8-12-17 Missouri:
A federal lawsuit filed against a county sheriff's office in Missouri alleges that an initiative to arrest sex offenders near a charity violates the organization's constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom.
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — A federal lawsuit filed against a county sheriff's office in Missouri alleges that an initiative to arrest sex offenders near a charity violates the organization's constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom.
The Kansas City Star reports the suit filed by the City Union Mission focuses on how the Jackson County Sheriff's Office interprets a Missouri law. The law mentioned in the suit prohibits some offenders from "loitering" within 500 feet of a public park that contains a pool or playground equipment.
The suit argues that the law doesn't sufficiently define the term "loiter" and is too vague.
"We want to get that cleared up," said Jonathan Whitehead, attorney for the mission. "Seeking shelter, food or prayer is not loitering."
According to the suit, the sheriff's office now says that the law applies to the charity's kitchens and shelters even though those buildings are being used for religious ministry.
"As a result, the sheriff's office has threatened to arrest certain mission employees or guests on mission property," the suit says. ..Continued..
August 13, 2017
Sex Offender Law Prompts Lawsuit
August 11, 2017
Threats to arrest convicted sex offenders at City Union Mission prompt federal lawsuit
8-11-17 Missouri:
The Jackson County Sheriff’s Office is targeting some sex offenders for arrest at the City Union Mission because it sits near a park, according to a federal lawsuit alleging that the practice violates the charity’s constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom.
The suit centers on how the sheriff’s office interprets a Missouri law that prohibits certain offenders from “loitering” within 500 feet of a public park that contains a pool or playground equipment.
The mission operates several facilities in the 1100 block of East 10th Street near Margaret Kemp Park, and the sheriff’s office has interpreted that law to cover those offenders at the mission, according to the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City.
The suit contends that the Missouri law does not adequately define the term “loiter” and is unconstitutionally vague.
“We want to get that cleared up,” said Jonathan Whitehead, attorney for the mission. “Seeking shelter, food or prayer is not loitering.”
The sheriff’s office is now saying that the law “applies to kitchens and shelters of the mission, even though those buildings are being used for religious ministry and not for ‘loitering,’ ” according to the suit.
“As a result, the sheriff’s office has threatened to arrest certain mission employees or guests on mission property,” according to the suit. ..Continued..
August 1, 2017
Lawsuit Says Only Five Out Of Thousands Treated For Hepatitis C In Missouri Prisons
8-1-17 Missouri:
A lawsuit alleging the Missouri Department of Corrections systematically denies medical treatment to prisoners with chronic hepatitis C has taken a big leap forward after a judge certified it as a class action.
U.S. District Judge Nanette Laughrey last week ruled that the lawsuit, which was filed in December, meets all the requirements for class certification, including numerous plaintiffs and common issues of law and fact.
The ruling is significant because the class potentially includes thousands of inmates. At least 10 to 15 percent of the Missouri prison population is infected with hepatitis C, and the corrections department itself, in response to a Sunshine Act request, estimated last year that it had 5,200 inmates with hep C. The hepatitis C rate among the general population is about 1 percent.
"By not treating them, they're increasing the spread of the disease within this population," says Gillian Wilcox, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Missouri, which represents the plaintiffs. "Ninety-six percent of these people are coming back into communities." ..Continued..
May 17, 2017
Hundreds of Missouri sex offenders now required to wear GPS monitoring devices for life
This has got to be unconstitutional, someone has to take this to court! ACLU where are you?5-17-17 Missouri:
ST. LOUIS • A sex offender from St. Charles County thought he had moved on with his life after successfully completing five years of probation for sending webcam photographs of his genitals to an undercover police officer posing as a 13-year-old girl.
Now he’s among hundreds of people in Missouri who are learning they must attach GPS monitoring systems to their ankles for life, even though such a requirement wasn’t part of their sentencing agreement.
The devices send out alerts if an offender lingers near a school or a park. Cut the wide black strap and the waterproof device will tell on them.
It beeps to prompt a verbal command from state officials, say to make a payment or report to probation officers immediately.
The retroactive requirements are part of a revised state criminal code that went into effect Jan. 1. Offenders either found guilty or who pleaded guilty to 13 various sex crimes in question based on an act committed on or after Aug. 28, 2006, are subject to the added security measures. Previously, the monitoring technology was used for a more limited class of high-risk offenders.
The St. Charles man is among several sex offenders who are suing and challenging the state. In the lawsuit, in which he is named only as D.G., the 40-year-old argues that the law didn’t exist when he pleaded guilty. He claims he’s no longer “legally subject” to the jurisdiction of state prison authorities.
He argues that he shouldn’t be required to pay monthly supervision fees for decades, nor have travel or residency restricted for life.
“I don’t think a lawyer can make a straight-faced argument that it’s constitutional,” said Clayton-based attorney Matt Fry, who is suing the state on behalf of D.G. and has many other plaintiffs in the wings.
A March 29 “Dear Sir/Madam” letter from chief state supervisor Julie Kempker lays out the law, including threat of a class D felony if conditions are violated.
“We understand that this change may be unexpected,” Kempker said in the letter. “Rather than being detracted by the lifetime supervision requirements, you are encouraged to remain focused on your daily supervision responsibilities and to do those things that improve your life and positively impact your family and the community in which you live.”
Many sex offenders panicked and started calling lawyers. Some are confused: for instance, those no longer on supervision who moved away from Missouri. ..Continued.. by Jessee Bogan
May 5, 2017
Defense Attorney Warns Against Sex Offender Tracking Device
SPRINGFIELD, Mo.-- Springfield crime trackers reports there are 991 sex offenders in just Greene county Missouri and 920 of those are free of incarceration.
"It's devastating to not only the child, but to the whole family," says Barbara Brown Johnson, Executive Director at Springfield’s Child Advocacy Center.
It’s her job to help children victimized by sex offenders.
"Last year this Child Advocacy Center served 1349 children," she says.
She says she’s seen first hand the kind of pain a sex offender can cause someone.
"It impacts everything," Johnson says.
But Adam Woody, Springfield defense attorney says there are plenty hurt by just the stigma of the title sex offender.
"This is not a group that is going to garner a lot of sympathy from the general public," he admits.
Adding to that stigma, he says is Missouri's new location-monitoring ankle bracelet is now required for all sex offenders found guilty after August of 2006.
"If you've committed one of 12 sex crimes, this requirement goes into effect. Things that are as mundane as a junior in high school having sexual contact with their freshman in high school girlfriend,” he say.
According to Woody, it's a law that was set in place after a large list of revisions was proposed by 2016's Senate Bill 491. The bill responsible for the newly revised Missouri Criminal Code.
"This specific prevision sort of snuck in. And it took everyone by surprise on January first of 2017 when it became enforceable," Woody says.
But Johnson says monitoring sex offenders is age old precaution...
"I don't feel so bad about a simple ankle bracelet," she says.
Even still, Woody says this new advancement is too far reaching to be constitutional.
"Obviously big brother is going to be watching them for the rest of their lives. No doubt it'll be appealed.” ..Source.. by Collin Lingo
August 27, 2016
Pardoned for the Sex Crime He Never Committed
8-26-2016 Missouri:
He was accused of an unspeakable crime he did not commit. For 27 years, Earnest Leap of Oakview, Missouri, has lived with the ugly label of child molester. With his name on a public sex offender list, word quickly spread that he had sexually abused his own son and admitted it in court.
The facts of Leap's case make it clear that his experience could happen to anyone who's in the midst of a contentious child custody case.
In the fall of 1989, following an antagonistic divorce, a judge ruled that Earnest and Karen Leap would share custody of their sons, 5-year-old Brodie and toddler Josh. Primary custody was awarded to Earnest, so the boys would live most of the time with their father.
Brodie Leap, now 32, remembers his mother's "incessant" cajoling to get him to say that his father had sexually abused him. Leap, motivated by a terrible guilt, has spent much of his adult life trying to undo the damage.
Hauled into court to face child abuse allegations, Earnest Leap took the flawed advice of his public defender and pleaded no contest to the charge. The deal included no jail time, a guarantee that record of his plea would disappear in three years and, most important to Earnest, it spared his son from having to testify. Back then there was no such thing as a sex offender registry.
Then, in 1994, a new federal law required every state to establish a public registry listing every person convicted of a sex crime. Leap was forced to register as a sex offender in Missouri and remain on the registry for the rest of his life. His world began to fall apart, his movements limited by rules that an offender may not be in proximity to or live near minors. Imagine going through life having to dodge schools, malls, parks, theaters or even ice cream stores.
For decades, both Brodie and Josh Leap have campaigned to clear their father's name, calling him "the most supportive and positive force" in their lives.
Finally, their efforts paid off. On Aug. 19, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon issued a full and complete pardon for Earnest Leap. He got the call and heard the news he must have longed for: complete exoneration. He was pardoned for the crime he never committed.
"I'm still overwhelmed," Leap, 57, told the Kansas City Star after the call. "I am just really, really thankful," he said.
The governor wrote that chief among the reasons he granted the pardon was the fact that Brodie Leap had never wavered from his insistence that he lied all those years ago, at the urging of his mother. (When contacted recently, Karen Leap — now Karen Harris — continued to maintain that the molestation occurred, saying: "It happened. ... My son would not have lied to me back then. I don't know why Brodie is lying now.") Sadly, neither son has a relationship with their mother.
I've written in this space before about the senseless way in which these registries are maintained. Officials should focus on tracking career pedophiles and those who produce and trade child pornography. Instead, state registries are overflowing with the names of those convicted of drunkenly urinating in public, or those involved in so-called Romeo and Juliet crimes (consensual sex between underage teens that is prosecuted as statutory rape). Just because the parents of a 16-year-old girl want her 17-year-old boyfriend to be punished doesn't mean the state should participate in ruining a young man's life.
The trend does seem to be shifting ever so slowly. Last year, the California Supreme Court declared that certain sex offender living restrictions in San Diego County were unconstitutional. The New York State Court of Appeals struck down an ordinance that banned sex offenders from living near schools. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck down restrictions to sex offenders living near schools and parks, and a judge compared the restrictions with two of the darkest restrictions in our country's history — the Native American reservations and the Japanese-American internment camps.
As the Leaps' marriage was dissolving in the late '80s, President Reagan's former labor secretary, Ray Donovan, was found not guilty of fraud and grand larceny. He famously asked, "Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?
As Earnest Leap knows, it's mighty hard to undo 27 years of public perception. Where does he go now for relief from nearly three decades of undeserved punishment? ..Source.. by Diane Dimond
November 10, 2015
Missouri Supreme Court: teen's challenge to possible sex offender listing is premature
ST. LOUIS • The Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a 14-year-old's challenge to his potential listing on the adult sex offender registry was not yet “ripe” because he had not been ordered to register.
The troubled, developmentally delayed St. Louis teen was adjudicated delinquent last year of attempted rape for an attack on his 41-year-old adoptive sister.
One of his lawyers, Patricia Harrison, worried that he would eventually have to register as an adult under state law because of the nature of his crime.
Harrison, a professor and director of the St. Louis University Law School Children and Youth Advocacy Clinic, told the Supreme Court during oral arguments in September that he could be charged with a felony for failing to register.
But the court ruled Tuesday that the lawsuit was “premature.” The teen had not been ordered to register with the adult registry by the juvenile court and there has been no other attempt to force him to register, the court said.
Lawyers thought the teen's case could challenge the state’s juvenile sex offender registry and the juvenile court’s ability to place children on the adult registry.
Harrison said that a lifetime of forced sex offender registration imposes an adult penalty on a juvenile, violating both the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions.
The primary argument of Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster's office was that the issue was ripe for review. They also said that the requirement for some juveniles to register was not unconstitutional or cruel and unusual.
The teen choked, beat and sexually assaulted his adoptive sister March in 2014, according to court files.
He has a range of developmental delays, an IQ of 61 and mental disorders including ADHD, bipolar disorder and schizoaffective disorder, according to court files.
The teen was exposed to crack cocaine before birth and lead after he was born. He was placed in foster care at 10 months. He had been suspended twice from preschool by the age of 4 for “acting in a threatening manner and ‘punching holes in the wall,’” his lawyers’ filing says, and had been in five different schools by the eighth grade. ..Source.. by Robert Patrick
September 30, 2015
Missouri Supreme Court weighing adult sex offender registration for youth
See also: Missouri Supreme Court considers child sex registry case --and-- Missouri’s juvenile sex offender registry is challenged as unconstitutional9-30-15 Missouri:
JEFFERSON CITY • The Missouri Supreme Court heard a case Wednesday that could have wide-ranging effect on children accused of serious sexual crimes.
The case involves a troubled, developmentally delayed 14-year-old St. Louis boy accused of sexually assaulting his 41-year-old adoptive sister. But it also could challenge the state’s little-known juvenile sex offender registry, and the juvenile court’s ability to place children on the adult registry.
The registry, unlike the adult version, is not public and is maintained by county juvenile offices. Certain individuals on this list no longer have to register when they turn 21. State law requires juveniles age 14 and older convicted of certain very serious crimes to register on the adult list.
Hundreds of juveniles have been adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court of serious sexual crimes that could qualify them for inclusion on the adult list. An adjudication of delinquency is akin to a conviction in adult court.
The teen, identified only by initials, was not certified to stand trial as an adult, but was adjudicated delinquent in August 2014 of a charge of attempted rape in the first degree after an assessment found him competent to proceed in court.
The teen was ordered to register on the juvenile sex offender list. But Patricia Harrison, who represented the teen Wednesday, said he would eventually have to register as an adult under state law because of his age and the nature of his crime. Harrison is a professor and director of the St. Louis University Law School Children and Youth Advocacy Clinic.
If the teen was one day stopped by police and they saw he had an adjudication for attempted rape but was not on the adult registry, Harrison said, he could be charged with a felony.
He “was 14 and adjudicated of attempted rape in the first degree, (so) the statute requires he be placed on that (adult) registry regardless of whether the juvenile judge felt that was appropriate,” Harrison said.
Forcing a teen to register as a sex offender for life violates both the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions, Harrison said, by imposing an adult penalty in a juvenile case, imposing cruel and unusual punishment and removing the juvenile court judge’s discretion.
But Assistant Attorney General Matthew Laudano said the teen was not ordered to register as an adult. Juvenile court judges cannot order him onto the adult list.
The state did not appeal the juvenile court judge’s decision to only require the teen to register on the juvenile registry, but Laudano said the attorney general’s office believes the teen’s crime likely falls under the category that could land him on the adult list.
The teen choked, beat and sexually assaulted his 41-year-old adoptive sister in 2014, according to court files. She is several inches shorter and substantially lighter than the teen.
Through tears in juvenile court, the woman said that it was as if her attacker “was a different person” and “didn’t have a soul that day,” court filings say.
To say that the teen had a troubled youth is an understatement, according to his lawyers’ court filing.
He was exposed to crack cocaine before birth, and was placed in foster care at 10 months. At age 1, tests showed elevated levels of lead in his blood, which can lead to neurological damage, behavioral problems and developmental delays. He was adopted by a woman who was thought to be his grandmother, although it later turned out she was not. He had limited contact with his father, who is currently in prison.
Although he never acted out sexually before the rape, he had been suspended twice from preschool by the age of 4 for “acting in a threatening manner and ‘punching holes in the wall,’” his lawyers’ filing says.
By the eighth grade, he had been in five different schools.
He has a range of developmental delays, an IQ of 61 and a series of diagnoses of mental disorders including ADHD, bipolar disorder and schizoaffective disorder.
In December 2013, his adoptive mother refused to pick him up from the hospital, and he was returned to foster care. He also needed mental health treatment that his adoptive mother could not provide.
The rape allegation was lodged in March 2014.
He was committed to the Division of Youth Services and ordered to register on the juvenile sex offender list and undergo therapy and treatment. There was a “great” possibility that he could victimize others if housed with them, court filings say.
The judge did not rule on a claim that the registry requirement in the law was unconstitutional for juveniles.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of itself and the Children’s Law Center Inc., made the same cruel-and-unusual punishment argument, saying that courts have long recognized that children “are both less culpable for their crimes and more capable of reform.”
The Supreme Court is not expected to rule on the case for weeks. ..Source.. by Robert Patrick, Alex Stuckey
July 23, 2015
Supreme Court: AG, Patrol should be part of sex offender case
Missouri’s attorney general and the Highway Patrol should not have been blocked from being part of a sex offender registry case, a unanimous state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
Heath A. Dunivan, now 42, of Camdenton, pleaded guilty in October 1993 to one count of second-degree sexual abuse for a 1992 incident in Lebanon involving a 13-year-old girl, when he was 19.
He was required to register as a sex offender.
On March 29, 2012, Dunivan asked the Laclede County circuit court to remove him from Missouri’s sex offender registry and relieve him from the registration requirement. A provision of the state’s Sex Offender Registration Act says some offenders can petition for removal from the registry at least two years after the conviction. The offender had to be 19 or younger and the victim was 13 or older; no physical violence or threat could have been used in the offense.
Dunivan notified the Laclede County prosecuting attorney about his petition, but the law doesn’t require any notice be sent to the attorney general or the Patrol.
The prosecutor represented the state at a May 7, 2013, hearing, but didn’t cross-examine Dunivan or offer any argument in opposition to his petition, according to the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The circuit court granted Dunivan’s requests, and later made a docket entry: “Court finds issues in favor of (Dunivan) and against (the state).” On May 20, 2013, the circuit court issued a written order Dunivan be removed from the registry and be relieved from his registration obligation, but the order was not designated as a “judgment” and wasn’t directed to anyone to take the actions needed.
Court records show the attorney general and the patrol received a copy of the May 20 order. The attorney general filed a motion on behalf of both agencies to intervene under the Supreme Court’s rules. The motion also asked the court to set aside its order, arguing Dunivan’s Missouri registration requirement was based on an independent federal requirement.
The court eventually denied the attorney general’s motion and issued a second order making its ruling a final judgment.
The Southern District appeals court in Springfield upheld Circuit Judge Kenneth Hayden’s rulings, and the attorney general appealed to the Supreme Court.
The high court’s 13-page opinion overturned Hayden’s ruling and sent the case back to the trial court.
Judge George Draper III, writing for the seven-judge Supreme Court, noted state law gives the attorney general the power to “appear and interplead, answer or defend, in any proceeding or tribunal in which the state’s interests are involved.”
Dunivan argued the attorney general’s motion to intervene came 91 days after the order removing him from the sex offender registry. But, Draper wrote, since Hayden had not designated his order as a “judgment,” as the Supreme Court’s rules require so that a final order can be appealed, the case wasn’t final when the attorney general sought to intervene.
Additionally, Draper wrote, the state “has an interest in a circuit court’s judgment ordering the removal of a sex offender’s name from Missouri’s sex offender registry” — and that’s an “unconditional” right, even if the local prosecuting attorney represents the state at a hearing.
Tuesday’s ruling also upheld the Highway Patrol’s right to be part of Dunivan’s case because it is required to maintain the sex offender registry, including complying with any court order to remove or exempt someone from the registry. ..Source.. by Bob Watson
Appeals court ruling blocks Koster on sex offender appeal
11-4-2014:
Attorney General Chris Koster’s office has not said, yet, if it will ask the Missouri Supreme Court to review last week’s state appeals court ruling that neither the attorney general nor the Missouri Highway Patrol (MSHP) has an automatic right to be included in a Sex Offender Registry case.
Last year, Circuit Judge Kenneth M. Hayden ordered in a Laclede County case that Heath Dunivan, Camdenton, be removed from the registry.
Dunivan, 42 on Thursday, has been required to register following his Oct. 13, 1993, conviction for second-degree sexual abuse of a 13-year-old in Lebanon, that occurred on May 1, 1992. Dunivan was 19 at the time.
In 2012 he asked the court to set aside that order and — after a hearing that included the Laclede County prosecuting attorney’s office — Hayden agreed, and on May 20, 2013, issued the order removing Dunivan from the list.
However, Dunivan’s information still was available Monday afternoon on the Highway Patrol’s website, www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/CJ38/searchRegistry.jsp.
Three months later, court records show, the attorney general’s office filed a motion for both Koster’s office and the patrol to intervene in the case.
After Hayden denied those requests, the attorney general appealed, raising two legal points — that a state law gives his office an “unconditional right” to intervene, and that a separate Supreme Court rule also gives the attorney general and the patrol that same right.
The appeals court rejected both claims.
On the first claim, the court said, Koster’s office “overstates the rights” the state law gives, because that law says the attorney general “may also appear … in any proceeding or tribunal in which the state’s interests are involved.”
The judges noted that the words “’may’ appear is not synonymous with an unconditional right to intervene in any existing lawsuit,” especially since the state was “already a party … represented by the prosecuting attorney.”
The judges also noted that the law that allows removing a name from the Sex Offender Registry “does not provide that the Attorney General be given notice of the petition to remove a name from the registry, nor does it mandate that the Attorney General be made an additional party to the proceeding.”
Koster’s office also had argued that, as a practical matter, the disposition of Dunivan’s petition could cause problems for the patrol’s enforcing Missouri’s Sex Offender Registration Act, and that their interests might not be represented adequately without being allowed to intervene.
In its ruling, the judges noted the attorney general argued “that the MSHP has an absolute right to intervene because of its interest in maintaining the statewide sex offender registry as required by statute. The MSHP does have that duty — however, it does not have input into whether Dunivan should be on the registry.
“(Hayden’s) order does not affect the MSHP’s duty to maintain the registry.”
The appeals court said Hayden didn’t abuse his discretion in denying the motions to intervene, noting again that “the State was already a party and was being represented by the prosecuting attorney.”
The judges ruling in the case were Nancy Steffen Rahmeyer, Gary W. Lynch and Don E. Burrell.
March 5, 2015
Sex offender residency law questioned
3-5-2015 Missouri:
A Jasper County judge delayed making a ruling Wednesday on whether a Carthage man should stand trial on a charge that he was living too close to a school as a convicted sex offender.
Associate Circuit Judge Joe Hensley said at the conclusion of the preliminary hearing of Kerry L. Pennington Jr. in Jasper County Circuit Court that he wished to study the finer points of a state law prohibiting residency of sex offenders within 1,000 feet of a school or day care center before issuing his ruling.
Pennington, 45, is required by law to register his address with the Jasper County sheriff's office because he was convicted in 2012 of having sexual contact with an underage girl and sentenced to four years in prison. He also currently faces charges that he sexually abused a minor in 2012 at an address in Alba.
Detective Chris Carriger testified at the hearing that it was brought to the attention of the Jasper County sheriff's office last year that Pennington was spending a lot of time at a girlfriend's house on East Fourth Street in Carthage across the street from the Jasper County Jail. Carriger said he spoke to the defendant about the matter on Oct. 7 — even though his registered address was in compliance with the law — because the girlfriend's home was within 1,000 feet of Carthage Junior High School.
Carriger testified that Pennington admitted to him that he'd slept at the girlfriend's house. The detective said he subsequently used the jail's outside security cameras to determine that the defendant spent an average of 10 to 12 hours a day there over a five-day period. But the detective acknowledged under cross-examination by public defender Darren Wallace that review of the video footage never showed Pennington staying at the house overnight.
Wallace argued that Assistant Prosecutor Will Lynch had no evidence the defendant was living at the address and the law specifically prohibits residency within 1,000 feet of a school or day care center.
"It doesn't say you can't stay there 10 to 12 hours a day," Wallace told the judge.
Lynch maintained that the statute defines residency as where someone sleeps.
Wallace also questioned the constitutionality of the statute because of its vagueness as to how the distance between a residence and a school or day care center is to be measured.
Carriger calculated that the girlfriend's property line was about 800 to 900 feet from the school's closest property line. But he acknowledged that the law does not state from what point of a property to another the distance is to be measured.
The judge overruled that objection when Wallace could present no case law to back his argument. Hensley said he would take the other matter under consideration and make a decision within a few days.
Issue
Convicted sex offender Kerry Pennington Jr. was charged in January of this year with living too close to Carthage Junior High School following an investigation by the Jasper County Sheriff's Department. ..Source.. by Jeff Lehr
September 17, 2014
Bonner man acquitted of child sex charges
After a two-day trial and several hours of deliberation Thursday, a Missoula jury exonerated Chad Lee Briggs, a 36-year-old Bonner mechanic who was one of seven people accused of attempting to have sex with a 12-year-old girl during a December sex sting.
The two-day undercover operation, orchestrated by several law enforcement agencies, nabbed seven people, including Briggs’ former girlfriend Jenna Davis, who is accused of setting up a sexual encounter between the fictitious girl and Briggs.
Prosecutors claimed Briggs and Davis responded to a posting on Craigslist last Dec. 18, advertising a 12-year-old girl available for sex. A female undercover agent posed as the fictitious girl’s aunt, and in communicating with the seven alleged perpetrators, she claimed she would make her young niece available for sex, according to court documents.
Davis allegedly told the officer that Briggs would be interested in helping the girl lose her virginity. “She said that Briggs had been involved in a prior sexual encounter with an underage girl and it had been a positive experience,” the affidavit stated.
It went on to claim that Briggs also called the undercover detective, assuring her that he would supply condoms and “be gentle with the 12-year-old.”
But the Missoula County District Court jury sided with Briggs and his attorney, Lisa Kauffman, finding the single father not guilty of a single felony count of sexual abuse of children.
“The state failed to prove that Chad had any knowledge that there was actually a 12-year-old there for sex,” Kauffman said Friday in a phone interview.
Briggs’ case was the first of six remaining cases to go to trial; Davis is due for a court appearance next week.
*****
In another phone interview, Briggs claimed the advertisement didn’t explicitly say anything about an underage person and he initially contacted the advertisement’s author on Dec. 17 out of concern. He asked the author to clarify what they meant.
“When they posted the age (of the girl), I didn’t respond back,” Briggs explained Friday. “Actually, I thought they were committing a crime to begin with — that’s why I flagged the ad to alert the Craigslist administration.”
He told Davis about the advertisement and the following day when Davis arrived at his home for dinner, the pair began arguing. Without his knowledge, Davis had sought out the Craigslist advertisement and started communicating with the undercover detective, he said.
“I didn’t know this conversation was going on,” he said. “That evening I was going to run across the street to get a gallon of milk, and she wanted to go for a ride.”
“I am not sure what her intentions were really going on in her head,” he added.
Kauffman said her client had no knowledge that he and Davis were going to meet an adolescent. But Davis, she said, passed the gas station where Briggs planned to buy milk and then Albertsons as well, while furiously texting.
“On the drive in, I was getting suspicious of what was going on,” he said. “The detective sent a picture (of herself.)”
At that point, three blocks away from the residence, Briggs said he realized that Davis was attempting to set up a sexual encounter with the aunt of the fictitious child and he claims when he got on the phone with the detective, she led the conversation and there was no mention of a child. When he got to the address, he reluctantly got out of the car and walked to the home. He said the detective led him inside, where he was arrested and taken into custody.
Briggs spent his last paycheck bailing himself out of jail, but didn’t have a life to come home to.
Child and Family Services took his daughter away and he lost his job as a mechanic at Paws Up Resort. He also lost his dog, his house, his truck, his girlfriend. He said people – random strangers – would yell at him at the gas station and in grocery stores.
But now, after the jury’s verdict, he’s ready to forgive and move on with his life.
“There’s a lot of anger there,” he said. “Time heals everything. If I keep being angry, I would never be happy with myself.” ..Source.. by Kathryn Haake
August 11, 2014
Missouri Supreme Court ruling hailed for ending court bias against victims of sex crimes
A recent Missouri Supreme Court ruling that received little public notice is being hailed as a landmark decision striking down one of the last vestiges of the discredited legal notion that victims of sex crimes are more likely to lie than other crime victims.
Until the court ruled July 29, appellate judges reviewing convictions for sex crimes could set them aside if they decided the victim’s otherwise uncorroborated testimony lacked credibility. Established in a 1911 precedent, the “corroboration rule requires the appellate courts to make factual determinations they are ill-equipped to make,” Judge Richard Teitelman wrote in the unanimous opinion.
In the case, Sylvester Porter of St. Louis was challenging his conviction and 25-year sentence on two counts of first-degree statutory sodomy. The victim was a girl, 3 years old at the time Porter assaulted her in 2010 and 5 when she testified at his trial. His attorneys, on appeal, argued that the girl’s testimony was not corroborated and contradictory, making the evidence insufficient to support a conviction.
In every other type of crime, Teitelman wrote, appellate judges assume that evidence supporting a conviction is true. The issue is whether there is enough evidence.
The corroboration rule joins the premise that victims of sex assaults lie with the idea “that judges and juries are uniquely unable to make accurate factual determinations in sex crime cases. Both assumptions are unsupported,” Teitelman wrote.
The court also used the case to strike down the “destructive contradictions” rule that allowed appellate courts to throw out convictions if a witness contradicts statements made during their court testimony or in earlier proceedings.
Prosecutors and advocates are hailing the ruling for removing an obstacle that weighed on decisions whether to file charges. “That will affect how we evaluate cases,” said Boone County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Knight, adding that the ruling could lead many prosecutors to review old cases for any that could be brought to trial with a greater chance of success.
The biggest impact of the decision might be in prosecution of child sex abuse cases, where the child’s testimony is often the only direct evidence, said Emily Van Schenkhof of Missouri Kids First. “So many children come through child advocacy centers, and very few” cases “are prosecuted. These cases face very substantial barriers to bringing prosecution, and a big piece of that is the child.”
Rainbow House Child Advocacy Center in Columbia conducted 412 forensic interviews with children from its 10-county region in 2013, and 334 involved investigations of sexual abuse. It is one of 15 advocacy centers in Missouri where children are interviewed by trained investigators in a setting where the child can feel at ease. The interviews are video recorded for use in court.
Porter’s attorneys sought to invoke the destructive contradictions rule because of varying details given at different times by the victim. That often happens, said Jerri Sites, child advocacy center program director at Rainbow House.
Child abuse victims “may make a clear disclosure in a forensic interview, and get to court, and they freeze when they are facing their abuser,” Sites said.
The legal obstacles facing victims have deep roots that have been difficult to dislodge, said Colleen Coble, executive director of the Missouri Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence.
“I think the corroboration rule is overt,” she said. “It was easy to see the bias that it represented. What is more difficult for survivors of sexual assault who proceed with criminal proceedings is the unspoken bias that often remains in a courtroom.”
While the practical effect of the decision is likely to be small because few cases have been overturned because of the rule, the decision has major significance in the development of the law, said Ben Trachtenberg, an associate professor of law at the University of Missouri.
“It shows Missouri following a modern trend of getting rid of some antiquated rules that apply only in sex cases and the theory that victim witnesses in sex cases, primarily women, were necessarily more unreliable than in other cases,” Trachtenberg said.
The bias against victims can be traced to English law and the presumption that if a woman did not report an assault right away, she was lying when she did so, Trachtenberg said. Victims delay reporting for a number of reasons, from fear of another attack to paralyzing trauma, he said.
At times, the legal bias was a bluntly stated double standard. “It is a matter of common knowledge that bad character of a man for chastity does not even in the remotest degree affect his character for truth when based upon that alone, while it does that of a woman,” Judge Gavon Burgess wrote in a Missouri Supreme Court decision in 1895.
Missouri has stripped most of the bias against victims from its statutes as well, Coble said. Rape now is a crime defined as a lack of consent or a lack of ability to consent to sex rather than a crime requiring overt violence.“I really do think that there has been a culture change in terms of greater awareness of what the realities are and what was passed as fact in the past is actually mythology,” she said. ..Source.. by Rudi Keller
July 9, 2014
Missouri measure targets people who post mugshots online and demand money to remove them
JEFFERSON CITY, Missouri — People humiliated by online mugshots of their past arrests will soon have greater legal options in Missouri.
Gov. Jay Nixon has signed legislation making it a misdemeanor to publish police booking photos on websites and then seek money to take them photos down. The new crime will be punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.
The legislation also says people who suffer "humiliation or embarrassment" by such websites can sue for actual and punitive damages.
The Missouri legislation also applies to any information about a person's name, address or charges that is published with the solicitation or acceptance of money to remove it.
The measure will take effect Aug. 28. ..Source.. by Th Republic
June 27, 2014
Springfield sued over order to close group home
6-27-2014 Missouri:
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (AP) - A Missouri nonprofit has filed a lawsuit contending that the city of Springfield violated federal and city laws when it ordered the closure of a group home for recovering alcoholics, drug addicts and sex offenders.
Recovery Chapel and its executive director, Farris Robertson, said in the federal lawsuit filed Tuesday against the city and its Board of Adjustment that the city’s refusal to allow the group home violates the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as local zoning codes.
In March, the city said the group home had to move because it violated zoning codes by housing convicted sex offenders, The Springfield News-Leader reported (http://sgfnow.co/UJbvgY ).
City Attorney Dan Wichmer said Tuesday that the city was expecting the lawsuit and “we’ll just follow it through to its logical conclusion.”
The conflict began last November when the first residents moved into the home and Robertson was told within a week that a citizen had complained. The city notified Robertson in January that the home violated city codes. And on March 14, Robertson was denied an occupancy permit for a group home because more than one person on probation and/or parole made the home a community corrections facility, not a group home, the city said.
He was given 30 days to close or relocate to an area of the city zoned for heavy manufacturing. Robertson said his organization did not have a contract for corrections services and challenged the city to prove the residents threatened public safety. He also argued that the property is a group home for people with disabilities.
Robertson told the Board of Adjustment earlier this month that all the sex offenders had left the home because of the conflict with the city, unwelcoming neighbors and media attention. Eight people with substance abuse or alcoholism problems currently live at the home, according to the complaint.
The plaintiffs are asking to be allowed to operate the property as a group home and are seeking actual and punitive damages. ..Source.. by Washington Times.com
May 15, 2014
How much can it cost to run and maintain a registry?
5-15-2014 Missouri:
In the article "Missouri sex offender presses for chance to be off registry" the panel on the left side shows the following:
Funding Allocation:
The Missouri State Highway Patrol has been awarded four years of funding from the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act since the act was signed into law in 2006. It created a national sex offender registry, along with stipulations for state registries under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act.
Funding is given to assist states striving to comply with the act's standards.
Missouri is one of 17 states currently in compliance, which is monitored by the Office of Justice Programs. The grant money goes toward maintaining the Missouri Sex Offender Registry's systems, programming and equipment.
Allocation by year:
2008: $155,117.55
2010: $281,960
2012: $178,548
2013: $400,000
Total: $1,015,625.55
—Missouri State Highway Patrol
How is it possible that, a name and address file with pictures can cost over 1 million dollars to maintain?
Is the public being ripped off?
April 16, 2014
St. Louis police using postcard to shame 'johns' who get prostitutes
Program will begin in Carondelet and Holly Hills neighborhoods.
ST. LOUIS, April 16 (UPI) -- In an effort to crack down on “johns" who are soliciting prostitutes in town, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department will begin sending a postcard to men who are caught trying to pick up ladies of the night.
The postcard reminds the johns that their “lewd, lascivious and/or suggestive behavior (including but not limited to prostitution, solicitation and prostitution loitering) are a violation of city ordinance and state law” and includes a court date. ..Source.. by Evan Bleier
April 15, 2014
Springfield 'sex offender house' gets 2-month reprieve
Thirty days ago, the City of Springfield gave residents of 1809 E. Crestview St. exactly 30 days to clear out. Today, the residents of the home — some sex offenders, some parolees, some drug addicts — are staying put.
An appeal filed today by Recovery Chapel, which operates the so-called group home, has delayed action against the house for at least two more months.
Last month city staffers investigated the halfway house at the urging of neighbors. Many seemed most concerned about the number of residents who appeared on the Greene County sex offender registry.
At the time, there were five. Today, there are two.
During city staffers' investigation of the home, they determined the home did not meet the zoning requirements of a group home.
The director of building development services wrote that the house acts more as a "community corrections facility" than a group home because of the high number of residents on probation and parole.
The city gave the residents 30 days to move or disband.
But today, a St. Louis-based attorney filed a formal appeal with the city on behalf of Recovery Chapel.
That means enforcement of the 30-day notice will be delayed until the case is heard by the city's Board of Adjustment, a five-member board made of members nominated by the City Manager and appointed by City Council.
The appeal is scheduled to go before the board June 3.
Chaplain Farris Robertson, who has fought the city's action against the Crestview house, confirmed the home continues to operate as usual. ..Source.. by Jess Rollins, News-Leader
December 27, 2013
Missouri Supreme Court overturns dismissal of charge against Springfield sex offender
12-27-2013 Missouri:
A Springfield sex offender who had a charge thrown out three years ago can now be prosecuted.
The Missouri Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Edwin F. Carey, 51, and two other defendants can be prosecuted under a law barring convicted sex offenders from being within 500 feet of public parks that have swimming pools or playground equipment.
At issue was whether the law violated a ban in the state Constitution against retrospective laws. All three men had been convicted of a sexual offense before the statute was adopted.
Carey was convicted of second-degree statutory sodomy in Scott County in 1997. In 2010, he was charged in Greene County with being a sex offender within 500 feet of a park.
Carey’s charge was initially dismissed because the law making it illegal for a sex offender to be that close to a park was enacted in 2002, long after his 1997 conviction.
The attorney for Carey, and for the others, had argued that the rule on retrospective laws applied to both civil issues and criminal penalties.
The divided Missouri Supreme Court ruled Tuesday the prohibition on being near such parks is a criminal law, so the prohibition against retrospective laws does not apply.
The members of the court said because the law against sex offenders being near a park is a criminal statue, “the circuit court erred in dismissing the charges against ... Carey on the ground the the statute was unconstitutionally retrospective as applied to (him).”
Supreme Court Judge Zel Fischer wrote in the majority opinion that the park law is part of the criminal code, uses the language of a criminal provision and does not depend upon someone’s registration as a sex offender. He said the law also carries a severe punishment.
“The General Assembly intended for this statute to punish felons, who had been convicted of committing specific, enumerated crimes, for engaging in future conduct that the General Assembly determined should be prohibited,” Fischer wrote.
Three of the court’s seven judges agreed with Fischer.
There was a dissenting opinion filed by Judge George Draper, who agreed with the dismissal of Carey’s case, saying the section about sex offenders being near parks should be construed as a civil law and subject to “retrospective examination.”
Draper said the law is designed to protect the public from harm and derives from the requirement for sex offenders to register, which has been deemed nonpunitive and civil in nature.
Draper was joined by two other judges in his opinion.
Carey’s dismissal was reversed and remanded to Greene County Circuit Court.
The Supreme Court case also included reviews of the cases involving the other two sex offenders: Jason Reece Peterson’s dismissed Carroll County case and Michael Wade’s conviction in St. Louis County. ..Source.. by Stephen Herzog
October 25, 2013
Jackson County judge delays contempt fine against breastfeeding mother facing jury duty
The Missouri General Assembly now controls the question of whether two nursing mothers will be held in contempt for failing to meet their Jackson County jury service obligations.
A Jackson County judge said Thursday he would delay fining the women $500 each until the end of the legislative session in the spring. But should lawmakers not approve a measure that specifically exempts breastfeeding moms from jury service, Presiding Judge Marco Roldan said he would impose the fines.
One of the women, Laura Trickle of Lee’s Summit, said she was grateful for the judge’s decision, which he announced at her contempt hearing Thursday.
“The judge stated he is going to follow the law, which is what he should do,” Trickle said. “It’s the law that needs changed.”
Through a spokeswoman, Roldan announced that he had refunded a $500 fine paid Wednesday by a second Jackson County woman and gave her the same opportunity for a legislative reprieve.
Roldan set June 6 hearings for the women to review their cases and assess any legislative changes.
Twelve states, including Kansas, have laws exempting nursing mothers from jury service.
Earlier this year, Trickle obtained a six-month postponement of jury duty while awaiting the birth of a child. But she was not prepared to serve on a jury in September, when she was called after receiving another postponement of about two weeks.
Trickle continues to breastfeed her 7-month-old son, Axel, who waited outside the courtroom in his father’s arms during the hearing.
Explaining his ruling, Roldan said Trickle should have appeared for jury service with a caregiver for the child and then made her hardship case to a judge. Given the importance of jurors in the legal system, judges are sensitive to the well-being of jurors, Roldan said.
“I’ve been a judge for 14 years and have seen a lot of hardships,” Roldan said. “Judges take those hardships seriously.”
Trickle said she wants to meet her civic obligations, but now isn’t the time.
“Please take into account the hardships we face,” she said after the hearing. “It’s a timing issue for me. I just can’t do it now.”
The judge expressed no opinion as to whether the General Assembly should exempt nursing mothers from jury service, only that he wanted to give legislators the opportunity to act before taking final action on cases that have received nationwide attention.
After the hearing, State Sen. Rob Schaaf, a St. Joseph physician, said at a chilly rally in front of the courthouse that he plans to reintroduce legislation in the upcoming session to provide the jury service exemption for breastfeeding mothers.
Such a provision would encourage more mothers to nurse their babies, who, generally, would then be healthier and less prone to some health problems, he said.
“It’s a no-brainer,” Schaaf said. “If you were in court trying to get some justice, would you want a breastfeeding mother on the jury?”
Schaaf, who met Trickle at the rally for the first time, said the judge’s decision would bring more attention to the question. He invited Trickle to become the face of the issue for lawmakers.
“We’ll have you come down to Jeff City to testify,” Schaaf said. “Would you like that?”
“Oh yes,” she replied.
“It shouldn’t be up to a judge to decide when you decide to stop breastfeeding,” Schaaf said.
About 50 mothers and children turned up for the rally to support changes in Missouri law to allow women greater freedom to nurse their children in public.
“How many more women, babies and families will have to suffer stress until the laws change?” asked rally organizer Rachel Daniels. ..Source.. by Mark Morris
September 3, 2013
Missouri high court mulls sex offender and gun laws
The Missouri Supreme Court considered Tuesday how to apply laws making it illegal for sex offenders to be near parks and for felons to possess a gun when their initial offense occurred before the restrictions were created.
At issue before the high court in five separate cases was part of the Missouri Constitution prohibiting retrospective and ex post facto laws.
In each case, defendants faced prosecution after running afoul of a law that applied to them because of a previous criminal conviction. A judge dismissed a charge in four cases, while a fifth defendant was convicted and appealed.
Three cases focused on a 2009 law that prohibits those convicted of a sexual offense from knowingly being present or loitering within 500 feet of a public park with playground equipment or a public swimming pool. Violators can be charged with a felony and face up to four years in prison.
Attorney S. Dean Price, who represents a sex offender whose charge for violating the 2009 law was dismissed, said the restrictions were not part of what his client bargained for when he pleaded guilty to the sex crime.
"He shouldn't go to prison for something where the rules got changed," Price said. For people convicted after the 2009 law, "We think it's a great idea going forward."
The Missouri attorney general's office said the bar on retrospective laws applies to civil and not criminal statutes.
Daniel McPherson, an assistant attorney general, said in his written argument the ban on retrospective laws is aimed at preventing instances where someone cannot avoid liability because all prerequisites happened before the law was enacted. However, he said someone can avoid criminal penalties "simply by refraining from the activities prohibited under the statute."
The Missouri Supreme Court has considered other cases dealing with new restrictions for sex offenders.
In 2008, the court upheld a trial judge's decision to strike down part of a law expanding a prohibition on sex offenders living within 1,000 feet of a school or day care to those already living in those places. In 2010, it sided with a man convicted of a sex offense before the housing restrictions law who wanted to move into his fiancee's home. The high court also upheld dismissal of a misdemeanor charge against a man who was convicted of a sex offense previously and accused of violating a Missouri law requiring sex offenders avoid Halloween-related contact with children.
The attorney general's office argued those decisions should no longer be followed.
In the gun cases, a charge was dismissed against two people accused of being a felon in possession of a gun. Missouri lawmakers in 2008 broadened state law to apply the ban to all felons. Violating the prohibition is a felony with a sentence of up to seven years in prison.
In the two cases before the Supreme Court, the initial felony convictions were handed down before the 2008 law. A judge in one case concluded the law was retrospective, and a different judge ruled in the other case it was an ex post facto law. ..Source.. by NewsPressNow.com
