit affirmed dismissal but reversed the award of fees last week.

"The dismissal on mootness grounds in the instant case was not the result of the Does prevailing on the merits of any of their claims," Judge Roger Wollman wrote for the court. "Instead, it was the product of a voluntary change adopted by the officials' in the face of the Missouri Supreme Court's decision in F.R. Under these circumstances, the Does are not entitled to prevailing party status simply because the voluntary change in conduct is recognized in an order of dismissal."

Chief Judge William Jay Riley and Judge Michael Melloy joined the opinion. ..Source.. by JOE HARRIS

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Two Victories for California RSOL

3-14-2013 California:

California RSOL has scored two victories in the cities of Simi Valley and Lancaster where city councils have agreed to relieve registrants from the burdens of sex offender ordinances passed in September 2012. The city of Simi Valley ordinance required registrants to post signs on the front door of their homes on Halloween while the city of Lancaster ordinance severely limited where registrants could live and visit.

“These are two significant wins for CA RSOL,” stated Janice Bellucci, President of California RSOL. “In both cities, the civil rights of registrants have been restored.”

The City Council of Lancaster unanimously approved the repeal of most of its sex offender ordinance — including all residency and presence restrictions — on March 12. The only provisions to remain in that ordinance relate to the celebration of Halloween. The City Council of Lancaster must give final approval to its decision on March 26.

The City of Simi Valley approved revisions to its ordinance in a private settlement agreement after a federal district court blocked the city’s requirement to post signs on Halloween last year. The revised ordinance in that city is similar to the revisions adopted in Lancaster on March 12. For example, registrants are prohibited from answering the door to trick-or-treaters, however, others living in the same home may do so.

“Despite the victories in these two cities, there are more than 200 city and county ordinances remaining in the state of California,” Bellucci stated. “California RSOL will continue its efforts to remove all ordinances that violate the state and federal constitutions by infringing upon the civil rights of registrants.” ..Source.. by CA RSOL

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Judge temporarily blocks part of Simi Valley Halloween sex offender law

10-29-2012 California:

A federal judge Monday temporarily blocked enforcement of a key provision of Simi Valley's new Halloween sex offender law but left the rest of the ordinance intact.

U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson's ruling came days before the holiday on Wednesday.

Anderson temporarily blocked the city from requiring its several dozen convicted child sex offenders listed on the Megan's Law website to post signs on their front doors on Halloween saying: "No candy or treats at this residence."

But Anderson let stand requirements that the offenders refrain from opening their doors to trick-or-treating children and decorating the outside of their homes or front lawns with Halloween ornaments. The convicts also must turn off outdoor lighting on their properties from 5 p.m. to midnight Wednesday.

Attorney Janice Bellucci, who last month filed a lawsuit saying the law was unconstitutional, said she was pleased with the ruling even though she had sought to have enforcement of the entire ordinance temporarily blocked pending the outcome of the lawsuit.

Simi Valley City Attorney Marjorie Baxter said the ruling was "a big victory on the majority of the ordinance."

The Simi Valley City Council on Sept. 10 enacted the law — the only one of its kind in Ventura County — to try to prevent sex offenders from having contact with trick-or-treating children. It was championed by Mayor Bob Huber, a lawyer who is seeking re-election Nov. 6.

Bellucci, president of the board of a group called California Reform Sex Offender Laws, filed the suit Sept. 28 on behalf of five registered sex offenders, three of their spouses and two of their children, all Simi Valley residents. It says the law violates the First and 14th Amendments of the Constitution because it "suppresses and unduly chills protected speech and expression."

Private attorneys representing the city in the lawsuit disagree.

"Convicted child molesters have no constitutionally protected right to hand out candy at Halloween," they said in court papers. "Children, on the other hand, do have a constitutionally protected right to be safe from sexual assault."

Opponents of the ordinance say there are no reported instances of a trick-or-treating child being molested on Halloween. But according to Ventura Superior Court documents, one of Simi Valley's Megan's Law registrants was convicted of exposing himself to six people at a Thousand Oaks home on Halloween in 2010 while dressed as a woman. It is unclear whether the victims included children, but the man has a separate child molestation conviction.

A hearing on the city's motion to dismiss the lawsuit is scheduled for Nov. 26. ..Source.. by Mike Harris

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Judge Pirro: Calif. Sex Offenders’ Arguments in Halloween Trick-or-Treat Lawsuit Are ‘Hogwash’

10-12-2012 California:

In Simi Valley, California, a law was passed prohibiting registered sex offenders from giving out candy to Halloween trick-or-treaters. A group of sex offenders have now sued the city, saying the law is an infringement on their First Amendment rights.

The law bans those convicted of sex crimes from having Halloween displays or outside lighting on Oct. 31. For offenders listed on the Megan’s Law website, the city also requires them to have a sign clearly posted on the front door, reading: “No candy or treats at this residence.”

Judge Jeanine Pirro (A ex Reality TV Show Judge) weighed in on the dispute this morning on Fox and Friends, saying essentially that the law should be upheld because government’s first obligation is the protection of its citizens.

“They say it’s a violation of their civil rights … that’s hogwash. Here’s the bottom line: predators and pedophiles are repeat offenders. They are cunning, they are devious. They are waiting for our children to come to their doors,” said Pirro, cautioning that not every city or state has such an ordinance. ..Source.. by Fox News Insider

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Child traffic fatalities increase on Halloween

2005 Halloween:

On Halloween night, pedestrian fatalities involving children are about 4.5 times the levels of other nights of the year, say researchers at the U-M Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI).

"This increase does not occur in daylight periods and it is primarily restricted to children 15 and under," says John Sullivan, UMTRI assistant research scientist. "This is a consequence of the special vulnerability of pedestrians at night, along with the greater than usual numbers of children out on Halloween, increasing the opportunity for an accident."

The accident data for Halloween were compiled from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System dataset, using statistics on pedestrian fatalities from 1987-2004. The data included the number of young pedestrian fatalities (age 15 and younger) in dark and light conditions for three days before and after Oct. 31 and those occurring on Halloween.

Compared to the approximately 3,000 annual pedestrian fatalities in darkness, the increase in Halloween deaths is relatively small, amounting to about three additional deaths per year. It illustrates, however, the more general point that darkness is extremely dangerous for pedestrians of any age and on any night of the year, the researchers say.

"Our recommendation for Halloween is that children dress in light-colored clothes, which improves their visibility to drivers," Sullivan says. "We also strongly recommend using retro-reflective marking on clothes and shoes. Retro-reflectors bounce light from headlamps back in the direction of oncoming cars and they are amazingly effective."

The results for Halloween emerged from a comprehensive series of data analyses that Sullivan and UMTRI colleague Michael Flannagan, a research associate professor, conducted on how light level affects accident risk. They examined how pedestrian risk is affected by the seasonal changes in light from June to December and the abrupt transitions in light versus time of day that occur at the beginning and end of daylight saving time in the spring and fall.

Their analyses have allowed Sullivan and Flannagan to measure how safety at night is affected by light itself, separately from other factors that make driving at night more dangerous, such as fatigue and alcohol. Their research is helping to determine the best ways to improve automobile headlamps.

Sullivan and Flannagan say that drivers have difficulty seeing pedestrians in the dark and often appear to have insufficient time to avoid striking them. This is especially a problem when driving at higher speeds, where drivers' stopping distance exceeds the limits of their headlamp beams.

Darkness and speed, they say, combine to multiply the risk of a pedestrian fatality seven times on high-speed, limited-access roadways; five times on urban side streets; and three times on slower local roads.

Their research has been sponsored by grants from NHTSA and the transportation industry through the UMTRI Industry Affiliation Program for Human Factors in Transportation Safety. ..Source.. by Bernie DeGroat, News Service

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Halloween restrictions on sex offenders do little to protect children, two groups say

10-31-2011 Missouri:

As children roam the streets trick-or-treating Monday night, registered sex offenders will be forced by state law to sit in their unlit homes with signs that deter the costume-wearing, candy-seeking youngsters.

Local and state organizations, however, say the law that prohibits offenders from contact with children on Halloween does little to protect children from sexual abuse and more to humiliate offenders.

Enacted in 2008, the law requires registered sex offenders to avoid all Halloween-related contact with children, remain inside their residence between 5 and 10:30 p.m., post a sign stating, "No candy or treats at this residence," and leave all outside residential lighting off during the evening hours.

A violation of the law is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail.

"They're picking on sex offenders," said American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri legal director Tony Rothert, who argued against the law when it was passed in 2008. "It's like a scarlet letter making them put a sign in their yard to keep children away."

The state law is vaguely written as to what "Halloween-related contact" is, Rothert said, adding that sex offenders cannot help dress their children or grandchildren for Halloween under the law.

Rothert, along with four sex offenders -- including one from Cape Girardeau -- argued against the law three years ago, saying it was unconstitutional to make sex offenders who were convicted before Aug. 28, 2008, abide by it. The law was amended in Rothert's favor, but the wording remains vague, he said.

"The law is adding punishment to people who have already been sentenced, and that's un-American," Rothert said. "They have to go on house arrest for one day."

The law is a symbolic effort by lawmakers and a flawed one at that, Rothert said. Varying degrees of sex offenders exist in every community, and someone who committed a nonviolent sex crime should not be treated like a child rapist, he said. Cape Girardeau County is home to 166 registered sex offenders, according to statistics from the Cape Girardeau County Sheriff's Department.

While the measure is in place to protect children, it does little to shield them from sex offenders, Beacon Health Center president Tammy Gwaltney said. Formerly the Southeast Missouri Network Against Sexual Violence, Beacon Health Center helps child and adult victims of sexual abuse by providing examinations, counseling, prevention education and advocacy.

"The person who is the most dangerous to a child is the one who is the closest and has the most access," Gwaltney said. "You're not putting a child in any more harm when they're trick-or-treating."

Gwaltney said the best way for parents to protect children from sexual abuse on Halloween is to be with them at all times during trick-or-treating and ensure that they are with trusted adults at parties. If a child is going to a Halloween party, parents should talk to them about adults touching their bodies before dropping them off.

The signs sex offenders must post on Halloween do little, Gwaltney added.

"The concern is for those who are not identified, those without signs," she said. "There are many sex offenders out there who have not been identified."

Cape Girardeau police chief Carl Kinnison said he is unaware of any arrests made on Halloween as a result of the law. No arrests were made before the law was in place either, he said.

Although no arrests have been made and the law has come under scrutiny from organizations like the ACLU, Kinnison said the law has good intentions and has proved to be helpful in other communities.

"It discourages persons who have a background with sexual offenses from participating in Halloween activities," Kinnison said. "It's really for the kids, and you can't argue with that." ..Source.. by Patrick T. Sullivan ~ Southeast Missourian

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Law considered to keep Halloween on Saturday forever

At first glance this might not be a bad idea....

10-26-2011 Connecticut:

As Halloween fast approaches, one Connecticut lawmaker has proposed that it be observed each year on the last Saturday in October, rather than on the 31st. State Rep. Tim Larson suggested that it would be easier for working families, safer for children, and better for the economy.

”Halloween is a fun night for the whole family, but not so much when you have to race home from work, get the kids ready for trick or treating, welcome the neighborhood children, and then try to get everyone to bed for an early school and work morning,” Larson said.

Governor Malloy is not in favor of the idea and was worried “about confusing the ghosts, goblins, and witches.” Larson acknowledges that this issue is not the most pressing one for the people of Connecticut, but he feels it makes sense and could create some jobs, too. Each year, Americans spend $7 billion on Halloween-related merchandise. ..Source.. by Olivia

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Halloweenitis Is sweeping the nation: Dozens of Articles to Numerous to Post All

10-20-2011 National:

"Halloween-itis is a coined term used to describe a mental abnormality often occurring in public servants and politically aspiring persons who can pass this psychological disorder onto others, generally occurring around holidays and elections; AKA Fear Mongering.

The disease is characterized by abnormal delusional visions of perceived horrific events creating an aura of public fear; these doomsayers get their rewards by painting a picture of "the sky is falling" and alienating the public.

Significant harm is caused by people so afflicted because the objects of their obsession are persons which society already looks down on (including their family members), and the collateral harm caused society is truly a tragedy.

Halloweenitis is a subset of offenderitis, and both are incurable social diseases because these people refuse to face reality, or facts and statistics which prove them wrong, they discount these facts and statistics because in their minds they only see horrific events in everyday life circumstances Those afflicted with Halloweenitis, fear based, focus on denial of civil rights of other persons under the pretext of public safety.” ..See artilces of where it is happening.. by eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Halloweenitis Is sweeping the nation

10-20-2011 National:

"Halloween-itis is a coined term used to describe a mental abnormality often occurring in public servants and politically aspiring persons who can pass this psychological disorder onto others, generally occurring around holidays and elections; AKA Fear Mongering.

The disease is characterized by abnormal delusional visions of perceived horrific events creating an aura of public fear; these doomsayers get their rewards by painting a picture of "the sky is falling" and alienating the public.

Significant harm is caused by people so afflicted because the objects of their obsession are persons which society already looks down on (including their family members), and the collateral harm caused society is truly a tragedy.

Halloweenitis is a subset of offenderitis, and both are incurable social diseases because these people refuse to face reality, or facts and statistics which prove them wrong, they discount these facts and statistics because in their minds they only see horrific events in everyday life circumstances Those afflicted with Halloweenitis, fear based, focus on denial of civil rights of other persons under the pretext of public safety.” ..See artilces of where it is happening.. by eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Halloween sex offender statute draws high court skepticism

1-23-2011 Missouri:

The Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed skepticism for both sides of a case challenging a statute that restricts sex offenders on Halloween.

Judge Laura Denvir Stith asked Audrain County Prosecutor Jacob Shellabarger whether upholding certain conditions on Halloween – such as keeping a porch light off and putting up a sign stating that there are no treats or candy at a residence – could open the door for more prohibitions.

“If we found this was appropriate and the restrictions on handing out candy and so forth are appropriate, couldn’t the Legislature … next year enact a law that said ‘You can’t go outside in the summer if children are playing?’” Stith said. “Where would the limit be, or would there be a limit on what the Legislature could impose by statute as a collateral consequence?”

And after a discussion about whether the statute ran afoul of a constitutional prohibition on retrospective laws, Judge Zel Fischer asked public defender Ellen Flottman how such an argument could be reconciled with a prior case involving regulations imposed on existing dams.

“Why wasn’t that creating a new obligation just like the obligation to put up a sign on Halloween?” Fischer said.

At issue is a law that provides a number of conditions for sex offenders on Halloween. In addition to forcing certain individuals to keep their lights off and post a particular sign, registered sex offenders must avoid contact with trick-or-treaters and remain inside between 5 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. The law also restricts sex offenders’ travel except for certain work or emergency situations.

Charles Raynor, a resident of Audrain County, was charged with a Class A misdemeanor for violating provisions of this state statute. Raynor had to register as a sex offender due to a conviction for a 1988 offense in Washington State. But Audrain County Associate Circuit Judge Linda Hamlett dismissed the charge, noting that the law violated prohibitions against retrospective laws.

In response to Stith’s query, Shellabarger said there was a “heightened public safety interest” in protecting people during the Halloween holiday. He said earlier that the restrictions were a consequence of Raynor having to register as a sex offender.

“I agree with you that there is a limit, and I can’t give you a straight answer, your honor, where that straight line is,” Shellabarger said, noting that the case revolved around issues of retrospective laws and not individual rights. “But if we were to go down that route, this is a compelling state interest and this is a narrowly tailored and least restrictive means of protecting children at that time.”

Shellabarger said the court upheld “collateral consequences” of conviction, including forcing somebody to continually register as a sex offender and to inform law enforcement officials of residency changes.

In response to Fischer’s question, Flottman said that the court’s test in those aforementioned types of cases was whether the law impaired a “vested right,” not whether it imposed a new duty.

“I think it’s different because it’s based on the current existence, operation and safety of the dam, rather than a single past criminal act,” Flottman said. “And you know, someone can decide not to operate a dam. Someone can decide to sell a piece of property if they don’t want to be subject to the regulatory police power of the government.”

“But someone can’t decide ‘I don’t want to be a registered sex offender anymore,’ ” Flottman added.

Judge Mary Russell then asked Flottman if she was arguing that Raynor’s “vested right to hand out Halloween candy” was being impaired.

“I’m not, you honor,” Flottman said. “I’m saying that particular test is not as applicable as the test where a law is retrospective if it imposes a new duty or obligation.”

Near the end of oral arguments, Judge Michael Wolff asked Shellabarger if the law even applied to Raynor.

“Because I think in your first argument, you were telling us that he had to register because of the federal requirement,” Wolff said, referring to a prior Missouri Supreme Court ruling where sex offenders convicted before the registration law went to effect still had the register because of a federal law. “But the Missouri statute on Halloween refers to the state Megan’s Law requirement.”

“It does, your honor,” said Shellabarger. “But I believe [the statute] refers to defendants required to register as a sex offender under other states’ law or federal law, which would have encompassed the defendant’s prior conviction and made that under Missouri law as well.” ..Source.. Blog of J.A.R

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Do Child Predators Pose a Higher Risk on Halloween?

See study: "How safe are trick-or-treaters? An analysis of sex crimes on Halloween" Chaffin, M., Levenson, J.S., Letourneau, E., & Stern, P. (2009).

9-25-2010 National:

The Risk of Sex Offenders on And Around Halloween

Qestion: Do Child Predators Pose a Higher Risk on Halloween?

Answer: There are a number of reasons to worry about your tween's safety on Halloween, but an increased risk of encountering child predators need not be your primary concern. In fact, only 2 out of every 1000 crimes committed on Halloween involve sexual abuse by a stranger. This rate is no higher than on any other day in the fall, according to psychologist Mark Chaffin and colleagues. They made this determination after analyzing national crime data over a 9-year period (1997 through 2005). They found that sex crimes by strangers do indeed occur on and around Halloween, but that "Halloween appears to be just another autumn day where rates of sex crimes against children are concerned."

Notably, however, the researchers found that the most common age of victims of non-relative sex crimes is 12 years of age. Therefore, tween parents should be particularly aware of the risk of sexual abuse, albeit not just at Halloween but on a regular basis. Chaffin and colleagues also note, "We do not suggest that there is no risk on Halloween or that anecdotal accounts of Halloween molestations should be dismissed. Nor do we suggest that parents should abandon caution and reasonable supervision of their children."

In sum, while 12-year-olds seem to be at increased risk of sexual abuse compared to younger children, this risk does not appear to rise on or around Halloween. It's up to you, then, to determine the optimal level of supervision for your particular tween, not just on Halloween, but on every day of the year. ..Source.. by Rebecca Fraser-Thill

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...