Total Pageviews

Sunday, January 30, 2011

CDCR Recommends Changes



 

Nine ways to stop sex offenders from committing new crimes

November 12, 2010 | 4:33 PM | By Rina Palta

    The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation released a report today that recommends changes to the way the state monitors people who have served prison sentences for sex crimes and are now back in the community. Many of the recommendations are ideas that have been floating about in the academic and policy worlds, but the advent of the report is still momentous: any time you talk about changing the laws regarding sex offenders and how they’re tracked, things can get politically dicey. This report, unlike previous ones, comes from the hands of police officers, sheriffs deputies, parole officers, prosecutors, and prison system officials–and much of it is meant to clear up some common misconceptions about sex offenders, who they are, and what kinds of things actually prevent them from hurting more victims. Some of the suggestions promise to be controversial, calling for the roll-back of politically popular laws.

    Overall, the report calls for nine changes in the way sex offenders are supervised while on parole:
    1. Implement a “containment model.” Which basically means that sex offender supervision should always be looked at with all of its complexities and all the people it affects in mind. Which means involving victims groups, working with legislators, and regularly auditing progress.
    2. Change how the department assesses who’s at highest risk for re-offending. Currently, each sex offender is given a risk assessment when they’re released from prison that looks at their past behavior and determines what level of supervision they should receive. But there are other factors that contribute to risk–like living situation, work life, emotional health, supportive families. What’s called a “dynamic” risk model takes things like these into effect–and can change as an ex-offender’s situation evolves.
    3. Have different levels of supervision for different people. Some sex offenders are high risk; others are not. Many fall somewhere in the middle. Currently, there are two levels of supervision that a sex offender can be assigned. The report recommends there be more, and that the level of supervision change depending on how well the offender responds to being back in the community.
    4. Get rid of “passive” GPS monitoring. Right now, about 6,600 paroled sex offenders are monitored on GPS. But that doesn’t mean someone’s watching every step they take. For some of them, a parole agent looks at where they’ve been about once a week. The report recommends that everyone’s travels be tracked once a day.
    5. Build a monitoring center. That said, more and more of a parole officer’s time is spent looking at a computer and responding to alerts that the GPS bracelets give off all the time (thousands a day statewide). If there were a monitoring center that took care of checking the alerts, parole agents could presumably spend more time in the field, checking up on parolees.
    6. Switch experienced parole officers to sex offender units. Instead of assigning the least experienced officers to sex offender units, send the most experienced ones, the report says. Those who know what to look for to see if a parolee is hiding something.
    7. Reduce caseloads. Right now, parole officers in sex offender units have from 20-40 parolees each under their supervision. The report says that number shouldn’t be higher than 20.
    8. Increase oversight. After Jaycee Lee Dugard was found to be living in a tent complex in Philip Garrido’s back yard in Antioch, many people pointed out the fact that Garrido was a registered sex offender, that parole agents had visited his house, and yet still, no one noticed Dugard’s continued imprisonment. The report recommends more managerial oversight and evaluations of how parolees are being monitored.
    9. Get rid of Jessica’s Law housing restrictions. This recommendation promises to be the most controversial. Jessica’s Law was passed as Proposition 83 in 2006 and among other things, it created strict rules for where sex offenders can and can’t live. According to the law, sex offenders cannot live within 2,000 feet of a school, park, or place where children regularly gather. Which means that in some cities (like SF) they can’t live anywhere and must declare themselves transient. Before the law passed, there were 88 homeless sex offenders on parole in California. Right now, there are about 2,100. The report says there’s no evidence to suggest that residency restrictions actually change the likelihood a sex offender will commit a new crime–they actually hurt public safety by ensuring unstable situations for already troubled people. The report recommends that the restrictions be dropped.
    So what now? Robert Ambroselli, the Director of the Division of Adult Parole Operations at the CDCR, told a group of reporters this afternoon that the department is reviewing the recommendations and seeing which ones can be implemented and how. The large remaining questions, which CDCR does not yet have answers to, are whether the resources and political will are there to see them through. Reducing the caseloads and switching experienced parole officers to sex offender units would either require taking resources from other areas of parole or getting a chunk of money from a state budget that’s already over-strained. Rolling back Jessica’s Law would also take considerable political maneuvering–a two-thirds vote of the legislature would be required to alter it. Senator Mark Leno, the chair of the Senate’s Public Safety Committee has said that he and other legislators are working on getting a bipartisan coalition together to take on the residency restrictions. Last week, a Los Angeles judge declared the residency restrictions unconstitutional, though the ruling only applies to LA county.
    Posted by at 1 comment:
    Labels:

    Saturday, January 29, 2011

    Must Read Books

    Snitch Culture

    By Jim Redden
    Published by Feral House, Venice, CA 2001, 235 pages

    Reviewed by Hans Sherrer
    Appeared in Justice Denied Magazine, Vol. 2, Issue 5

    Snitch Culture is a timely examination of how personal and technological snitching is used by the state and private organizations, in conjunction with informational databases, to obliterate the privacy of Americans. The author, Jim Redden, formerly published PDXS, a quasi-counterculture newspaper in Portland, Oregon.
    Judas Iscariot is the most well known snitch in history. Mr. Redden relates in considerable detail how the state in general, and its law enforcement network in particular, is dependent on large numbers of people emulating Judas' example of snitching on Jesus Christ for 30 pieces of silver. They are also duly rewarded with enticements that can include a reduced sentence, dropped charges, informant payments and deflecting their guilt on to others.
    The state's addiction to snitches is illustrated by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in 1999 to let stand a lower court ruling in U.S. v. Singleton, that federal prosecutors are exempt from the federal statute prohibiting the bribery of witnesses to testify favorably for the government.
    The book also relates horror stories of innocent people who have been victimized by snitches unconcerned with the truth. Their ordeals emphasize that everyone is endangered by the state's unrestrained purchase and reliance on questionable information from suspect sources.
    Furthermore, when the state is unable to acquire information directly, it has long relied on the intelligence network of snitches working with private organizations, such as the Anti Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
    Mr. Redden points out that children are taught to snitch on each other and their parents by programs such as DARE, employees are encouraged to snitch on coworkers and their employers, lawyers snitch on clients, acquaintances and spouses snitch on each other, ad nauseam. Snitching is so epidemic in this country that it is becoming culturally ingrained.
    For anyone skeptical of how easily and quickly "ordinary" people can be induced to become a snitch, Mr. Redden explains the chilling "Third Wave Experiment" a San Francisco area high school teacher conducted in 1967. In an April 2000 interview, the teacher recalled that in few days: "Students were becoming like the Gestapo and giving me personal information I could use against other students in class."
    Mechanical and electronic snitching has a long history of augmenting personal snitching. Although not mentioned in the book, at the behest of the federal government a mechanical punch-card computer was invented in 1884 that aided the collection of information on Americans beginning with the census of 1890. When later controlled by IBM, that same technology assisted the German censuses of the 1930's and it eased the identification and rounding up of Jews and other undesirables. The passage of the Social Security Act in 1935 and the creation of a data file on most Americans and every business employing workers, encouraged development of the electronic computer: the first prototype of which was functional in 1939.
    In the 1928 case of Olmstead v. U.S., the Supreme Court gave its approval to the state's use of electronic snitch devices to snoop on Americans. In his dissent, Justice Louis Brandeis warned of the Pandora's Box of privacy invasions the Court was opening. Mr. Redden explains that just seven decades later, Americans are subjected to pervasive forms of technological snitching from before their birth until after their death. Most of that covert surveillance and collection of information is conducted as a part of the daily routine of state agencies and private businesses and organizations.
    There has been considerable publicity in the last few years that phone calls, emails, and even faxes of people are secretly monitored by State agencies, as well as employers who are not constrained by any 4th Amendment concerns. Although published in March 2001, snitching is expanding at such a rate that Mr. Redden doesn't mention the NSA's (National Security Agency) Tempest project that can read a computer screen from 1/2 mile away, that was written about in the April 20001 issue of Popular Mechanics. Neither does he mention the NRO's 25 billion dollar spy satellite project reported on page one of the LA Times of Mach 18, 2001. Those projects reflect one of the central themes of Snitch Culture: we often don't know when or how we are being watched or reported on.
    Furthermore, untold thousands of businesses have improved on Radio Shack's rudimentary collection, beginning over 20 years ago, of information about its customers. State agencies are increasingly using information in private databases to fine-tune its own snitch projects. Mr. Redden also points out the irony that people who publicly express the fear of losing their rights are specifically targeted for state funded snitch programs that undermine those very rights.
    Jeremy Bentham didn't apply his concept of the Panoptical prison to the surveillance of an entire society. However, the U.S. increasingly resembles just such a prison due to the institutionalization of state and private snitching. Given that environment, Snitch Culture provides a healthy counterbalance to the deafening crescendo that technology is "our friend". It is ushering in a brave new world, but one that has many ugly and disturbing qualities.
    It can no longer be ignored that the technological surveillance portrayed in the chilling 1970 movie, Colossus: The Forbin Project, and in the book, The Year of Consent by Crossen (1954), is now more in the realm of possible and even the real, than it is of science fiction. Along with other science fiction of the 1950's and 60's, they prophesied that the ability of technological devices to snitch on people would affect their conduct, and the direction and "feel" of society.
    This review only scratches the surface of the wealth of information in Snitch Culture and the breadth of its contents. Its last 60 pages, for example, are comprised of 9 case studies covering aspects of the snitching and surveillance Americans have been and are continuously being subjected to. A valuable addition to future editions would be an index and a bibliography that are noticeably absent from the first edition.
    Snitch Culture is a significant contribution to the growing body of criticism related to state sponsored and private spying, invasions of privacy, and the law enforcement networks dependency on closing case files by purchasing tainted information and testimony. Mr. Redden succeeds in painting a horrific portrait of the central role snitching has in the surveillance state the U.S. has become. The book is worth reading by those wanting to increase their awareness of how their life is, and will continue to be, impacted by state and private surveillance, intelligence networks and snitching techniques.
    Snitch Culture can be ordered by mail for $18.45 ($14.95 + $3.50 s/h) from:
    Feral House P.O. Box 13067 Los Angeles, CA 90013-0067
    It can be ordered online from bn.com (Barnes and Noble), amazon.com, and other web sites.

    Click on the book title to read the review or to purchase the book.

    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels:

    Friday, January 28, 2011

    Victim of the Feminist State

    The Backlash! - July 1996

    Organization News - Society Against False Accusations of Rape
    James Donald Anderson #6952487
    Oregon State Correctional Institution
    3405 Deer Park Dr SE
    Salem, OR 97301

    A victim of the feminist state

    by James Donald Anderson, convicted rapist
    Copyright © 1995 by James Donald Anderson

    I have recently received more bad news and this nightmare I find myself in just doesn't want to end. I already have served over four years in prison for a so-called date rape I did not commit. A crime I was convicted of with absolutely no evidence, only my word against my accuser's.
    I escaped from prison once and received additional pirson time. I view my escape as fully justified because I feel I am a political prisoner in the feminist controlled state of Oregon. Now, to add insult to injury, the Oregon Parole Board added 2 years to my prison term because I refuse to fully "confess" to a crime I did not commit and volunteer to enter "treatment" at the maximum security Ward 41B at the Oregon State Mental Hospital for violent sexual deviants and predators.
    In January 1995 I filed my commutation papers with the Governor of Oregon to commute my prison term. My accuser was a former mental patient, drug addict, alcoholic, who had a history of falsely accusing men of sexual abuse and was falsely accusing me in order to file a 1 million dollar lawsuit (against an alcohol treatment center).
    The judge overseeing my trial ruled that all this evidence could not be used in court because it could embarass the "victim," even though the only evidence of any crime was her word against mine. The Governor of Oregon has yet to rule if over 4 years out of my life is enough punishment for a crime I did not commit.
    To make a long story short, I have rotted in prison for over 4 years because according to "feminist law" when a woman accuses a man of rape you cannot question her about her accusation or motives, even when there is no evidence of a crime. The so-called justice system is rigged to insure a conviction.
    I was sentenced to serve 10 years in prison solely on the word of a deranged woman's accusation, who, in the past, told one of her many psychologists that she hated men and wanted to get back at them. This time, with the help of the local Rape Crisis Center where she was coached on how to act like a real victim, she succeeded in her demented revenge.
    In 1990, a few months before my first prison break, I went in front of the "old" Parole Board to determine how long I would actually spend in prison. Also in attendance was my so-called "victim" and her buddy from the Rape Crisis Center. I was allowed to present the Parole Board with all the evidence that was not allowed in my trial. They deducted 6 years fropm my prison term and declared:
    1. the "victim" was not harmed in any way.
    2. the "victim" was not threatened in any way.
    3. the "crime" contained no violence.
    4. the "victim" may have aided in the "crime."
    Shortly after this hearing, I escaped from prison, only to be recaptured 18 months later and given more prison time. I have now asked the Governor to release me from this continuing nightmare.
    It is now 1995 and I should have been paroled from my unjust conviction and starting to do my 14 month prison term for the escape. However, the Parole Board in Oregon is "new and improved," reflecting political changes here in Oregon. The Parole Board now has only 3 members, 2 women and 1 minority male. White males are no longer allowed to serve, because this would be considered sexist and racist, even though the Oregon prison population is 70 percent white male and only 5 percent female.
    One of the new members of the Parole Board even runs a Rape Crisis Center herself in Hillsboro, Oregon, when she is not giving men additional prison sentences to serve. Not that she would have any bias against men. Yeah, right.
    A few weeks after I filed commutation papers with the Governor's Office, the new Parole Board retaliated by ordering that before they would parole me I must pass a State Psychological Exam to prove I am not a "danger to society." Well, I took their damn State Psych test and passed it. My father hired a psychologist from the streets and I passed his psych test, also. I went to see the Parole Board again on April 6, 1995, and presented them with these 2 positive psych evaluations, my college degree completed in prison, my excellent prison conduct (besides escape), and an outstanding "parole package" stating I had a job waiting for me and a place to live. My attorney was positive I would receive parole. The Parole Board would have no reason to deny it.
    Think again. Not only did they deny it, but they added two years to my prison term. They stated that even though I had 2 positive psych evaluations, they did not have to consider them, and ruled that I: "(have) a severe mental and emotional disturbance that predisposes him to violent crime rending him far too dangerous for the safety of the community." Parole denied!
    They had come to this conclusion with absolutely no evidence or anything that would suggest I am a "danger to society" and should remain behind bars. They also stated that in 2 years I will come in front of them again to see if I still have a "severe mental and emotional disorder" and should be given more prison time. I told the Parole Board I was done with them and would not see them again.
    Because I refuse to confess to something I did not do, show "remorse" and apologize to my so-called "victim," and because of my pro-male activism in prison, my research into false allegations of rape, my organization -- S.A.F.A.R. -- and my outspokenness against Oregon’s feminist movement, I am evidently to spend endless more years in prison. Does Oregon’s Parole Board have no ethics, morals, or any sense of right or wrong? Or are these words totally foreign to feminists?
    Another reason for my denied parole and continued imprisonment is that Oregon is in the middle of a huge prison expansion, with new prisons being built, and the Parole Board has expressed desire to double Oregon’s prison population from 6,000 male inmates to over 12,000 male inmates by the year 1998. It would seem that I’ve been caught up in Oregon’s prison boom industry and its desire for more warm, male bodies to fill their prison beds.
    Seems like the only hope that I’ll find any sort of justice soon is through the Governor’s Office and if the Governor sees that a terrible injustice has been done and commutes my prison term. The last time the Governor’s Office commuted an inmate’s prison term was about 6 months ago when a woman walked free after serving less than 2 years for murdering her boyfriend, who she claimed hit her. If any readers would like to write to the Governor on my behalf you are more than welcome to, and I would really appreciate it.
    Governor of Oregon
    Honorable John Kitzhaber
    State Capitol
    Salem, Oregon 97301
    And if anyone would like to contact me about my research, my activism, my case or would like to be put on the mailing list for the BI-monthly S.A.F.A.R. Newsletter, they can write to me (use first class mail) at the address above.
    This added prison time hasn’t whipped me in the least. Nor will I ever allow these wannabe Nazis to castrate or brainwash me. No matter how many more years they hold me hostage to this hell. They will never break me and I will walk out these prison gates with my head held high, knowing I have done the right thing by not "confessing" to something I did not do!
    I’m more determined than ever to fight the hate-filled propaganda against men, the Feminist Stormtroopers in Oregon and their weak, bootlicking male allies. The whole feminist philosophy is based on lies about men and manhood. Feminism has no foundation, it will fall and hopefully soon. You can believe that I, for one, am going to help stamp out the virus that is the modern day feminist movement.
    [ HOME ] [ BACK ]
    The Backlash! is a feature of Shameless Men Press
    Email to the Editor

    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , ,

    Munchausen Syndrome - A Star is Born

    My so-called "victim" no doubt has Munchausen Syndrome. She's a serial false accuser who has sex with men, cries rape, then files a lawsuit. She's a whacked-out, alcoholic, drug addict, with severe mental problems who gets a kick out of falsely accusing men of rape. She learned that if she's viewed as a "victim" that all eyes are on her. She's the star of the show. Every 2 years in the 1990's this nutcase would show up at my parole hearings and put on an Academy Award winning performance as she cried and begged for more money from me for all her "suffering". It was a bunch of crap then, and it still is. She's a miserable human being who has sent numerous innocent  men to prison and destroyed their life's. Mine being one of them.

    Münchausen syndrome is a term for psychiatric disorders known as factitious disorders wherein those affected feign disease, illness, or psychological trauma in order to draw attention or sympathy to themselves. It is also sometimes known as hospital addiction syndrome or hospital hopper syndrome. Nurses sometimes refer to them as frequent flyers, because they return to the hospital just like frequent flyers return to the airport. However, there is discussion to reclassify them as somatoform disorder in the DSM-5 as it is unclear whether or not people are conscious of drawing attention to themselves.[1]
    Münchausen syndrome is related to Münchausen syndrome by proxy (MSbP/MSP), which refers to the abuse of another being, typically a child, in order to seek attention or sympathy for the abuser.

    Contents

    [hide]

    [edit] Description

    In Münchausen syndrome, the affected person exaggerates or creates symptoms of illnesses in themselves to gain investigation, treatment, attention, sympathy, and comfort from medical personnel. In some extreme cases, people suffering from Münchausen's syndrome are highly knowledgeable about the practice of medicine and are able to produce symptoms that result in lengthy and costly medical analysis, prolonged hospital stay and unnecessary operations. The role of "patient" is a familiar and comforting one, and it fills a psychological need in people with Münchausen's. It is distinct from hypochondriasis in that patients with Münchausen syndrome are aware that they are exaggerating, whereas sufferers of hypochondriasis believe they actually have a disease. Risk factors for developing Münchausen syndrome include childhood traumas, and growing up with caretakers who, through illness or emotional problems, were unavailable. Arrhythmogenic Münchausen syndrome describes individuals who simulate or stimulate cardiac arrhythmias to gain medical attention.[2]
    A similar behavior called Münchausen syndrome by proxy has been documented in the parent or guardian of a child. The adult ensures that his or her child will experience some medical affliction, therefore compelling the child to suffer treatment for a significant portion of their youth in hospitals. Furthermore, a disease may actually be initiated in the child by the parent or guardian. This condition is considered distinct from Münchausen syndrome. In fact, there is growing consensus in the pediatric community that this disorder should be renamed "medical abuse" to highlight the real harm caused by the deception and to make it less likely that a perpetrator can use a psychiatric defense when real harm is done.[3] Parents who perpetrate this abuse are often affected by concomitant psychiatric problems like depression, spouse abuse, sociopathy, or psychosis. In rare cases, multiple children in one family may be affected either directly as victims or as witnesses who are threatened to keep them silent.
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: ,

    Thursday, January 27, 2011

    Falling on the Deaf Ear

    In 2001, I was in Sunnyvale, CA taking care of my mom and working on my book. It was never completed because I as sent back to prison. Here's the chapters of my future book.

    Falling On the Deaf Ear:
    False Accusations of Rape, Child Abuse Hoaxes, Innocent in Prison, and How to End the Sex Crime Witch Hunt
    by J. A.

    Chapters include:

    1. My personal nightmare: falsely accused, wrongly convicted, unjustly imprisoned, and branded for life
    2. The date rape myth and Women's Studies- the big lie and cultist recruiting on campus
    3. False rape reports: the unknown epidemic
    4. Spousal rape allegations- the vengeful wife's revenge
    5. Rape shield laws- ensuring convictions by hiding evidence
    6. Child abuse hoaxes- the ultimate evil
    7. Child protective services- brainwashing kids and destroying families
    8. Munchausen syndrome- a star is born
    9. Rape crisis centers- the need for more "victim's", more money, and tampering with witnesses
    10. False memory syndrome- crooked shrinks and implanted memories
    11. Trial by media- No man is innocent!
    12. The cops- your best friends?
    13. Prosecuters and judges- why you must be convicted
    14. Your defense attorney- Don't turn your back on this guy
    15. Feminism- How It turned into an all powerful, man-hating,  homosexual cult
    16. The men's movement- our only hope
    17.The prison industrial complex- warehousing, slave labor, and the all mighty dollar
    18. How to survive prison- what your momma didn't tell you about hell on earth
    19. The prison guard- abuse, torture, and murder behind bars
    20. DNA evidence- life-taker and life-saver
    21. Sex offender treatment- peter meters, polygraghs, forced confessions, and other scams
    22. Megan's laws- The post-prison, life-long nightmare
    23. The last resort- new identification and the underground
    24. How we can end the witch hunt
    25. Resource guide- organizations, books, newsletters, and self-help
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels:

    System Failure by James F. Love

    Editorial Reviews

    Product Description

    Why are so many innocent people imprisoned in the United States, and why are so many of those wrongly convicted people unable to overturn their conviction? System Failure explains in 25 chapters how and why that has happened. Author James F. Love has extensive knowledge and keen insights about the inner workings of the legal system gained from his extensive experience as a top jailhouse lawyer involved for almost two decades in criminal and civil litigation. Love's accomplishments include being responsible for the reversal and new trial in four aggravated murder convictions in Ohio. System Failure is a must read for lawyers, law students, paralegals and laypersons concerned with preserving their rights.

    About the Author

    James F. Love has studied the law since 1990. Mr. Love was a published columnist for four years with Ohio S.O.R.T.'s magazine, The Challenger. He is a contributing writer for Justice:Denied - the magazine for the wrongly convicted. As a jailhouse lawyer Mr. Love has seven reported decisions from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and numerous other lower court reported decisions. He is responsible for the reversal and new trial in four aggravated murder convictions in Ohio since 1995. Mr. Love's personal convictions have been reversed twice. The trial court dismissed the indictment in February 2008. The prosecutor appealed, and in December 2008 the Court of Appeals reinstated the indictment. After the Ohio Supreme Court declined to review the appeals court ruling, Mr. Love filed a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court in Cincinnati. He is arguing that a third trial is barred by the U.S. Constitution's Double Jeopardy Clause. As of November 2009 the U.S. District Court has not issued its decision.
    This review is from: System Failure: A Critique of the Judicial System of the United States (Paperback)
    James Love knows the law like the air that we breathe. Incarcerated for a crime he did not commit, he has over the years spent countless hours of research in litigating his case and the cases of other wrongfully incarcerated inmates. His observations on the American judicial system's betrayal of the concept of fairness are illustrated with a wealth of hard-earned anecdotal and carefully documented evidence, interwoven with the fiber of historical perspective and startlingly common-sense solutions to a monumentally tragic state of affairs.

    In a style of writing which is sharp, crisp, and proceeds with the impassioned eloquence and reasoned tone of the best of reporters, Mr. Love walks the reader through the self-perpetuating myths, the labyrinth, of the justice system, destroying long-standing platitudes and misconceptions at every turn of the page. How he has managed to accomplish this in the spirit of optimism often causes the book to be temporarily set aside and pondered.

    Immediately, one thinks of the words of Margaret Meade: Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

    --Tom Krzywkowski
    This review is from: System Failure: A Critique of the Judicial System of the United States (Paperback)
    The jury trial is the very keystone of the "common law" tradition we have inherited: the common law was not made by king or parliament, congress or president, but hammered out over the centuries by several courts making their decisions consistent. The citizen is entitled to all presumptions in a criminal trial (including the presumption that se is a reasonable citizen.)
    How, then, does it come about that the citizens of these United States are convicted in greater numbers than those of any other nation? The notion has come to be widespread that "democracy" means majority domination: grand juries in particular are allowed to indict by mere majority. But the grand jury hears only the case of the prosecution: if the case is indeed good beyond a reasonable doubt, it must sound good beyond any imaginable doubt to the grand jury - it is palpably ridiculous to accept an indictment unless the grand jury was unanimous.
    Once the case is tried in court, the prosecutor (who, under a republican form of government, must stand for election after a fixed term) is naturally anxious to make as strong a case as se can. And the prosecutor can draw upon the taxpayers' treasury to find evidence and precedents in hir favor: the citizen has to rely upon hir own resources.
    Thus it is unsurprising that the imprisoned Love has encountered numerous (other) prison inmates who were unjustly and unjustifiably convicted.
    His opus offers food for thought to every citizen!

    You can write to the author at:
    James F. Love
    #329-475
    P.O. Box 4501
    Lima, Ohio 45802 
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels:

    My First E-Mail

     Reply mailto:%7Csfordyce@roadrunner.com to me, sherry.l.fordy.
    show details 12:57 AM (7 hours ago)
    Hello,  I am so happy to find another person that feels the same way I do. My heart aches for all those that are labeled SEX OFFENDER.  My son, now 24 will never have a normal life because of this stupid law.  When are people going to understand not all sex offenders are child molesters or rapist.  My son made the mistake of getting involved with a girl a few years younger and will pay for the rest of his life.  My son is not allowed to even visit me at my house because I have little boys.  Even when they are not home he isn't allowed because they have toys.  Can you believe that.  He was in a relationship with a teenage girl not little boys under the age of 5.  My oldest boy has nobody else but me, and I am helpless with no extra money to help him.  He was released from prison, and was told that day all the conditions he would need to abide by.  We were both in shock we learned about the GPS monitor.  My poor son was homeless, jobless, carless, bicycless.  His probation officer did nothing to help.  Needless to say my son cut his bracelet off, took my car and went on the run.  He didn't get far.  He is now locked up again. He was 19 when all this began.  5 years of hell, and nothing to look forward too.
    Do you think the laws will change?  We live in San Bernardino county and they don't have many programs for sex offenders.  Now, if you have a drug or alcohol problem that's a different story.  They have plenty of programs available.  But nobody wants a sex offender around.  I would be happy to get signatures on a petition if it would help.  My son is currently in Corcoran state Prison.  He is so far away I can't visit him.  He will be released in Sept 2011.  I should be happy, but I already now we have the same situation to look forward too.  My boy homeless, and I can't do anything about it.
    Why don't they just build a small city and put a big electrical fence around it.  No children allowed.   Give these people a job, and a place to live.  I'm sure they would love to pay taxes and pay for their own keep..,,  At least then they will all have place to live, and survive.
    God forbid if two people living in the compound fall in love and have children, they would be taken away.  NO CHILDREN ALLOWED.    My son will never get the chance to be a father or have a family of his own. Thanks for listening.
    Sincerely,
    Sherry Fordyce

    Thanks Sherry! Don't give up. That's what THEY want. We got to keep fighting!!! E-mail me at maxmydog2011@gmail.com . My name is James D. Anderson and I am NOT afraid of The Sex Crime Witch Hunters.
    Posted by at No comments:

    Tuesday, January 25, 2011

    Court Challenges

    Court challenges mount against sex offender law

    Posted: 12/21/2010 06:33:40 PM PST
    Updated: 12/22/2010 05:25:14 PM PST




    Hundreds of paroled sex offenders are winning reprieves from a ban against their living near schools or parks as they flood local courts with constitutional challenges to the most controversial part of Jessica's Law.
    Judges in Contra Costa and elsewhere have routinely issued stays permitting sex offender parolees to ignore the ban on their living within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children "regularly gather," pending rulings in their cases.
    The slow pace of those challenges means the stays could last until their parole terms expire and the restrictions no longer affect them.
    In the East Bay, at least a few dozen sex offenders have challenged the ban.
    "I am seeing more, that's for sure," said Martinez attorney David Briggs.
    Contra Costa judges have assigned him to represent about 16 parolee sex offenders seeking freedom to live where they want. In each case, he said, judges have barred enforcement of the law.
    "There may be other (parole) restrictions on where they can't stay, and they're all on GPS, but this rule does not apply."
    The flurry of court actions adds a new wrinkle in an ongoing debate over the residency ban's effect on public safety, and whether it's worth the added strain on parole resources. A statewide task force last month found that the ban has led to a dangerous 24-fold increase in homeless sex offenders and recommended repealing the voter-approved limits.
    Parole agents should have
    leeway to target restrictions for the 6,300 paroled sex offenders living in communities, according to the task force of sheriffs, police chiefs, probation and parole officers, prosecutors and victim advocates. Since the law went into effect, the number of sex offender parolees who register as transient has risen from fewer than 100 to more than 2,100.
    The bulk of legal challenges has arisen in Southern California, where about 850 paroled sex offenders have filed petitions in Los Angeles and San Diego counties, most of them after a state Supreme Court decision in February.
    The court upheld the 2,000-foot rule against claims that it amounts to illegal, ex post facto punishment of parolees who committed their sex crimes before the law passed. But it left local judges to sort out, case by case and county by county, whether the restriction amounts to unconstitutional banishment, or whether it is unconstitutionally vague.
    The sheer volume of challenges came to light last month, when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza issued a countywide stay barring parole agents from enforcing the "predator-free zones." By then, 650 sex offenders had filed petitions in the county, the judge wrote. More than 100 petitions have since come.
    A state appeals court panel nixed Espinoza's blanket order. But the judge has stayed enforcement of the ban in nearly all the individual cases, said Dylan Ford, a deputy public defender in Los Angeles County. Ford leads a team of lawyers and legal clerks who are helping process what he called a deluge of challenges by homeless sex offenders. He said about 75 percent of the 2,000 paroled sex offenders there are homeless or living in housing subsidized by the state corrections department.
    "What a stay will do is allow a parolee who's living on the street, sleeping in their car, riding the buses at night, living under a bridge, to return home to their family and their social support network," Ford said.
    On Friday, a San Diego County judge rejected a similar plea for a blanket stay order. Nearly 100 paroled sex offenders have filed challenges there, court documents show. The state Attorney General's Office is fighting the blanket stays in both counties, aiming to defend a law that voters overwhelmingly passed in 2006.
    "I have considered filing a similar action in Contra Costa County. I think we have the same issues," said Briggs, the defense lawyer. "The futility of this policy is apparent to anyone who looks at it."
    Men opposing the 2,000-foot rule in Contra Costa County claim similar struggles.
    "I have not been able to live at home with my wife, but forced to live in a motel," wrote Wayne Captain, who was convicted of rape in 1987, then was released on parole for an unrelated crime in 2008 and fell under Jessica's Law.
    Another foresaw a grim future with the ban.
    "My parents allowed me to live with them. "... When I am order(ed) to leave this address I will have to live in my car. Or somewhere on the streets," wrote Anthony Brewer, of Pittsburg.
    State corrections officials said they have not tallied how many paroled sex offenders are now free from the 2,000-foot rule. Fred Bridgewater, parole administrator for the North Bay district, said such stays are "sporadic" in the area.
    The challenges do not affect conditions that parole supervisors can impose based on individual circumstances. Nor do they affect a different law that prohibits convicted child molesters who are deemed high-risk sex offenders from living within a half-mile of a school.
    Growing pressure to overturn the 2,000-foot rule rankles the author of Jessica's Law.
    Outgoing state Sen. George Runner, R-Antelope Valley, said he is pushing legislation that would protect it by allowing local judicial panels to adjust the limits but not eliminate them.
    "I don't think the voters are concerned whether it's too hard (to find housing). It's whether it's possible," Runner said. He downplayed the notion that homeless sex offenders are more likely to commit new sex crimes, particularly now that sex offender parolees all wear GPS anklets.
    "We are not aware of an individual who's on GPS, who is transient, who has committed an illegal sexual act," he said. "So we believe at this point it's a problem that they can't find a place to live. I'm sure that's a personal hassle for them, but that's not my concern."
    In the meantime, few of the state's 58 counties are attempting to fully enforce the 2,000-foot rule on sex offenders under court probation, said probation officials.
    "The bottom line is we're doing everything we can with the limited resources we have," said Philip Kader, county probation officer in Contra Costa. The department, which oversees about 140 sex offenders on probation, has sustained steep cutbacks and does not adhere to the 2,000-foot rule, unless a judge orders it, Kader said.
    "We have not been adhering to the 2,000-foot rule because we wouldn't have any place to put our folks," said Bill Fenton, assistant chief probation officer in Alameda County, where about 200 registered sex offenders are on probation. "To me, the bigger risk is not knowing where they are."
    Contact John Simerman at 925-943-8072.

    Reprint Print   Email   Font ResizeReturn to Top

    CA - Assemblyman Tom Ammiano Questions State's Sex Registration Laws

    Labels: ,
    Original Article

    01/24/2011

    By Erin Sherbert

    No two sex offenders are the same, which is why Assemblyman Tom Ammiano wants California to consider a tiered system to categorize those who break the state's sex laws.

    As he points out, there is a gradation of offenses. It's true that a consensual, sexual relationship between a 21-year-old and a 16-year-old, for instance, is not even in the same league as a person who sexually assaults a 3-year-old. However, in both scenarios, the guilty party is stamped a sex offender for life.

    To get to the bottom of this issue, the veteran assemblyman will hold the first hearing Tuesday, where experts will discuss the merits of this "black and white" system.
    - So will they be sex offender experts or people who think they are experts?

    Specifically, he wants to reconsider registration requirements, so that perhaps less violent sex offenders, or those in consensual relationships, don't have to register as sex offenders for life.

    "You are forever a sex offender, regardles of the scope of your offenses," says Quintin Mecke, a spokesman for Ammiano. "But there are differences across the board -- there is a whole range of sex offenders."

      
    Posted by at No comments:

    Monday, January 24, 2011

    A Prison Without Walls

    A prison without walls

    I do not want my name or where I live published because I do not want to be tracked down by media and have our lives ruined again. Please post this on your Citizens for Change Website.
    Almost 30 years ago I committed a sex crime while living in a certain state, was caught, convicted and served the time I was sentenced to. Part of the sentence was 10 years probation after the time served in prison. I left that state when I was released and went to another state  to begin my 10 years of probation. I served all that 10 years on probation and while I was on probation I met a woman, we fell in love and I got married. Soon we had children and I had several business going and we all were doing great in the community.
    I had never again broken any laws.
    When two of my children were in their early teens.. the state I was living in passed some new laws and long story made short, I was forced by threat of prison to register as a sex offender for my 1 crime decades ago.
    As my family and I were very high profile in our city, everyone knew us.. respected us.. when the news hit, all the television stations, radio, news paper.. of my being a sex offender.. we had to leave town for a few weeks.. the media hounds kept coming to our home trying to do a video on me. I got that report from neighbors as we were not there.
    Eventually we had to go home..
    From that point on, we all felt we were under a microscope. Everywhere we went, as I had been all over the news for days, we could feel the eyes upon us. My children, over time lost all friends.. nobody wanted to be their friends as their dad was a sex offender. Nobody invited them to birthday parties, nobody wanted to spend the night with them any more, or invite them over to sleep over at there homes any more....the kids picked on them at school.. my kids became depressed and I can see their tears even now.
    I lost a LOT of clients from my business.. oh they said they loved my work.. but simply could not be associated with a sex offender.. clients that loved my work and had for years...all gone.
    Finally, after a few years of living like lepers.. I moved us to a state that said I did not have to register because the Constitution of that state stated forcing a person to register as a sex offender for a conviction decades ago, before there were any sex offender registry was ex post facto, retroactive law and prohibited by the United States and That State Constitution.
    Now, we sold our 5 bedroom home which we were buying for $600.00 a month.. left everything we owned to come to a state which did not publicly humiliate my family.
    After being in this state for 2 years.. feeling like Free Americans again.. having friends, getting a business going.. surviving.. even though we are now paying $1000.00 a month for an apartment.. we were beginning, after 2 years to feel like human beings again and not some bothersome animal...
    All that changed last week. I received a registered letter from the school where my kids go.. it said they have found out that I am on the registry and I must now go by a bunch of new regulations as far as coming to the school for meetings with teachers, sports events.. plays, music and choir.. anytime I go to the school I have to get permission in advance from the Principle.
    OMG, I am NOT on the registry. I find out that I am in the state where my conviction was 30 years ago.. but not here..
    So, I guess the school is going to spread it around amongst themselves that I am on the registry... Here we go again.. soon my kids will have NO friends..
    Nobody wants to be friends of kids who have a parent on the registry.
    When will it ever end? Why can a murderer kill someone and do his or her time then in a few years get out and NOT be required to do all these things? If I had murdered someone I could go to that school any time I want and all would love me.
    These laws are killing MY children.. and they must be killing thousands of other innocent children.
    I thought these laws were created to PROTECT children?
    Again, here we are.. under the microscope... I have NOT told my kids about this.. they do NOT know the principle sent me that letter... I do not have the heart to tell them.
    I cannot tell them everyone at the school now sees them as lepers...
    How can a school say you are a sex offender and ban you from normal activities for a three decades old crime.. and the state you live in does not label you as a sex offender?
    Is that even legal?
    How can I prevent that principle from spreading around about my past?
    Posted by at No comments:

    Jailhouse Lawyers

    The Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual

    Labels: , ,


    All the text below is from the 2009 version.

    Welcome to A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual Online. Here you can download and print the entire contents of A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual and Supplement, one chapter at a time. You'll need a to have a program called Adobe Acrobat installed on your computer in order to download A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual. You can download Acrobat for free by clicking here:


    If you already have Acrobat installed on your computer, you are ready to start reading A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual.


    Legal Disclaimer

    A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual is written and updated by members of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review. The law prohibits us from providing any legal advice to prisoners. The information is not intended as legal advice or representation nor should you consider it as such. Additionally, your use of the JLM should not be construed as creating an attorney-client relationship with the JLM staff or anyone at Columbia Law School. We have attempted to provide information that is up to date and useful. However, because the law changes frequently, we cannot guarantee that this information is current or correct.


    Chapter 1 - Introduction: How to Use the JLM
    Chapter 2 - Introduction to Legal Research
    Chapter 3 - Your Right to Learn the Law and Go to Court
    Chapter 4 - How to Find A Lawyer
    Chapter 5 - Choosing a Court & a Lawsuit: An Overview of the Options
    Chapter 6 - An Introduction to Legal Documents
    Chapter 7 - Freedom of Information
    Chapter 8 - Obtaining Information to Prepare Your Case: The Process of Discovery
    Chapter 9 - Appealing Your Conviction or Sentence
    Chapter 10 - Applying for Re-Sentencing for Drug Offenses
    Chapter 11 - Using Post-Conviction DNA Testing to Attack Your Conviction or Sentence
    Chapter 12 - Appealing Your Conviction Based on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
    Chapter 13 - Federal Habeas Corpus
    Chapter 14 - The Prison Litigation Reform Act
    Chapter 15 - Inmate Grievance Procedures
    Chapter 16 - Using 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 28 U.S.C. 1331 to Obtain Relief From Violations of Federal Law
    Chapter 17 - The State's Duty to Protect You and Your Property: Tort Actions
    Chapter 18 - Your Rights at Prison Disciplinary Hearings
    Chapter 19 - Your Right to Communicate With the Outside World
    Chapter 20 - Using Article 440 of the New York Criminal Procedural Law to Attack Your Unfair Conviction or Illegal Sentence
    Chapter 21 - State Habeas Corpus: Florida, New York, and Texas
    Chapter 22 - How to Challenge Administrative Decisions Using Article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules
    Chapter 23 - Your Right to Adequate Medical Care
    Chapter 24 - Your Right to be Free from Assault by Prison Guards and Other Prisoners
    Chapter 25 - Your Right to Be Free From Illegal Body Searches
    Chapter 26 - Infectious Diseases (AIDS, Hepatitis, and Tuberculosis) in Prison
    Chapter 27 - Religious Freedom in Prison
    Chapter 28 - Rights of Prisoners with Disabilities
    Chapter 29 - Special Issues for Prisoners with Mental Illness
    Chapter 30 - Special Information for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered Prisoners
    Chapter 31 - Security Classification & Gang Validation
    Chapter 32 - Special Considerations for Sex Offenders (Related)
    Chapter 33 - Rights of Incarcerated Parents
    Chapter 34 - Temporary Release Programs
    Chapter 35 - Getting Out Early: Conditional & Early Release
    Chapter 35 - Parole

    Appendix I
    Appendix II
    Appendix III
    Appendix IV
    Appendix V

    Immigration and Consular Access Supplement
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels:
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)