The Ticking Sex Offender Bomb

War on … the Fallout of Declaring War on Social Issues: Symposium Article: The Ticking Sex-Offender Bomb

Corey Rayburn Yung

University of Kansas School of Law
December 12, 2013

Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, Vol. 15, 2012
Abstract:     

Much like the ticking-time-bomb scenario in the public debate about torture, the belief that sex offenders generally, and child molesters specifically, will inevitably commit new offenses has come to effectively frame societal understanding. The concept of the sex offender who is a ticking time bomb waiting to molest more children has served as the basis for sex-offender registration, residency restrictions, community notification, and civil commitment. Relying on strongly held myths about stranger danger, sex-offender recidivism, and sex-offender homogeneity, the criminal war against sex offenders shows little sign of abating. This Symposium Article explores the rhetoric and reality of the War on Sex Offenders and how the ticking-time-bomb metaphor reshaped the debates and policies surrounding sexual violence.

Children on Sex Offender Registries

From: Center of Public Integrity http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/05/01/12594/report-details-lives-ruined-children-put-sex-offender-registries

Report details lives ruined for children put on sex-offender registries

Nudity, streaking, petting, not just rape, have led to youths put on sex-offender registries

Put on a sex registry for the offense of public nudity as a minor. Harassed by neighbors out of a home and banned from a homeless shelter because of an offense committed at age 15.
The New York-based research group Human Rights Watch issued an extensive report today on the life-shattering consequences of putting minors on sex registries for offenses — sometimes shockingly mild offenses — for the rest of their lives.
Filled with devastating stories of teens and young adults unable to put offenses behind them, the rights group's report is called “Raised on the Register: The Irreparable Harm of Placing Children on Sex Offender Registries in the U.S.”
The report is the product of a 16-month investigation into 581 cases and interviews with 281 sex offenders — median age 15 — in 20 states.  Prosecutors, defense attorneys, child sexuality experts and victims of “child on child” sexual assault were also interviewed.  The investigation explores how a burgeoning national web of laws in various states requiring constant registration and public disclosure of offenders’ identities has affected the lives of young offenders long after time served or rehabilitation. Some on registries have killed themselves, even before reaching adulthood.
The report begins with Jacob C., who was 11 years old when convicted of one count of sexual misconduct in Michigan for touching, not penetrating, his sister’s genitals. He was not allowed to live in a home with other children, was eventually put into foster care and was placed on a sex registry that was made public when he turned 18.  He struggled to graduate from high school, and was shunned because of his registration status. And when he enrolled in college, he said, campus police followed him everywhere. He dropped out.
Now 26, the report says, Jacob’s life continues to be defined and limited by a conviction at age 11.
Another case in the report: “In 2004, in Western Pennsylvania, a 15-year-old girl was charged with manufacturing and disseminating child pornography for having taken nude photos of herself and (posting) them on the internet. She was charged as an adult, and as of 2012 was facing registration for life.”
Sex offender laws, the report says, “that trigger registration requirements for children began proliferating in the United States during the late 1980s and early 1990s. They subject youth offenders to registration for crimes ranging from public nudity and touching another child’s genitalia over clothing to very serious violent crimes like rape.”
Registries can also include “people who have committed offenses like public urination, indecent exposure (such as streaking across a college campus), and other more relatively innocuous offenses.”
The Human Rights Watch report acknowledged that registration laws were designed to protect the public from offenders, and that they are based on assumptions that offenders are likely to violate again.
“But including youth sex offenders on registries assumes that they are highly likely to reoffend, which is not the case,” the report says. “Numerous studies estimate the recidivism rate among children who commit sexual offenses to between 4 and 10 percent, compared with a 13 percent rate for adult sex offenders and a national rate of 45 percent for all crimes.”
The report was prepared by Nicole Pittman, a national expert on the application of sex offender registration laws who was an attorney at the Defender Association of Philadelphia. She specialized in child sexual assault cases and registries, and has provided testimony to Congress and state legislatures on the subject.
The report calls current registry laws “an overbroad policy of questionable effectiveness” that leaves the public often unable to discern who on a registry is actually dangerous.

Journalist Needs Your Help for Book on the The Sex Crime Witch Hunt

If you are a family member of a registered "sex offender", here is a chance to speak out:

Dear family member of a sex offender,

I’m a journalist who is working on a larger project,

I’m working on a book proposal whose working title is Families in the Cross-Hairs: Collateral Damage from America’s 20-Year War on Sex Offenders. It’s designed to tell the stories of sex offenders’ loved ones (wives, sons, daughters, parents)—the discrimination, abuse, and worse that many have suffered as a result of living with someone on the sex offender registry (documented in Levenson and Tewksbury’s study of this issue in 2009, which I’m sure you’re aware of). It also will share stories about how family members have become active in the fight to reform sex offender laws (through organizations like USAFAIR, RSOL, and WAR) and the small victories they’ve achieved to date.

I’m contacting you because I’m putting together the lead chapter for the book and am looking for family members willing to share their stories about what it’s like to live in a home with someone who’s on the registry. I well know the risks that these folks live with--so while it would be great to speak with people who are willing to use their real names, I understand and can include the stories of people who cannot do so.

Below this email, I’ve included sample questions of the type that I’d be seeking answers to in talking with people, though obviously my follow up questions would change depending on the specifics of each family’s circumstances.

And again about me: I'm a magazine reporter who has written stories on sex offender laws for The American Prospect (http://prospect.org/article/life-list), Good (http://www.good.is/post/a-new-way-to-treat-sex-offenders/), and The Crime Report (http://www.thecrimereport.org/archive/standoff-over-sex-offenders/). More of my writing on criminal justice topics appears athttp://www.stevenyoder.net/journalism/criminal-justice/.

I was hoping that RSOL might be able to post an announcement asking prospective families to contact me in whatever way is comfortable for them. If so, just let me know how you’d like to proceed—I’m happy to write this up in the form of an announcement if that’s helpful.

Sample Questions
What has it been like for you to live with someone who is listed on the sex offender registry?
Have you or other immediate family members experienced any of the following as a result of your loved one’s being on the registry?
Financial hardships?
Changes in your housing, or difficulties obtaining housing?
Teasing, ridicule, social isolation, or exclusion?
Property damage?
Harassment, verbal abuse, or assault?
How have your experiences affected your views of current sex offender laws?
Has that led you to be involved in efforts to change those laws, if at all?

Thanks so much.

Steven Yoder [mailto:steven@stevenyoder.net]

Group Accuses People of Molestation On-Line

From: WSMV - Nashville,
http://www.wsmv.com/story/18387940/nashville-based-group-accused-people-online-of-pedophilia

Nashville-based group accuses people online of pedophilia

NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) -

A Nashville-based citizen activist group is posting online the photographs and personal information of people whom the group accuses of being pedophiles.

Many of the people on the site have never been charged with a sex crime.

The underground group, which calls itself Evil Unveiled, does research in Internet chat rooms and forums often devoted to sinister, sexual fantasies such as pedophilia.

The group records that information, stores it and begins to track the people who are posting only using nicknames, waiting for them to reveal personal details.

"And you just keep collecting information until they accidentally post their email they didn't mean to post. And then it all falls together, and this is the real person behind the nickname," said Victoria, the creator of the group, who asked us to conceal her identity.

Victoria said she knows the website where the information is revealed, http://evilunveiled.com, is controversial. Members of the group aren't professional investigators or law enforcement officers, but they are making serious accusations for anyone to read.

Several people on the website are from Tennessee, including a realtor in Nashville and a man in Sevierville.

"Do you worry that some of this information might be wrong, that you're putting the wrong people on the Web?" asked Channel 4 I-Team chief investigative reporter Jeremy Finley.

"No, I don't. We have a lot of checks and balances, a lot of different ways to prove in a court of law that the information on the site is correct," Victoria said.

One person whom Evil Unveiled accused of being a pedophile called himself "Wolfy" in forums and chat rooms.

Victoria said after awhile, she began to see Wolfy was posting personal information and showing a picture of himself.

The first photo "Wolfy" posted was a picture that appeared in a local newspaper of Albert Rankin, a man once involved with Occupy Nashville and who did several interviews with the local media.

"I look like a boss. This was in the newspaper," said one chat room post by Wolfy.

Wolfy later posted another picture of himself, again showing a photo of Rankin.

A Channel 4 I-Team investigation found that Rankin's MySpace page, email address and Skype account all contain the word 'Wolfy.'

Rankin said "Wolfy" is his nickname, and he posts in forums and chat rooms using the name "Wolfy."

"Wolfy is a nickname I had as a kid and it just kind of stuck," Rankin said.

But Rankin said the "Wolfy" making the pedophilia statements isn't him, and he said Evil Unveiled has wrongly identified him.

"I'd have to say I'm a little confused. If they're targeting me specifically, I'm not sure why. I'll have to look into this. That's a really serious allegation," Rankin said.

Rankin agreed to speak with the Channel 4 I-Team via Skype from where he now lives in Oklahoma City.

The Channel 4 I-Team told Rankin we wanted to speak with him about his time spent with Occupy Nashville in order to confirm that the person on Skype was indeed the same person who was associated with Occupy Nashville.

The Channel 4 I-Team then told Rankin he was listed on the Evil Unveiled website.

Rankin said he'd never heard of the site, but he did answer our questions about "Wolfy."

Finley held up printed pictures of what Wolfy posted online.

"This person (Wolfy) actually posted pictures of himself. And these are they pictures that he posted. This is you," Finley said.

"Oh yeah, that's a picture of me," Rankin said.

"And that's you," Finley said, referencing another photograph. "So is this you posting in these chat rooms?"

"Uh, no. I've put my pictures out all over the Internet," Rankin said.

The Channel 4 I-Team also asked Rankin about the fact that Wolfy wrote about personal details in his life, including that he was in a military family, that he was in the Army and that he had spent 90 days in a tent for Occupy Nashville.

When Wolfy wrote that information, he also stated that he was a pedophile.

Rankin said while all the information about his military history and involvement with Occupy Nashville was accurate about his own life, he denied writing it in the forum and stated he never wrote that he was a pedophile.

Rankin said he had never visited the chat room where those statements were made.

"If this isn't you, then this person has a whole lot of personal information about you," Finley said.

"It's not hard to emulate somebody if you talk to them for a while," Rankin said.

On the day we interviewed Rankin, records from a chat room show Wolfy was posting again.

Wolfy made a disturbing statement about pedophilia, and then 30 minutes later, Wolfy posted that he had to get rest soon because he was doing an interview for NBC.

Rankin said when Wolfy was writing about his interview, that was indeed him posting.

But he said the other Wolfy talking about pedophilia just 30 minutes earlier wasn't him.

"I've told you before, I've used the name 'Wolfy' on various places, but I also use other names as well. There are plenty of places that I peruse on the Internet," Rankin said.

Rankin said he suspects someone is trying to slander him and that other members of Occupy Nashville have had their nicknames stolen in order to post on news websites in an effort to discredit the activists.

"Honestly, I guess if they're (Evil Unveiled) trying to make the Occupy movement look bad, that's one way to do it," Rankin said.

But Victoria, with Evil Unveiled, said she had no problem with Occupy Nashville. Victoria said her only battle is with people she believes are pedophiles and is ready to fight in the courtroom if need be.

"You know, at some point, you could be sued. You know someone could say, 'This isn't true,'" Finley said.

"Absolutely," Victoria said.

A representative for Occupy Nashville did confirm that as soon as members read the Evil Unveiled posting about Rankin, they went to speak with him about it, but Rankin was suddenly missing from Legislative Plaza and never returned.

That representative said they were told Rankin had left to take a job out of town.

The Channel 4 I-Team wanted to ask Rankin about that and if he planned to take any legal action against the website, but he did not respond to our follow-up email.

Victoria said the group has received no word from Rankin asking to remove his profile from the Evil Unveiled website.

RSO Homeless Camps in CA Attacked

From: My Auburn, http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/207814.html

 

A SMALL ROOM CROWDED WITH FEAR AND DESPERATION

 

By RLitchfield1

This is the twenty-fifth in a series of articles on Auburn-area homeless people, written by local attorney, author, and Sierra College Instructor, Bob Litchfield.

A week or two after I first interviewed Jack and Ernie, the two homeless registered sex offenders described in article number fourteen in this series, I ran into the two men again. This time, they were in a small room that was crowed with fear and desperation. Something has changed since the last time I saw them. Something big.

Three local homeless camps where “290" registered sex offenders camped have been attacked by a group of vigilante thugs.

Two of the 290 homeless people have been attacked and beaten. Tents have been trashed. Personal property has been taken, or destroyed. People were sprayed in the face with Raid and insect repellant, and were warned to get out of town.

One 290 homeless man named Gary was badly beaten. His wife was with him at the time. When she jumped on the back of one of the attackers and tried to pull the attacker off of her husband, one of the attackers punched her in the face, and broke her nose.

Jack and Ernie are both homeless “290" registered sex offenders. If you want to read what I wrote about them earlier, it is in article number fourteen in this series. That article is entitled, “Torturing Auburn’s Homeless Registered Sex Offenders - A Great Idea?”

Things were bad enough for Jack and Ernie back when I wrote that first article. Now, thing are worse.

Jack is the taller, white man, and Ernie is the small, black man who walks with a cane because he has two stints in his leg from having peripheral artery disease.

With vigilantes attacking and beating local homeless registered sex offenders, Jack and Ernie are both really afraid. Mostly, they are worried about Ernie.

They have been allowed the temporary use of a small room. As I come into the room, Jack is seated in front of a low coffee table, making phone calls on his cell phone. He is trying to find someone... anyone, who can provide Ernie with some shelter. Jack may be the only real friend that Ernie has, and Jack is worried for Ernie’s safety.

There is only one place in all of Placer County that will rent a place to live to a registered sex offender. The cost is $500 per person per month.

Neither Jack nor Ernie have any money, nor any hope of obtaining employment, as registered sex offenders. As a condition of their probation, they are not allowed to leave this area, and they are required to wear GPS satellite ankle monitors.

Jack, who is the white man, has been a Mormon all his life, and has been attending the local Mormon Church. When he explains his dangerous predicament to the people at his church, the church puts up the $500 a month that Jack needs to get off the street before the vigilante thugs can find him.

You say whatever else you want about the Mormon Church, but they take care of their own.

So, the white man finds shelter.

But the small, black man cannot find any shelter here in Auburn.

Ernie’s situation is made worse by the fact that his peripheral artery disease makes it hard for him to walk. He cannot hike the two or three miles between the things he needs in town every day (like a re-charge of the battery in his ankle monitor) and the best-hidden homeless campsites, which are located far out of town.

So, Jack is making phone calls, trying to find some shelter for Ernie.

But there is no shelter to be found.

While Jack makes phone calls, Ernie and I sit and talk.

Ernie is truly scared. He is also frustrated, and a bit angry. He says to me, “If those vigilantes come to get me, I’m going to do what ever I have to do to stay alive.”

Looking at his small size, and his limp and his cane, it sounds like a pretty empty threat. But it makes me worry for him even more. If he tries to defend himself, he’ll probably just provoke a more severe beating.

Ernie eventually tells me about the bad things that he has done that resulted in his criminal convictions. I cannot be absolutely certain, but I am inclined to believe that Ernie told me the truth about what he has done.

The things that Ernie did were bad. There is no question about that.

But as I sit and think about it, it does not seem to me that the things that Ernie did are anywhere near as bad as the things that were done by the rich, white lawyer I knew in Oregon who went to jail for having sex with his fourteen-year-old daughter.

When that rich, white lawyer got out of jail, I don’t believe that he went onto any registered sex offender list.

In fact, the Oregon State Bar reinstated that lawyer’s license to practice law. The Oregon State Bar said that this lawyer’s acts of moral turpitude were not the kind of acts of moral turpitude that might adversely impact the interests his clients.

That was the day that I lost faith in the ability of lawyers and judges to police their own ranks.

I think about it some more. It does not appear to me that the bad things that Ernie did are any worse than the bad things done by one former foothills District Attorney, or possibly even by one former judge. I never saw that District Attorney or that judge get placed on a list that condemned them to social and economic death for the rest of their lives. But then again, both of them were powerful, financially-successful, white men.

I find myself wishing that I had the time and the resources available to count all of the 63,000 people on California’s registered sex offender list, to see how many of them are successful white people who could afford to hire good private lawyers, and how many of them are poor blacks and hispanics who were told by some over-worked and marginally-competent public defender to “take the deal” without even the benefit of a jury trial.

And of course, I find myself getting a little angry.

As Ernie talks to me, he often looks me straight in the eye. It is an engaging thing about him. Ernie has deep, soulful eyes.

Today, his eyes also show his fear, and his sense of helplessness.

I remember a story I read about an interview with Mother Teresa. Mother Teresa was standing between the cots at her medical treatment facility for the poorest of the poor, rescued from the streets of Calcutta. She was explaining to the interviewer that when the impoverished sick people were brought in off of the streets, they were usually filthy dirty, and often covered with sores... sometimes even sores draining with puss.

Mother Teresa said that the first thing that her Sisters do is give the new patients a bath and clean them up.

Then she said, “Of course, when the person is so covered with draining sores and smells so bad that the Sisters just can’t stand it, then I do it myself.”

At that point, Mother Teresa gestured with her hand toward some of the patients who were lying on cots nearby and said, “I have to do it. Because after all, I never know for sure which one of these poor, sick people might be Jesus, in one of his distressing disguises.”

I look into Ernie’s deep, soulful eyes. He is a black, homeless, registered sex offender... the most unwanted of all the unwanted. As I continue to look into his eyes, I find myself wondering whether or not Ernie might be Jesus, in one of his distressing disguises.

I spend the next week making phone calls and sending emails, trying to find some kind of shelter for Ernie. I talk to friends, to service clubs, to the Pastors of Churches. I talk to the leaders of National Advocacy Groups who are attempting to reform the sex offender registration laws. (These people contacted me after they read the first article that I wrote about Jack and Ernie.)

None of them have any shelter for Ernie.

The churches have all kinds of programs to help the homeless. Some even have wonderful half-way houses for drug addicts.

But as soon as I mention the words “registered sex offender,” even the churches quickly turn Ernie away.

“We have children nearby,” they say.

They don’t have to say anything more than that. I understand.

But Ernie’s life is still in danger.

For Ernie, there is no room at the Inn.

I consider the possibility of paying for Ernie’s shelter out of my own pocket. But that won’t work. On a small-town lawyer’s income, the most that I could hope to buy for Ernie would be one month of shelter, and after that, he’d be back out on the street.

After about a week, I give up trying. I surrender to the fact that without God’s help, I’m not going to be able to make this happen.

If Ernie is, in fact, Jesus in one of his distressing disguises, then I have let Him down.

But then again, so have you.

Two More RSO's Gunned Down

From: KOMO News  http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Man-suspected-in-slayings-of-2-sex-offenders-156991795.html  

Sheriff: Man who gunned down sex offenders said it 'had to be done'

By DOUG ESSER The Associated Press

 

SEATTLE (AP) - A man suspected of shooting two sex offenders to death on the Olympic Peninsula left a note saying he hated sex offenders and "it had to be done," the Clallam County sheriff said Monday.

Investigators say Patrick Drum, 34, shot Gary Lee Blanton, 28, on Saturday night at a home Drum was renting near Sequim. Blanton was renting a room in the home.

Drum then drove to the home of Jerry Wayne Ray, 57, in the Agnew area near Port Angeles where Ray was killed early Sunday morning, Clallam County Sheriff Bill Benedict said.

For some reason, authorities say, Drum abandoned a rental car he had been driving and was seen on foot in the remote area of the northern Olympic Peninsula. Reports of a suspicious man in the area Sunday led deputies to respond. They found the car and the note inside that led to the victims and identified Drum as a suspect.

The note was "apologizing to police for what he had done," Benedict said, and it said, "It had to be done."

"He took full responsibility for 'taking care of some problems,'" Benedict said Monday.

Drum knew both men were sex offenders. Both were shot multiple times, the sheriff said.

Dozens of officers responded to the area. Drum was tracked down by a dog team and flushed out of a wooded area by a Customs and Border Protection helicopter Sunday after a manhunt that lasted more than three hours. He was armed with a 9mm pistol, Benedict said.

Drum was jailed in Port Angeles for investigation of murder with an initial court date expected Monday afternoon. Drum has an extensive criminal record and is known to police in Sequim and Port Angeles as well as to Clallam County deputies, Benedict said.

The sheriff wouldn't speculate on what prompted the shootings over the weekend.

"It appears in my mind what went on was somewhat planned," he said.

The sheriff's office online record of sex offenders shows Blanton was convicted in November 2001 of third-degree rape. Ray was convicted in August 2002 of child rape.

Sex Offenders - The New Jews in America

From: http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/207978.html

 

THE NEW JEWS IN AMERICA

By RLitchfield1

This is the twenty-sixth in a series of articles about Auburn-area homeless people, written by local attorney, author, and Sierra College Instructor, Bob Litchfield

A few days after I interviewed LaRaine Olson, I ran into the young man who offered her some of his groceries while we were talking.

(For more information about LaRaine, see article number twenty-one, called, “From Hells Angel to Homeless Angel.”)

The young man looks to be about twenty years old. But it turns out that he is actually 28. He has been homeless for about two years. Since he is a 290 registered sex offender, we will not use his real name. Instead, we’ll call him Sam.

Young Sam can’t get a job, he is homeless, he wears a GPS ankle monitor, and he is basically ruined for life because of his registry as a sex offender.

I look at him, and I realize that he is about the same age as my own children.

I ask him about his sex offense.

“I’m not a rapist. And I never abducted a child,” he says. “I did something really stupid, back when I was eighteen years old. Now, I can’t get a job, and I can’t find a place to live.”

Sam will almost certainly be on the registered sex offender list for the rest of his life. Once you get on that list, you’re not getting off without a miracle or a governor’s pardon.

Sam says, “So, here I am, camping where ever I can find a place to hide out and camp... until I get discovered camping there, and the police come and run me off.

“I am forced to violate the terms of my probation all the time, because every day, I have to sneak around and find a place to plug in my ankle monitor to re-charge the battery.

“It’s illegal for me to live in a house or an apartment that is anywhere near a school, or a park. And yet, it’s perfectly legal for me to be camped out in the woods near a school or a park. Now...if I was a dangerous sexual predator, (which I am not) where would you rather have me, in a house where you can find me, or camped out somewhere in the woods?”

Sam’s theory as to why he is being kept on the registered sex offender list is that the parole officer’s union is a very powerful California Labor Union, and that as long as there are an abundance of registered sex offenders for the parole officers to monitor, then all of the California parole officers have good job security.

If Sam had a magic wand, and could do or be anything, what would he do? He would go back to when he was just eighteen years old, and undo his crime, so that he wasn’t a registered sex offender any more.

If Sam had a message for the world, what would it be?

“Take people as individuals, and take the time to see who they really are. People are not numbers. People are not statistics.”

Sam has bi-polar disease. He is on medication for his bi-polar disease. But he says that the medication isn’t working very well.

Most of the time, Sam is a pretty cheerful guy, and when he comes around the other homeless people, he makes them laugh, and he brings a lot of happiness.

But on some days, Sam gets pretty depressed about his situation.

I can’t say that I blame him.

At the age of 28, his life is ruined beyond repair.

His lifetime registry as a sex offender is a life sentence to social and economic death.

He is not a rapist, and he is not a child abductor. That means that he is on the list for some lesser, sex-related offense. But that doesn’t stop the general public from lumping him in with the general assumption that everyone on the sex offender registry is a rapist or a child abductor.

Well, they’re not. In fact, if someone would make a count, I’d wager that most of the people on the registered sex offender list are NOT rapists, and are NOT child abductors.

So, what’s wrong with this picture?

Sam, like many other people on the registered sex offender list, is just another notch on the gun of some politically-ambitious deputy district attorney, who is anxious to show a high conviction rate, and hoping one day to be promoted to full District Attorney, or Judge.

If you young deputy district attorneys out there want to know how it works out for you, spiritually, to pursue your ambitions by putting people on a list that ruins their lives, regardless of whether they are true sexual predators or not, check out Judge Deck Diver, up in Nevada County. The Nevada County voters are trying to recall her because they are tired of waiting for her to come back from rehab.

But... on the other hand, given the number of drunken judges that we’ve had on the Nevada and Placer County benches during the past few years, maybe Judge Deck Diver, as the one judge in our area who finally had the courage to check herself into rehab, ought to be given a medal.

My recent experiences with homeless registered sex offenders reminds me of a time when I was a young attorney, doing collection work for banks.

The bankers explained to me that there was a no good, crooked, lying, cheating local business owner who had failed to make his payments. They wanted me to go to court to get the man’s business shut down, and to seize all of the man’s assets.

I filed the necessary court papers to shut down the evil, wicked, mean, bad, and nasty man’s business, and to seize his assets.

Then, I met the man whose life I was helping the bankers to ruin.

The man was NOT evil, wicked, mean, bad, and nasty. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth about who that man really was.

The man was the owner of “The Little Puffer Billy” Toy Store. He was the sweetest, kindest, most innocent little man I ever met. He was as honest as the day is long. He had probably never cheated anyone in his entire life.

He was simply unable to pay his loan payments because he was the victim of the bad economy of the early eighties and the twenty-one-percent interest rates that came with it.

So, where was the disconnect between the reality of who the toy store owner really was, and the evil man that the bankers had described?

The answer was simple: as human beings, with consciences (yes, even bankers occasionally have consciences), the bankers found it necessary to de-humanize the man, before they could bear the idea of putting the man out of business and seizing all of his assets.

This is what we human beings to do. In order to make it all right for us to hurt somebody, we must first de-humanize them.

We de-humanize our enemies in war, in order to make it all right for us to kill them. That is why we did not kill Germans, we killed Krauts, Huns, or Heinies. We did not kill Japanese, we killed the Japs. We did not kill Vietnamese, we killed Charlie, or the Cong. We do not kill Iraqis or Afghans, we kill the Towel Heads, or the Sand Niggers, or the Terrorists.

This is what we do to make it all right for us to kill, torment, or torture our fellow human beings. We tell ourselves that those people are not really human beings like us. Then, it’s all right for us to beat them, enslave them, lynch them, torture them, or otherwise torment them.

Wouldn’t it be nice if one day, we became awake enough so that it was no longer acceptable for us to de-humanize our fellow human beings?

If we had to recognize everyone as a human being, war and killing and beatings and torture and injustice might have to come to an end.

But in the mean time, we have created a new sub-culture of sub-human beings whom we call “registered sex offenders.”

According to popular belief, registered sex offenders are evil, mean, bad, and nasty sub-humans, because they have done something sexual, like touching their own private parts... something that none of the rest of us have ever done. (In an age where fully fifty percent of all adult males who attend Christian Churches are, according to Dr. James Dobson, addicted to internet pornography.)

Let’s separate this sub-culture of sub-human beings from the rest of us good people by putting them on a bad-people list for the rest of their lives.

Let’s put a special mark upon them, to keep them all separate from the rest of us. Let’s sew a scarlet letter upon their chests, or place an electronic monitor around their ankles, or better yet, let’s just sew a large, black, six-pointed star upon their chests... like the Jews in Nazi Germany.

As a jobless, homeless, separately-marked sub-culture of presumed-to-be sub-humans, the registered sex offenders are, after all, our new American sub-culture of Jews.

Which makes those of us who separated them out and marked them as sub-human the new Nazis.

You may be indignant, at this point, saying to yourself that registered sex offenders are nothing at all like the Jews in Nazi Germany. You argue that the Jews were innocent victims of religious prejudice, while the registered sex offenders are convicted criminals. You say that’s a huge difference. You say that it’s necessary for us to separate the registered sex offenders from our children, in order to protect our children.

You may be right.

But really?

If you believe that it is all right to de-humanize, separate, and mark for like anyone who has ever committed any kind of sex-related crime, then I invite you to go back and review some of the World War II era Nazi propaganda films about why the Jews must be separated from the rest of the German population. According to those films, Jews are dirty, immoral people, who have such unsanitary personal hygiene habits that they have rats running around in their kitchens. According to those films, we must protect our children from being exposed to the filthy habits of the Jews by separating them from the general population.

Not long after the negative propaganda about the Jews began, the roving bands of Nazi vigilante thugs began the random beatings. At first, they only beat up the Jews. But later, they beat up anyone who spoke out against the Nazi political agenda.

Soon, the German people became afraid to speak out against anything, and the rest is ugly history.

So right now, here in Auburn, we have roving bands of vigilante thugs who are beating up registered sex offenders.

Maybe next, the cry will be, “Let’s gather them all up into a single camp.”

Or, “Let’s just gas them all.”

It’s all right. So far, it’s only registered sex offenders who are getting beaten up. And they aren’t really human beings, are they?

Don’t you understand that when we, as a society, make it all right to do this kind of cruelty to anyone in our society, we make it all right to do cruelty to all of us?

The rumor is that some of our local law enforcement officers are participants in the gang of vigilantes who beat up the homeless registered sex offenders.

If that is true, then I can’t help wondering whether or not some of these same law enforcement officers are the ones who assumed that it would be all right to pull one of our local attorneys off of the front porch of his own home, throw him to the ground in front of his terrified wife and children, handcuff him and arrest him.

What were this highly-respected lawyer’s crimes?

First, he was such a devout Christian that he had chosen to home school his children.

This decision created an inconvenience for county employees, who then chose to harass his family repeatedly.

Second, when county officials and law enforcement officers showed up at his home to “inspect” one of his children, the lawyer stood in the doorway of his own home and had the audacity to insist upon his Constitution rights, and asked the law enforcement officers to obtain a warrant before coming into his home.

For these crimes, one of the most highly-respected Christian lawyers in our community was thrown to the ground in front of his family, handcuffed and arrested, and was later prosecuted by our courts for felony interference with the duties of a law enforcement officer.

The poor lawyer had to take the matter all the way up to the Court of Appeals before he was able to find a judge who had any understanding of our Constitution.

But it’s okay. Because that particular lawyer was different from the rest of us.

If he has chosen to keep his children out of the public schools where our insane legislature has just recently decided that we can best protect our children from sexual abuse not just by segregating sex offenders from schools, but also by requiring that all of our children should be taught in school about the wonderfulness of sodomizers who have made great contributions throughout history, well then, that lawyer is so different from the rest of us that he probably isn’t really a human being anyway, is he?

I submit to you that the people in our California legislature are insane.

Here are two items that tend to prove my assertion:

First, the legislators say that we must keep our children safe from sexual deviance by separating out all of the sex offenders, and keeping them far away from schools and parks and children. But the same legislators also pass a law that says that we must teach our children in our public schools about the wonderfulness of homosexuals throughout history.

What happens in that classroom, when the first little Johnny or Sally raises his or her hand and asks the teacher, “But...what is a homosexual?”

What happens is that the teacher ends up being forced to teach our children and our grandchildren in the public schools the details of homosexuality.

And then our children, who experiment with every new thing that they learn about as they are growing up, all have a new toy.

Wow. That’ll protect them.

That’s legislative insanity number one.

Here’s insanity number two: I call it the Jack Black, va-poo-rizor delusion.

A few years ago, comedians Jack Black and Ben Stiller starred in a movie called, “Envy.” In that movie, Jack Black’s character becomes a millionaire when he invents a wonderful new spray that causes dog poop to simply disappear, so that dog owners no longer have to clean up after their dogs. He calls his new invention “va-poo-rizer.”

The only problem with va-poo-rizer is that we discover later in the movie that all of the tons and tons of dog poop that has been “disappeared” by spraying it hasn’t really disappeared at all.

No, no. Dog poop doesn’t just disappear.

As it turns out, all of those tons of dog poop that were sprayed with va-poo-rizer were actually transported to some other place. And that poor place is getting bombarded and buried in tons and tons of dog poop.

What has that got to do with our State Legislators? Well, our legislators seem to believe that if we just spray the words “registered sex offender” on anyone who commits any crime that is even remotely related to human sexuality, then those people will be separated from our general population, and they will just disappear... like spraying those people with the sex offender’s version of va-poo-rizer.

Well, guess what? Registered sex offenders don’t just disappear.

They have to end up somewhere, jobless and homeless and branded for life.

Right now, it appears that an extraordinarily large number of them are ending up being dumped here in Auburn.

So, if homeless registered sex offenders are the new American version of the Jews, it appears that Auburn is the new Polish Ghetto.

We have so many homeless registered sex offenders here in the Auburn area that it is even worrisome to the other local homeless people.

The local homeless people have at least three different theories as to why there are so many registered sex offenders in the Auburn area.

The first theory is that in Placer County, there used to be two different parole offices, with one parole office down in Roseville, and the other parole office here in Auburn. But now, because of budget cut-backs, the Roseville parole office has been closed.

So, all of the convicted criminals who used to get paroled in Roseville are now getting paroled in Auburn. That includes all of the registered sex offenders from the much larger City of Roseville.

There appears to be some truth to that rumor.

The second rumor is that because of the new law which requires a registered sex offender to be paroled a minimum number of miles away from his or her victim, registered sex offenders from all of the major metropolitan areas have to be paroled some place other than the big cities where they were arrested.

So, where are all of these big city sex offenders getting sent? Some of them are getting sent here.

Is there any truth to this rumor? Well, the registered sex offender that I called Ernie in two of my earlier articles was arrested and convicted of his sex crime in Modesto. But he was paroled here in Auburn. According to one source, we are paroling registered sex offenders here in Auburn who are from as far away as Arizona.

The third rumor is that there is big money involved in the manufacture and sale of the ankle monitoring devices, and that Placer County has received some kind of big-money government grant to be one of the counties that monitors registered sex offenders.

I have not been able to ascertain whether or not there is any truth to that rumor.

But I do think that the people of Auburn would like to know how much truth there is to any and all three of these rumors.

Maybe instead of forming roving bands of vigilantes, and beating people up, some of you ought to write letters to your elected officials, during this election year, and ask a few very specific questions about why there are so many homeless registered sex offenders here in the Auburn area.

You might want to send some of those letters to the elected Placer County officials who live in big, expensive houses down in Granite Bay.

I have a not-very-funny, tongue-in-cheek theory of my own to add to the list. We have known for quite some time now that our neighboring county, Nevada County, has the highest per capital number of registered sex offenders in the State. Maybe now, Nevada County is full up, and having dumped as many registered sex offenders as the State can possibly dump into Nevada County, they’ve simply started dumping them into Placer County.

Va-poo-rizer.

It makes sense to our State Legislature.

No one at the State Legislature will ever ask for my opinion with regard to the registered sex offender list, but here are my two suggestions for making the list more humane:

First, let’s change to law so that the list is limited to no one other than actual rapists and actual child abductors.

Second, since being placed on the registered sex offender list is tantamount to being given a life sentence of social and economic death, let’s treat registry on that list somewhat similar to the way that we treat death sentences in this State.

Every time that a court in this State enters a death sentence, there is an automatic appeal. This is done to ensure that we do not execute any innocent man or woman.

Let’s change the sex offender registry process so that every time someone is put onto that list, that person gets an automatic appeal, so that some higher court or some higher authority makes a determination that this person really is a threat to the safety of others, and ought to be included on this list. That way, we register the real sexual predators, but we do it for reasons that truly protect the public, and not just to put another notch on the gun of some politically-ambitious deputy district attorney.

You say that you don’t want to spend that much for the State’s money on expensive court appeals? Fine. Then instead of having the automatic appeal go to a higher court, lets have the appeal go to a panel of appointed citizens whose only job is to determine whether or not each person who has been placed on this social and economic death list is a real danger to society or not.

And let’s finish by talking about the cost. Right now, there are more than 63,000 people on California’s registered sex offender list. Of those 63,000 people on the list, only about 33,500 are able to show any kind of home address, which would indicate that the rest of the people (about 29,500 people) on the list are currently homeless, and... against their wishes, jobless.

For every homeless person in the State of California, it costs the California tax payer about $40,000 a year in all of the services required to care for, to police, and to clean up after the homeless. That’s 29,500 people whom we have artificially created as homeless, at $40,000 per person. Which means that just in the homelessness costs, the California registered sex offender list is costing us $1,180,000,000 per year.

I don’t mind paying over a billion dollars a year to keep our children safe from real sexual predators. But I’m not quite that excited about paying over a billion dollars a year to keep my children safe from assorted flashers, Utah Congressmen, and Secret Service Agents. (And of the latter, anybody want to take any bets as to how many of them will actually make it onto the list?)

Residential Restrictions on S.O.s

From: Find Law, http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/residency-restrictions-for-sex-offenders.html

Residency Restrictions for Sex Offenders

---

Residency restriction laws are a fairly new method some jurisdictions are using in an attempt to curb the actions of sex offenders. Alabama passed the first residency restriction law in 1996. The law was part of the states' Community Notification Act. It prohibited child molesters from living within 1,000 feet of a school. By January 2006, approximately 14 states had enacted residency restrictions. Moreover, some local governments have implemented their own residency restrictions.
Critics and supporters of residency restriction laws have watched Iowa's law with interest since its passage in 2002. The Iowa law applies to a "person who has committed a criminal offense against a minor, or an aggravated offense, sexually violent offense, or other relevant offense that involved a minor." According to the law, "A person shall not reside within two thousand feet of the real property comprising a public or nonpublic elementary or secondary school or a child care facility." The law does not apply in certain circumstances, including where the "person has established a residence prior to July 1, 2002, or a school or child care facility is newly located on or after July 1, 2002," or where the person is a minor or a ward under a guardianship. It is an aggravated misdemeanor to reside within 2,000 feet of a school or child care.
The Iowa law took effect on July 1, 2002, but was almost immediately challenged in federal district court. The plaintiffs were three named sex offenders who contended that the law was unconstitutional on its face. The case was certified as a class action, on behalf of other sex offenders to whom the law would apply. At trial, the plaintiffs presented evidence regarding the scope of the law. In many cities, the law would effectively limit sex offenders to small areas of residency. In small towns, a single school or child care center could mean that the entire town was off limits. Expert witnesses on both sides testified to their beliefs in the expected efficacy of the law.
The district court enjoined enforcement of the law, and ruled that it was unconstitutional on several grounds, including:

• The law was unconstitutional because it was an ex post facto law for anyone convicted before July 1, 2002;
• It violated plaintiffs' rights to avoid self-incrimination, because registrants would be required to report their addresses, even when the addresses were not in compliance with the law;
• It violated plaintiffs' procedural due process rights;
• It infringed on fundamental rights to travel and decide how to conduct their family affairs; and
• It was not tailored narrowly enough to serve a compelling state interest.

In a ruling dated April 29, 2005, three judges from the United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously voted to reverse the district court's decision. The appellate court dispensed with each ground relied upon by the district court, and ruled that the law was not unconstitutional on its face. The court ruled that there exists no constitutional right to "live where you want." Therefore, the state only needed to show that the statute rationally advanced some legitimate governmental purpose. Plaintiffs acknowledged that the law was enacted to promote the safety of children, and that this was a legitimate legislative goal. They argued, however, that the law is irrational because there is no scientific evidence to support the conclusion that residency restrictions will enhance the safety of children. The court rejected this argument as well, noting that state policymakers are entitled to employ "common sense" when making a determination that "limiting the frequency of contact between sex offenders and areas where children are located is likely to reduce the risk of an offense."
Two judges agreed that the law did not amount to an ex post facto punishment. They ruled that plaintiffs did not establish by "clearest proof" that the law's punitive effect overrides the legislature's "legitimate intent to enact a nonpunitive, civil regulatory measure that protects health and safety" of the state's citizens.
Municipalities and counties have enacted their own versions of residency restrictions. For example, in Des Moines, Iowa, the state's largest city, officials added parks, libraries, swimming pools, and recreational trails to the list of protected buffer zones.
A report in the Des Moines Register on January 22, 2006, reported that since the state's residency law took effect, more sex offenders are eluding tracking by authorities. The paper reported that 298 sex offenders were unaccounted for in January 2006, compared to 142 on June 1, 2005. Critics charge that the law has forced some sex offenders to become homeless; others may lie and say that they are homeless to hide the fact that they are not complying with the law. Iowa has approximately 6,000 registered sex offenders.

Megan's Law to Mug Shot For-Profit Mags

From: Once Fallen, http://once-fallen.blogspot.com/2012/05/from-megans-law-to-mug-shot-magazines.html ( Excellent Website )

From Megan's Law to Mug Shot Magazines: Citizen involvement in the growing police state

Many Americans are in a constant fear of a "police state." This concept is not new. In the 1930s, the Nazis epitomized the police state. In fact, we still refer to overbearing police as "Gestapo." Powerful as the Gestapo was, they were not large enough to act alone; around 70% of the arrests made by the Gestapo were initiated by the tips or information of the general public. The Nazis employed propaganda to influence the people, and the people in turn, played a major role in sending millions to their deaths in concentration camps.

America is slowly becoming a similar police state. But just like the Nazi era, the police is not the only concern. This generation has done the same. We are a nation of nanny cams, background checks, and a growing number of public pillories known as "registries". Right now meth maker registries, domestic violence registries, and animal abuser either on the books are in the process of creation. Hell, we even have registries for your dog!

<><><><> <><><><> <><>

Bad Dog, Go Register!

But even that is not enough. Someone has decided that taking mug shots and putting them in a newspaper format and selling them is a great business opportunity. Somewhere along the way, we've turned the criminal justice system into the next spectator sport:

<><><><> <><><><> <><>

Someone should make a rag with pics of those who sell this crap

http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/the-newest-tabloid-craze-mug-shots_7554544

Imagine going to the Internet to search your name only to find a mug shot from years ago posted on multiple websites. There are publications and websites whose sole purpose is to feature police booking photos. Some make a profit selling advertising around the photos, while other websites are offering, for a price, to remove or hide these images permanently. ***** McMahon learned about the mug shot business the hard way.

In 2003, McMahon woke up one morning covered in blood, with stab wounds and evicted from his home. McMahon was fired from his job and slept in a gas station bathroom that night. McMahon knew his life was in need of a change. At the time, the then-bartender was dealing with the deaths of his best friend and sister within months of each other, along with a family history of drug abuse. McMahon started using cocaine at age 12 and lived in a drug-induced haze until he was 23. During those tumultuous years, McMahon was arrested several times, including two instances for driving under the influence of alcohol.

These days, McMahon is a happily married, churchgoing father who works at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. His wife, ***** McMahon, is a part-time student at the University of Georgia earning a master's in social work. When they're not working, life for the McMahons revolves around their 2-year-old daughter, ******. It is a much different existence than McMahon once had.

Congratulations are in order. This man turned his life around, rehabilitated, cleaned up his act, etc. He's a happily married man with a wife and kid, works hard, and even goes to church. Who would want to mess that up? Enter the Mug Shot Magazine Business:

As part of his recovery, McMahon went to the Internet to check his online image after he read that employers use Google to search the names of potential employees. Having served the time for his crimes, McMahon was shocked to find his mug shot still posted on a website along with others. He contacted the site to have the image removed. He paid a another site to have the mug shot removed only to see his photo show up in four other places. "It's like killing one flea and then saying, 'OK the flea problem is done,'" McMahon said. His frustration built when he contacted the website Reputation.com, which said for $7,500 it could not get rid of his image, but could "bury" it in Internet purgatory.

McMahon is not alone in finding his murky past displayed for the public.

So you not only have a business that posts your mug shot, no matter how old it is, but for a high price, you can pay to have it removed. But then it shows up elsewhere, because now that you have paid one site, other sites know you are willing to pay. It is like the South Park "Underpants Gnome" equation, only instead of collect underpants, someone collected mug shots, and they found that missing step to turn mug shots into profit.

<><><><> <><><><> <><>

I'm pretty sure a phase 2 involves something illegal.

Yes, I went there.

Caught Up is a Tennessee-based weekly that dubs itself a "crime-fighting publication." It features police booking photos. Found primarily in smaller communities throughout Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Indiana, and Kentucky, the publication showcases people's names and alleged crimes listed below their mug shots. Caught Up and other similar papers collect mug shots, which are public record, from sheriffs and local police departments, who hand over the information with the names listed in alphabetical order, detailing the criminal charges. These photos are also featured and archived on the publication's website caughtuplive.com...

"Sometimes I say I'm the most popular woman of the small counties because police departments are so grateful," said Lori Broderick, the media liaison for Caught Up. Broderick is involved in the publication of every paper, which puts out more than 25,000 copies weekly. Broderick, who is also a paralegal, joined the Caught Up team in December 2010. She feels the mission of the paper is to give people the ability to keep an eye on their communities.

Well in the interest of fairness, I will post a link to Lori Broderick's Facebook page here in case any one is interested in suing her. So if they are putting out 25k+ copies per week at a dollar a pop, and assuming they are making at least a 50 cent profit ($12,500 weekly), then they are racking up $650,000 per year. That is a lot of dollar rags.

The flip side is how the publication affects the people showcased. Broderick recalled a man who was a sex offender and had finished serving his sentence. The man was trying to rejoin the community but felt he couldn't with his mug shot in the paper and online. Broderick said she and her team discussed the issue, but ultimately felt their need to inform was more important than helping the man overcome his past.

"When you're talking about the safety of the community and the safety of children and seeing as how these are already public records, we just made the determination that it was in the best interest of the public to have this information available," Broderick said. "The lack of knowledge was not a chance that we were ready to take."

Here we get to the meat of the issue. The paper really should have said "their need to publicly humiliate in order to sell papers was more important than helping the man overcome his past. In other words, increasing the likelihood of recidivism is LESS important than selling papers.

Mug shots: Informative vs. slander?

Caught Up consists mostly of mug shots with a few related written pieces and various games that it calls "informative fun." There also is some local advertising. Caught Up Vice President Geoffrey Bar-Lev said in today's economy the profit margin for this business is relatively low. However, the demand for the publication in smaller communities has remained the same. The business makes money even if the lives of the people who make up its content have changed, which leaves someone like McMahon out of luck.

Again, I broke down the profit margin. What is disturbing is Caught Up calls this "informative fun." So what can you do about it?

Several clients have asked Kavan Singh-Grover, an Atlanta-based criminal defense attorney, about removing their mug shots from the sites and about what legal action can be taken. "They are using a person's image for commercial gain without their permission," said Singh-Grover. "To me, its extortion, maybe not legally, but the common use of that term." Singh-Grover said legally, there is nothing that can be done. The only thing that could stop the publications and websites is legislation that forbids them. That legislation does not exist.

That legislation NEEDS to exist. That being said, I'd argue False Light and misusing my image. And yes, these papers have been sued in the past, HERE and also HERE.

Caught Up's Broderick said she understands the concerns and said other publications might have a lower standard, but their purpose is to encourage safety in communities, not promote public humiliation. "People think we are in the business to mock," Broderick said. "They believe that we have photos of a person who has been arrested to allow the community to thumb their nose at and that's not our purpose. If people find some of the mug shots amusing, that's more or less a side effect." McMahon isn't laughing.

Oh, really?

It is hard to claim that when all the mug shot papers' web pages resemble this.

"But that's the main way they make profit, right," he said. "We can read a paper without looking at a picture and know that seven people were arrested for DUI -- we don't need the picture. It just -- to me -- seems like the way that they're making money is because the pictures are pathetic or sometimes funny."

RemoveSlander.com is a website that erases mug shots from the Web once a person has been legally cleared. The site said it uses "trade tools" to eliminate the mug shot. Spokesperson Philip Lee said he does not feel RemoveSlander.com should be "affiliated with the mug shot website."

RemoveSlander.com via ImageMax Mugshot Removal said it is the first reputation management firm to offer the service. For $399, RemoveSlander.com allows a customer to specify one website from which to have a mug shot deleted. For $699.00, the mug shot is removed from three sites. Remove.Slander.com has 14 business days to remove the mug shot from the website and Google or the customer gets their money back. If a customer has multiple arrests with more than one booking photo, that costs more.

In his suburban Atlanta home, McMahon seems at peace with his new life and everything that comes with it. However, he's eager to talk about his past if it means more people are aware of publications like Caught Up and sites like RemoveSlander.com.

"I'm human, I made a couple of mistakes -- it's not a secret I made more than one," McMahon said. "Everyone has a past. It's just unfortunate that mine is exploited for profit."

Again, this is all about the money.

With 65 million Americans with criminal records, including 750,000 or so on the sex offender registry, the business opportunities are endless, at the expense of the people.


I have my own story to tell. During the lowest point in my life, the week my mother died, they released my mug shot in a Mug Shot rag, leading to harassment as I was grieving over my mother's death. A neighbor told my now ex-fiancee Brandi's mother that I was a "bad man" who "hurts people." The same could be said for that person as well as the people who run the Mug Shot Magazines.

My original premise is this phenomenon is merely an extension of the Gestapo generation. Megan's Law, the flint that ignited this fire, has expanded over the years to other crimes. The justification has been to "inform the public." However, we have seen that argument fall apart when you see how these papers are viewed by the general public. It is the return to the scarlet letter and public pillories. These methods have been proven ineffective, so there is no other reason to have them than for entertainment value. Roman society crumbled while its citizens were distracted by "bread and circuses." American society is falling into an equally dangerous trap.

It is past time for legislation putting an end to these practices once and for all.