Thursday, June 23, 2016

Want to sell books and scare the public? Just make up a scary stat. No one fact checks anyways, right?


There are NOT one MILLION annual sex trafficking victims in the US. The actual stats are barely a hundred, not a million. But hey, why let facts and figures get in the way of peddling a book full of fear? (I guess the old Goldilocks number of 50,000 wasn't enough for Sarnoff.)

Addendum: I contacted her today about hr false stat and this was her response:

Re: Conchita Sarnoff "Sex trafficking myth"
Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:34 AM Mark as Unread

From: 
"Conchita Sarnoff" <sarnoff.conchita@gmail.com>
To: 
iamthefallen1@yahoo.com

Dear Sir,

You might want to research the issue and statistics further in order to debate the figures.

The numbers you refer to as Myth #14 i.e. "The Child Trafficking Myth: “It's between 100,000 and 300,000 child sex slaves in the United States today,” Ashton Kutcher," are outdated 2012 figures.

Best wishes,
Conchita Sarnoff

Executive Director
Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking

My response:

Derek Logue <iamthefallen1@yahoo.com> wrote:

Wow, that I the best response you can conjure up? So sometime between 2012 and today, we somehow jumped from one hundred to one million sex trafficking victims? I cite my sources. Where are your sources? Or did you just pull this out your rear end?

And her reply:

Dear Sir,

One child trafficked for sex is one too many. 


Conchita Sarnoff
Executive Director
Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking

She can't cite a SINGLE stat to verify her ludicrous claims.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/21/is-there-an-end-to-child-sex-trafficking/

Is There An End To Child Sex Trafficking?

Photo of Conchita Sarnoff
CONCHITA SARNOFF
Executive Director, Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking
10:54 AM 06/21/2016

The first human trafficking guilty verdict in Sarasota Florida was handed down last week, to Ronald McBride III, 22, for six felony counts, one of which was human trafficking. After the jury’s conviction, McBride could face up to life in prison. It is a milestone case for the Sarasota Police Department.

According to news reports the trafficker began “grooming the victim in November 2015, on how to trade her body for drugs and money.” The young woman was in her twenties receiving counseling for drug addiction at the time she met McBride. Instead, McBride got the victim hooked on heroine and crack cocaine.

The girl told the Sarasota police, “If she didn’t make a certain amount of money for a sexual act, McBride would beat her or have another girl beat her. I have to give all the money I make to McBride because he says he owns me.” On the day she escaped, December 29, 2015, McBride beat her with a gun and told her he would come back to kill her. After the beating, she managed to run away nearby U.S. 41. A passerby found her crouched in a fetal position on the ground and called the police. This is a victory for the Sarasota Police Department and the State Attorney’s Office in the 12th Judicial Circuit given the difficulty in convicting a street level pimp. McBride will be sentenced September 16, 2016.  

In the United States more than one million children are trafficked every year.



The global figure is far higher surpassing the 20 million mark according to most recent statistics. Why? After a decade researching the issue of human trafficking, I published a book to help explain the problem.  

TrafficKing tells the story of the most protracted child sex trafficking case in U.S. legal history. Jeffrey E. Epstein, a Wall Street billionaire, was arrested in 2005.  More than two-dozen victims testified against him. After a two-year federal investigation he received a Non Prosecution Agreement in 2007 for two counts of solicitation of prostitution with a minor. Why did he receive such a sweetheart deal given the number of victims who testified? Why wasn’t Mr. Epstein prosecuted under the federal law, Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) like most sex traffickers? Irrespective of the Non Prosecution Agreement, Mr. Epstein remains a registered level three sex offender for life.

Epstein’s human trafficking case set a precedent. Since 2007, a handful of traffickers arrested in Florida for perpetrating the same or similar crimes have attempted to benefit from Epstein’s defense. Their defense in court has been to claim the court was prejudicial based on their different ethnicity, lack of economic resources, and nonexistent political connections. It appears the punishment applied to these men has been far more stringent than Epstein’s Non Prosecution Agreement. This raises an important legal question. Are there two separate systems of justice in the United States? One for the rich and powerful, for men such as Epstein who can afford to live on a private island and rub shoulders with former presidents; and one for the common people who can barely eke out a living?

If you are following the Epstein case it seems that way. Perhaps the system needs an overhaul and Epstein’s case might just be the one to pave the way. For more than eleven years, several Epstein related cases have continued to grace the U.S. courts. Since 2007, multiple civil cases and related cases were filed. Today, three Epstein related cases are pending, two in Florida and one in New York. Epstein’s criminal case implicated several high profile personalities and international leaders in the fields of politics, business, academia, including a British Prince.

Since “TrafficKing” was published several victims have reached out asking for help. Others have offered support to help our organization, Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking www.atrvt.org, stop human trafficking. Every day, in every state across the country heinous human trafficking stories appear in newspapers, on-line journals, television, radio and other digital outlets.

Human trafficking has reached epidemic proportions in the United States. Why? Perhaps one reason is the overwhelming demand and powerful industry of pornography — child pornography specifically. Another could be the rise and power of the pedophile networks in the United States.

The issue of human trafficking has many layers and is complex. Human traffickers can be individuals working for large trafficking networks such as the: Chinese, Colombian, Mexican, Russian, Ukrainian, and the United States’ own MS (Mara Salvatrucha) Cartels, or they can be small, one man, ‘mom and pop’ operators or inner city pimps. There are hundreds if not thousands of operators trafficking children across state lines. A number of traffickers have gone as far as tattooing a victim’s neck in order to claim the girl as property. The average age of entry for a trafficked child in the U.S. is 12. The reason is simple: It is a moneymaking enterprise that has a finite expiry date. That is one reason why traffickers target young children. Another reason is, the younger the child the greater the profit.

One of the biggest impediments for law enforcement remains identification and tracking. Most traffickers hide behind a veil of secrecy called the Internet while others disappear behind the lesser-known “dark net.” Behind this curtain traffickers and perpetrators buy, sell and trade children for sex via the better known social media spaces including: Backpage, Craigslist, Facebook and other platforms that cater to pedophile networks.  

According to Telecrunch, “On any 18 minute period there are 11 million viewers on Facebook on average.” Social Bakers, another forecasting company, claims, “Facebook earns $2.5 billion a quarter from mobile advertising.” The reason the sites are popular with traffickers is because social media companies and advertisers know everything about their targeted audience and in many instances have decided to “turn the other way.”

For example, an ad on Facebook can sell for as low as five cents while the average cost of a Facebook ad is approximately five dollars per 1000-targeted viewers. All social media platforms are after the same thing: likes and shares which is exactly what a human trafficker wants. Unlike Facebook, “most of Craigslist’s revenue comes from job ads, adult service ads, and New York real estate listings, enabling the remainder of Craigslist’s services … to be available to users for free.” While Craigslist charges $75 for a job listing, approximately $10 an ad for ‘therapeutic services’ in the U.S., reposts of live ads are $5 dollars. MasterCard and Visa are accepted.  

There is no doubt the cost of advertising, accessibility to a wide audience, and low risk operation continue to attract and drive traffickers to online platform sites to prostitute children. Law enforcement confronts ever-greater challenges today. These include, how to identify and track victims and human traffickers online and on the street. It is a fact that most traffickers continuously move their victims from one state to another to prevent detection and prosecution. Secondly, how to protect at-risk victims and thirdly, where to house survivors after they have been rescued. There is a tremendous dearth of short and long term housing for survivors in every city of the United States. This situation prevents many victims from attempting to escape the clutches of their predators and lands them right back in their hands.

Another important challenge is data collection. If you can’t measure a problem you can’t solve the problem. Most law enforcement officials and congressional leaders do not have accurate statistics reflecting the increase in demand of trafficked victims. As a result, it is easier for them to sweep the problem under the rug, not lobby Congress for state and federal funding and be free of the responsibility and accountability to the court of public opinion. Some government officials even claim the problem is vastly exaggerated or does not exist at all.

One thing is certain, human trafficking exists. It exists on a massive scale in the United States, across all levels of the socio economic ladder and for several reasons: lust, money, power, and influence. It is time to shine a spotlight on human trafficking and put an end to child sex slavery. The book, TrafficKing and the Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking hope to accomplish just that.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Missouri Gubernatorial Candidate Catherine Hanaway believes liberal "sexual permissiveness" is to blame for CP

Here is your achetypical conservatard pandering pol comparing "sexual permissiveness" with the acceptance of sex crimes. And yet, somehow she is taken seriously.

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/mary-sanchez/article9355337.html

Missouri’s Catherine Hanaway panders to conservatives, conflates permissiveness with perversion

BY MARY SANCHEZ
The Kansas City Star

Pity the politician caught on tape, hopscotching thoughts into an illogical babble.

Catherine Hanaway’s moment came at a conference last weekend in St. Louis. Her performance was a doozy.

Hanaway took aim at what she termed the liberal framework that values sexual permissiveness as evidenced by out-of-wedlock births. Then Hanaway claimed that it leads to acceptance of all “sexual preferences,” including pedophilia and child pornography.

I kid you not. This came from the woman who wishes to be Missouri’s next governor.

Hanaway began with a common conservative discourse about unmarried mothers. It is a line that conveniently misses the fact that in more than half of such births, the father is a cohabiting part of the family. But why quibble. Where she went rogue was the reach to child pornography as an offshoot of such unmarried sexuality.

This is the crazy that people reserve for friends. Hanaway spoke ideas that she felt would reverberate at the conservative event.

It isn’t that more liberal-minded people disdain marriage or dismiss correlations between out-of-wedlock births and higher rates of poverty. But they flinch at politicians who belittle single, working mothers while at the same time cutting funding for the very things that have been proved to stabilize families.

Education lifts women out of poverty and toward healthier relationships. Not preaching from a podium about morality, birthin’ babies and wedded love.

By Wednesday, snippets of Hanaway’s address showed up in an email blast for Democrat donations. The chairman of the Missouri Democratic Party labeled Hanaway as “nothing but another Todd Akin Republican.” Recall that Akin famously professed the unscientific view that a woman who has been raped can magically avoid pregnancy because her body will shut down conception.

As a former U.S. attorney, Hanaway is painfully familiar with horrendous cases of child porn. Surely she knows that Democrats find these criminal acts equally deplorable. Yet she chose to invoke single, working mothers as a battering ram, drawing a convoluted connection from them to disgusting crimes against children.

She’s right about one thing. It’s too simplistic to call her views a war on women. Rather, the approach is a far more tortured, often paternalistic and offensive view of women.

And it’s so dismaying to watch an educated woman partake in the foolishness.

And here is her original speech:

https://soundcloud.com/progress-missouri/catherine-hanaway-suggest-liberals-sexual-permissiveness-is-to-blame-for-child-porn

Appearing at the Educational Policy Conference which featured speakers like former Congressman Todd Akin, former Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, and Phyllis Schafly, gubernatorial candidate Catherine Hanaway appeared to make the bizarre claim that liberals "sexual permissiveness through abortions and other things" is responsible for the horrific act of creating child pornography. Here's a transcript of her remarks:

"So, the liberals want to talk about conservatives waging a war on women. But, think about what they're talking about. When their chief criticism of conservatives, the chief criticism is that we stand up for the sanctity of life. That because we are pro-life we are somehow against women.

I am here to say that their culture of permissiveness towards sexual activity is the real war on women. Let's start with the notion, well it’s not a notion, it’s a fact, that the fact that the culture of sexual permissiveness has led to record levels of out of wedlock births.

And what has that done for women? It has impoverished women. It has reduced their access to educational opportunities. It has impoverished and endangered their children. It has forced those children to grow up in households where their mothers have to work, to make it economically viable for them to exist and with no fathers. How is that culture good for women and children?

But it goes a step further, and it’s that step further that I want to talk about today. And this is the hard part. So, if you pursue this course that sexual permissiveness is to be valued, which is the liberal framework and that you should protect sexual permissiveness through abortions and other things, you lead to a conclusion where every sexual preference is acceptable.

Now, I still think and pray that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that those who have a sexual preference for children are evil. But I will tell you that in the four years I spent as the presidentially appointed united states attorney, which is the chief federal prosecutor, a tremendous amount of my time was devoted to child pornography related crimes.

So it is a federal crime to possess distribute or produce child pornography, and it should be. Well what concerns me is the slide in our culture that says hey everything is okay and so why should just having a picture of something be a crime, because to possess child pornography is a crime, why should that be a crime? Well, it should be a crime, and this is some of the difficult stuff I have to talk to you about, and please forgive me, 70% of those images depict kids under the age of 12, 50% of the images depict kids under the age of 5, 30% under the age of 2, and the children are not alone, they’re really crime scene photos, they’re photos of children being raped, that’s what they are. So even calling them pornography, I really think we should call them crime scene photos."

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Cindy Del Buono compares an alleged sexual assault to the Orlando massacre

Wow, she compares a man who commits an alleged sexual assault to a man whose act of terrorism killed 49 people. Just when I thought the feminist-powered victim industry couldn't get any more insane.

And I really hate how the victim industry downplays false allegations. If "only 2% to 8%" of abuse allegations are false then of the 850,000 people forced to register on the public pillory, then between 17,000 and 68,000 of them are registered as the result of false allegations. So even by her standards, up to about 1 of every 11 allegations are false.

O yeah, and that whole "rape culture" myth is just another meaningless buzzword.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/5741535-181/close-to-home-stopping-sexual

Close to Home: Stopping sexual assaults begins with the courage to speak out
BY CINDY DEL BUONO | June 16, 2016, 12:07AM

What the stories of Brock Turner, the former Stanford swimmer found guilty of sexual assault, and Omar Mateen, the man responsible for the deaths of 49 people in Orlando, Fla., have in common is a flagrant disregard for humanity.

Sexual violence in particular is at epidemic proportions in our society. We must stop tolerating it as a mistake in judgment, as with Turner, who was convicted of three counts of sexual assault against an unconscious victim.

Dismissing the horrific victimization of Turner’s crime on the survivor, Judge Michael Aaron Persky levied a 6-month jail sentence with three years probation. A Persky recall petition has since garnered more than 1 million signatures, and a Stanford law professor, along with at least three well-known political consultants, have joined the now national recall effort.

A national conversation has ensued about privileged perpetrators receiving diminished sentences.

But what can’t be forgotten is the extraordinary courage required of the victim to speak out and begin the long journey toward reclaiming herself. Her bravery in standing up to her perpetrator at the sentencing hearing was the call to action for all survivors — an assurance that they are not alone and that their voices must be heard.

Please join me and thousands of others who are fighting to eliminate sexual violence by choosing to look inward and then act. Consider:

False reports of sexual assault are rare. Its incidence is the same as other crimes, 2 percent to 8 percent. This means that up to 98 percent of the time, a person stating he or she has been sexually assaulted is speaking the truth.

Sexual assault is behavior that is encouraged in our society. College athletes make up 4 percent of the college population yet commit 19 percent of sexual assaults. Many who rape are repeat offenders. Yet expulsion is rare. There are societies in our world today where men do not rape women, where interpersonal violence and male dominance do not exist. When your favorite athlete or actor or otherwise privileged male, or your family member, neighbor or friend, commits sexual assault how do you respond?

Each of us may be contributing to a rape culture. With no other crime do we shift blame to the survivor instead of the perpetrator. No woman deserves to be assaulted no matter what she is wearing, whether she has been drinking, what her sex life is like, what time she is out, where she is at or whether she changes her mind during an initially consensual sexual encounter. Is there a part of that sentence that you don’t wholeheartedly agree with?

There is tremendous work and advocacy on behalf of and to support survivors of sexual violence through Verity, Sonoma County’s sole rape crisis, healing and trauma center. Verity staffs a 24/7 rape crisis hotline for sexual assault survivors and their families in Sonoma County (***). Our volunteer state-certified sexual assault counselors accompany and support survivors during the medical exam where evidence of assault is collected and medical needs are assessed. Counseling services and support groups are provided. Verity staff and volunteers partner with our schools to increase awareness of sexual assault, sexual harassment and child abuse prevention and intervention strategies through classroom and community presentations. We are a non-profit organization relying on grants, donations and volunteers to accomplish this life-saving work.

Beyond supporting Verity, the three most important things you can say to a sexual assault survivor are: “I believe you. It was not your fault. Thank you for having the courage to share this with me.”

Brave women and men are speaking out — and our society’s views about sexual assault are changing. Verity is a channel through which you can make a real impact.

Cindy Del Buono is a member of the board of directors and crisis line counselor for Verity. For information, go to www.ourverity.org.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

The M'Naughton Rule: Michaela Naughton took her complaints against an employed registrant to FB and it backfired



It is too bad I didn't see the action over at the Roxborough Rants & Raves page at FB (mostly because I don't actually USE FB), but it seems that Michaela Naughton make quite a name for herself and not in a good way.

You know, the M'Naughton rule was once a legal standard for determining insanity. I'd say M in M'Naughton must stand for Michaela.



When Your Boss Is Also a Registered Sex Offender
Would you be okay working with someone who is on the Megan’s Law registry for life? If not, where should they work?

BY VICTOR FIORILLO  |  JUNE 9, 2016 AT 2:20 PM

Once a promising young cadet in the police academy, Conshohocken’s **** is now a convicted sex offender. In 2014, at the age of 29, Laurenzi pleaded guilty to statutory sexual assault and sexual abuse of a child. The victim took private ballroom dancing lessons from ****, and investigators said that he videotaped some of their more than 20 sexual encounters, which occurred when the girl was 14 and 15 and **** was 27.

*** will be listed on the Pennsylvania Megan’s Law website for the rest of his life. So does that mean he shouldn’t be able to work at the local pizza parlor?

If you ask 24-year-old Roxborough mom Michaela Naughton, the answer is a resounding yes. Until two weeks ago, Naughton worked as a server at the new East Norriton location of Mister P Pizza & Pasta, where **** was her manager.

“When I first met him, I knew something wasn’t right,” says Naughton, a health management student at the local community college, who added that she never really got along with Laurenzi. “My dad was a cop for 33 years, and I just have a sense about these things. Being around it all the time, you pick up on it.”

Certainly, Naughton didn’t think that Laurenzi was a registered sex offender, but her persistent belief that something was amiss led her to Google his name.

And, voila.

Naughton saw the articles about Laurenzi’s crimes and also found his entry on Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law website, where Laurenzi is listed as a tier-three sex offender, the most serious classification. (The two charges that Laurenzi pleaded guilty to are actually lower-tier offenses, but Pennsylvania law states that anyone guilty of more than one lower tier offense is automatically on the third tier.)

With what she felt was damning information in hand, Naughton told her co-workers about their manager’s misdeeds, and she went to the owner of Mister P’s Pizza, Giuseppe “Joe” Piroso, to ask why a guy like Laurenzi would not only be working at Mister P’s but also in charge. And to her surprise, she says Piroso defended Laurenzi, explaining that he was well aware of his history and status as a registered sex offender.

Naughton continued to raise holy hell, and within a few days, she says that Piroso fired her, something he denies.

“I got fired because I found out information about the manager and tried to take control of the situation and do the right thing,” maintains Naughton.

She was quick to point out that there was at least one girl under the age of 18 working at Mister P’s as well as a constant stream of customers who are children and teens, and Naughton surmised that this must be in violation of Laurenzi’s restrictions as a tier-three sex offender. After all, many sex offenders found on the Pennsylvania Megan’s Law website are not allowed to have contact with minors.

SPONSORED CONTENT
Suggested: Vote Now For Your Favorite Real Philly Deli (Plus, Four You Need to Visit Today!)
But that’s actually not the case with Laurenzi, whose only restriction is that he is not allowed to have contact with the victim, as the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office confirms. He’s allowed to live where he wants and work where he wants, and neighbors do not get a notification of his conviction nor is Piroso required to tell his employees or customers about Laurenzi’s past.

Like with most criminal sentences, the restrictions and requirements facing a sex offender can vary greatly, and the law recognizes that there is a difference between a “sexually violent predator” — think of most of the defendants on Law & Order: SVU — and someone convicted of a crime like Laurenzi’s.

But Naughton doesn’t see much of a difference.

“I’m sorry but these kinds of people just don’t belong in our society,” she decrees. “They just don’t. Honestly, people like him should get 25 to life, if you’re going to violate a child like that. He knew he was doing something wrong. If anyone ever does that to my child, I will be sitting behind bars. I can guarantee you that.”

On the day that she says she was fired, Naughton took to a local community Facebook page to let Mister P’s Pizza have it, telling people her side of the story and pleading with them not to eat at Mister P’s anymore.

“I saw what she wrote, and I can’t believe she is being so mean,” Piroso told us when we asked him about Naughton’s post. “I didn’t even fire her.”

The way Piroso tells it, Naughton was a difficult employee and “had problems with everybody.” He says that in addition to her hellfire over Laurenzi, Naughton was always giving another server a hard time, and so when the situation regarding Laurenzi came to a head, he had a talk with her.

“I told her that if she kept insisting on causing trouble all the time, I would have to take her off the schedule for a while,” Piroso recalls of the conversation. “I try to build a nice environment and make sure that everybody is getting along, but you just can’t make all people happy.” (Naughton disputes Piroso’s account and insists that he fired her because of her complaints over the manager.)

As for Laurenzi, who did not return calls seeking comment, Piroso has known his family for years.

When the original press reports came out, Piroso says he couldn’t grasp the fact that it was really Laurenzi, whom he met when Laurenzi was in his teens.

“I couldn’t believe that it’s the same guy,” Piroso remembers.

After serving just five months of a nine- to 23-month sentence in county jail, Laurenzi became eligible for work release, and Piroso readily offered him a job at Mister P’s.

“We couldn’t be happier with him,” says Piroso. “He made a mistake, and he’s paying the price. He’s very easy to work with — unlike some people — and does a great job for us. I don’t know why she has to make such a big deal about the past.”

Naughton’s lock-’em-up-and-throw-away-the-key reaction may be overblown and unreasonable, but it’s certainly not uncommon. And with the information so readily available, as it is on Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law website, it’s hard to keep your past a secret if you’re a registered sex offender.

While reentry is difficult for any ex-convict, it is particularly difficult for sex offenders, who don’t seem to understand just how difficult life on the other side of a sex offense conviction is going to be, according to this 2012 study published on behalf of the Pennsylvania Prison Society. Finding housing and employment can be particularly challenging, and then there’s the stigma that never quite goes away once your neighbor finds out you are on the registry.

It’s commonly thought that sex offenders are highly likely to reoffend after reentering society, but that’s simply not the case. In fact, sex offenders are among the least likely to commit their crimes again. Still, the fear is real and enduring.

Taken to its extreme, the fear of sex offenders can lead to vigilante murder and disastrous scenarios like the one that played out in Miami, where a colony of dozens of sex offenders grew under a bridge, because they had nowhere else to go.

“I always try to help people and give them a second chance,” Piroso tells us. “I’m just trying to help him get his life back on track. If we don’t open up ourselves to people like that, is it really any good to have them living on the street?”

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Cheesehead sheriff David Beth actively protests the right of registrant to live in his county

It should come as no surprise that a sheriff who actively protests a registered citizen has a problem with dishonesty and the typical backscratching associated with redneck sheriffs. This pig claims he can't trust DHS on registrant placement, but who can trust a biased sheriff abusing his power?

http://www.cbs58.com/story/32090029/sheriff-joins-neighbors-in-protesting-sex-offender-placement

Sheriff Joins Neighbors in Protesting Sex Offender Placement
Posted: May 28, 2016 9:48 PM EDT
Updated: May 28, 2016 9:48 PM EDT
By Evan Kruegel

At Mark Rogers' rural Wheatland home, the signs in the front yard say it all: "No Violent Sexual Predators".

     "It's 75 feet from my house, that they're trying to place a sex offender."

That offender is 53-year-old Michael McGee, twice convicted of sexual assault, including the assault of a 10-year-old. According to Sheriff David Beth, the state's Department of Health Services chose the Kenosha County location for McGee, because there was no room in Racine County, where he lives. 

     "We're all on board with making sure Mr. McGee finds a safe place to go, but it's not in Kenosha," says Beth. "Find a place for him in Racine."

Sheriff Beth joined a handful of picketers outside Rogers' home Saturday, one day after he made headlines for questioning the honesty of DHS.

In a letter sent to every Sheriff in the state, Sheriff Beth writes "I have no faith DHS will be honest to any of our departments in the placement of Violent Sex Offenders."

Sheriff Beth says his department was told a different sex offender, classified as non-violent would be the one residing next to Rogers. That's when he says the state pulled a switch, without telling anyone involved.

     "This is a major concern to the people of Kenosha," he says. 

Rogers says he'll continue to fight the ruling. If McGee moves in, he says he'll have to move.

     "We just want it to stop," he says. "I don't want to have to move from my home, and I don't think I should have to." 


Sunday, May 22, 2016

Tim Fisher, sock puppet for Watch Systems, claims each person on the list has at least one victim

Just who the hell is Tim Fisher? He is a schmuck from Nevada who is on a one man crusade to prove the registry is inaccurate (which helps the anti-registry movement since this is proof the registry is worthless, but don't tell this guy that). In the article below, Tim Fisher is really fishing when he claims everyone on the registry has at least one victim or survivor (which means the same thing, by the way). This reminds me so much of that Dr Drew argument I had with Leo Terrell. Some folks on the registry have no victims, such as the teens who are on the list for having relations with each other, or that FloriDUH couple having sex on the beach. This guy is just plain stupid. (Anyone who still believes the debunked "100,000 missing sex offender" myth is a bona fide idiot.)

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/crime/2016/05/21/south-carolina-sex-offender-registry-issues/83226592/

Issues arise with South Carolina sex offender registry

 Romando Dixson, rdixson@greenvillenews.com 7:02 p.m. EDT May 21, 2016

After experiencing issues with the new sex offender registry software, several counties decided to use a paid subscription service to supplement the state's mandated option.


Victims of sexual assault and anyone else who monitors South Carolina's sex offender registry may be viewing false information, The Greenville News found during a review of the state's sex offender registry.

The uncertainty arose as the state transitioned to new tracking software this year. In addition to misleading information, the state inadvertently published juvenile sex offender information online for nearly two weeks when the new system was rolled out.

Months into the changeover, The Greenville News found intrastate and interstate discrepancies in sex offender data, revealing a lack of communication between jurisdictions.

It’s a chilling feeling when a victim sees conflicting information about their molester, said Tim Fisher, a Nevada resident who is a survivor of sexual assault and an advocate for victims. How is someone supposed to know which information is correct?

“Why scare me?” Fisher said. “When there’s an offender who’s listed as absconder in one state and compliant in another, nine times out of 10, your victim, your survivor, is not going to look at the other record. They’re going to see the one red flag, and they’re going to freak. These are mothers. These are kids like myself who grew up and are literally afraid of what our abusers can do because we know what they did do.”

The State Law Enforcement Division defended the accuracy of the new system, blaming discrepancies on sex offenders who failed to properly register with law enforcement.

SLED Chief Mark Keel said the inconsistencies could be found in any state.

“It’s only as good as what information gets put in it,” Keel said.

The root of the problem

Until this year, South Carolina was among 21 states that used OffenderWatch to track sex offenders, according to Watch Systems, the company that provides OffenderWatch.

Once the state's business relationship dissolved with OffenderWatch, SLED mandated that starting this year every South Carolina county use the Sex Offender Registry Tool (SORT), a free application provided by the Department of Justice.

Within weeks of using SORT and encountering various issues, multiple counties agreed to a contract with OffenderWatch, a paid subscription service that previously was in effect statewide.

“And now we have a problem,” Fisher said. “Because now we have the state system, which does not communicate with the other systems.”

Keel said the state never would've left the previous vendor “if we had a system that we felt worked and was efficient and was accurate.”

“I wasn’t going to be allowed as an agency head to be held hostage by a vendor who can go up on me, increase my cost, at any time they want to and there’s nothing I can do about it,” Keel said.

The counties using SORT and OffenderWatch must update the systems separately.

Spartanburg, Anderson, Richland, Berkeley, Darlington, Dillon and Horry counties continue to use OffenderWatch for various reasons, said Joe Gauthier, director of client services for Watch Systems. The counties signed contracts based on population, adding an expense they didn't have when the state paid for OffenderWatch. Spartanburg, Richland and Horry counties paid $6,375 for a one-year contract, according to Gauthier. Darlington, Anderson and Berkeley counties paid $4,250, while Dillon County signed a $1,025 contract, Gauthier said.

The counties that resumed using OffenderWatch said productivity and efficiency dropped without it because many of the processes were automated, Gauthier said.

“Deputies were taken out of the communities and forced into a manual data entry role,” Gauthier said.

A benefit of OffenderWatch is that when a sex offender record is updated, the system updates the file in real time for every client in the OffenderWatch network, which includes 3,500 local, state and federal law enforcement agencies throughout the country. Most states in the Southeast, including North Carolina, Tennessee and Georgia, have statewide contracts with OffenderWatch, according to the company’s website.

Although SORT is a government application, SLED employs a programmer who builds the system, adds state-specific functionalities and addresses issues.

SLED said SORT also updates information immediately and has done so since it was implemented here. Gauthier said this does not happen with SORT.

The Horry County Sheriff's Office concurred with Watch Systems’ assessment and renewed its OffenderWatch contract “while some of the issues with the SORT program are being worked out,” Sgt. Sherri Smith told The News.

“At the time we renewed our contract, our greatest concern was the ability to update the website in real time,” Smith said in an email.

The Anderson County Sheriff's Office uses every available tool to keep track of sex offenders, Lt. Sheila Cole said.

“That being said, we continue to use Offender Watch in addition to SORT because it provides functionality that allows us to more easily identify offenders who fail to register,” Cole told The News. “Also, Offender Watch allows us to perform searches based on a suspect description. It also provides our investigators (in the field) the ability to remotely verify and update the status of an offender."

SLED said SORT can perform searches based on descriptions but does not have the other two functions within SORT that Cole mentioned.

Keel said major advantages with SORT are: SLED maintains the database, can customize the software to South Carolina laws and create functionalities the sheriffs want. However, some of the customized options and improvements will take time to implement.

“When I talked with the sheriffs, I told them it would take us a year to get everything fully functional the way we wanted it to make the improvements,” Keel said, adding that counties have reported that system is efficient and easy to operate.

Any problems this year were “nothing more than what you would normally expect any time you change from one system to another,” SLED spokesman Thom Berry said.

However, the state had to deal with a new problem.

A data conversion issue caused information for juvenile sex offenders, more than 900 in the state, to be available for about 12 days in January, Berry said. The names, pictures, birth dates, addresses and physical descriptions — the same information available for adult offenders — was published. Oconee County authorities notified SLED, and state staff resolved the issue on Jan. 14, state officials said.

How the registry works

More than 15,000 individuals are labeled as sex offenders in the South Carolina registry, according to SLED records.

An individual is considered a sex offender in South Carolina if convicted of certain crimes, including, but not limited to: criminal sexual conduct, incest, peeping and voyeurism. Kidnapping and trafficking in persons, depending on the details of the case, may also land a person on the sex offender registry.

A judge has discretion to determine if someone found urinating in public would be required to register.

A South Carolina sex offender is required to register biannually for life, during the person's birthday month and six months later, according to state law. Some offenders are required to register every three months.

Sex offender registries exist, in part, to help the victims and communities keep track of offenders in their neighborhoods. The registries also serve as a tool for law enforcement.

The information on the South Carolina registry comes from local sheriff's offices, Berry said.

Laura Hudson, the executive director of South Carolina Crime Victims Council, described the state's sex offender registry as a "passive" system, meaning it's up to residents to find the information. It is important for the public to be diligent, she said, because sex offenders sometimes can move here from another state and "we don't know it."

The sex offender registry is a good tool for law enforcement, but is not the "end all and be all of safety," Hudson said.

"As far as I know, the material that is on SLED, I've never had anybody claim that it wasn't accurate," Hudson said. "I have had people say I know somebody that's a sex offender and they're not on there."

Some discrepancies

The News, by checking the different websites, confirmed multiple instances in the Upstate in which data for a sex offender conflicted with the information of other states. A review also found sex offenders listed as noncompliant or not registered in a county but compliant on the state’s registry, creating confusion rooted in the fact that there are two different systems.

Fisher also found multiple instances in which data for an offender did not match up across state lines, including in Greenville County. One man, for example, was labeled as an absconder in Greenville County but compliant in North Carolina. In this case, the Sheriff's Office said it was aware of the individual registering in North Carolina. The South Carolina registry was updated after The News questioned the discrepancy.

“We are responsible for offenders in our county,” the Greenville County Sheriff's Office said in a statement, “and we periodically audit our non-compliant offenders to see if we can locate and verify that they are compliant in another state. We encourage anyone who has a question or concern regarding an offender to contact Beverly Pettit at 864-467-5192. The Greenville County Sheriff’s Office investigates every tip and complaint that comes into our office regarding sex offenders.”

In one example, a man is listed as noncompliant and incarcerated on Spartanburg County's OffenderWatch site. The confusion arises when the information is checked against the state registry. The SLED site does not indicate the sex offender is an absconder, or noncompliant, because he's in jail, Berry said. But the state website also does not have a section to show that the sex offender is incarcerated, Berry said.

"It should be showing the address where the individual is incarcerated," Berry said. "If it does not, then that could be something the folks at the local departments can address."

Fisher found multiple cases involving inconsistent information between Spartanburg County and the state registry.

“When they’re compliant and noncompliant in the same state, that should not happen,” Fisher said.

Users also may be confused because SORT and OffenderWatch have different formats.

"We went back to using OffenderWatch in conjunction with SORT at the beginning of February, which our agency pays for, because we felt like it is easier to read and is more user friendly,” Spartanburg County Lt. Kevin Bobo said in an email.

In another example, a man is listed as noncompliant in Spartanburg County and an absconder on the state registry. So the data matches within the state, although the verbiage is different. That person, however, is registered and compliant in Georgia, according to the national registry. A victim may wonder which one is correct.

Fisher said he did not notice these issues when South Carolina used OffenderWatch.

Fisher, who lives in Las Vegas, has audited sex offender registries nationwide for about six years. He says there is no method for how he chooses a state to audit. He may see something online or someone may bring an issue to his attention via Facebook.

He said he has built a rapport with the Department of Public Safety in Nevada. He sends them tips about registered sex offenders who are noncompliant in Nevada but compliant in another state. The state researches the tip and contacts the proper jurisdiction.

“They know my track record is impeccable,” Fisher said. “The hard part is getting law enforcement in other jurisdictions to accept that. Law enforcement, most often, believes that they're correct 100 percent.”

More than 800,000 sex offenders are registered in the United States, according to Parents For Megan's Law and The Crime Victims Center, a nonprofit organization committed to prevention and treatment of child sexual abuse and rape. Fisher said he has provided more than 900 tips to law enforcement nationwide.

​Fisher said law enforcement agencies need to do a better job communicating across state lines and with the offenders, especially when it appears they are trying to do the right thing.

“I’m thinking it’s a major flaw in that we’re not telling these offenders exactly what they have to do,” Fisher said.  “If you’re trying to hide, you’re not going to register where you’re going. But the jurisdictions don’t communicate.”

Berry said SLED has the means to communicate with every state in the nation.

"We use SORT exchange to communicate with the other states, so, yes we do have that linkage," he said. "It's just not within SORT itself, but we do have the SORT exchange that we do use to communicate state to state."

Fisher said if the state websites have conflicting information then people cannot protect their children and they question the accuracy of the information.

“Each one of these offenders represents at least one victim,” Fisher said. “I was a victim for seven years when I was kid. Two other victims were found after I made my report, which meant that my offender took three kids over the course of 12 years and molested them. Each one of these offenders represents a victim or a survivor, depending on where that person is in their life right now. I know we use these tools, the sex offender registries, because we want to know where our bad guys are. It's not just for concerned parents living in this neighborhood or that neighborhood.

Friday, May 6, 2016

Only Leo Terrell could be such a douchecanal that even the audience is cheering for a registered citizen

Leo Terrell Hears No Facts
I've been on HLN a half-dozen times now (5 times on Dr Drew and once when Kyra Phillips had her own show), and if there is one thing I have learned is that I am expected to be treated like crap by at least one guest on the show (and maybe some grumbling about me being on the show after it is over). I usually even get a hater or two. Yes I know I take a lot of crap but it is fun and I get a little exposure and credibility. 

So for the May 4 Dr Drew appearance, I was unfortunate to share airtime with Leo Terrell, a "civil rights attorney" affiliated with Black Lives Matter and is a family friend to OJ Simpson. (Dr. Drew stated he was a "judge," but I don't know if that is accurate or not). I expected he would be more understanding of the injustices of the registry, but I couldn't have been more wrong. Well, just see for yourself....



The funny thing is, I've gotten a lot of support from people who dislike this judge. Apparently, telling Leo Terrell to "stick it" was a good thing. 

I'm not used to being the "good guy" on Dr Drew but Leo Terrell is such a douchebag that I got calls from folks thanking me for telling him off. 

Thursday, April 28, 2016

First it was Mark Foley, now it is Dennis Hastert. Who else used the Adam Walsh Act as a cover-up for their own



I'm really hoping John Walsh is the next to fall. It seems that the AWA has been used a lot to cover up a lot of sexual improprieties. Dennis Hastert recently got 15 months for paying off someone he allegedly touched decades ago.

http://www.ibtimes.com/dennis-hastert-promoted-himself-crusader-against-sexual-abuse-children-1944886

Dennis Hastert Promoted Himself As Crusader Against Sexual Abuse of Children
BY DAVID SIROTA @DAVIDSIROTA AND MATTHEW CUNNINGHAM-COOK @MATTCUNNINGHAMC ON 05/29/15 AT 6:10 PM

Nine years before being indicted on financial charges -- reportedly an attempt to cover up sexual misconduct involving a male high school student -- Dennis Hastert spent his last few months as House speaker alternately promoting himself as a defender of child welfare and fending off accusations that he helped cover up another Republican's gay sexual misconduct scandal.

In July 2006, shortly before Democrats won the midterm congressional elections and ended his speakership, Hastert spearheaded a bill to toughen punishments for sex crimes against children. The legislation, named after the abducted and murdered Florida boy Adam Walsh, passed the Republican-controlled House unanimously. In a statement at the time, Hastert said protecting children from predators was as high a priority for him as national security -- this, post-9/11 and during two wars.

"At home, we put the security of our children first, and Republicans are doing just that in our nation's House,” he said. “We've all seen the disturbing headlines about sex offenders and crimes against children. These crimes cannot persist. Protecting our children from Internet predators and child exploitation enterprises are just as high a priority as securing our border from terrorists.”

The biography of the former speaker at the website of Wheaton College's Hastert Center for Economics, Government, and Public Policy states that during his three terms in the Illinois Legislature, Hastert "spearheaded legislation on child abuse prevention." During his 20-year congressional career, Hastert supported legislative initiatives to deter and punish sexual abuse of minors, including the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Amendments of 1996, the Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act of 2000 and the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

In his press release touting the last initiative, Hastert specifically touted its provisions “improving sex offender registration and notification programs, enhancing law enforcement resources, preventing child exploitation, stopping child pornography and creating new criminal offense penalties protecting children from the Internet.”

Among the members of Congress who publicly thanked Hastert for championing the bill was Florida Republican Mark Foley. Only months later, Foley’s sexually suggestive text messages to underage congressional male pages would become a scandal for Hastert, who some say ignored the situation and did not take fast enough disciplinary action.

In that sordid affair, some congressional Republicans suggested that Hastert did not adequately respond to concerns -- long raised privately -- about Foley’s behavior. A former Foley aide said that long before the allegations became public, he alerted “senior staff at the highest level of the House of Representatives asking them to intervene,” but Hastert’s office did not respond. Hastert denied that accusation, but later acknowledged that his office had been contacted about the matter a year before it became a public scandal.

House Majority Leader (now Speaker) John Boehner, R-Ohio, also said he told Hastert about the allegations earlier in the year (Boehner quickly retracted his own statement). Hastert was forced to answer ethics committee questions, and was criticized by then-Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., over his handling of the matter. The conservative Washington Times called for Hastert to resign.

Hastert did find one high-profile backer during the scandal: President George W. Bush. In comments to reporters, Bush declared: "I know that he wants all the facts to come out and he wants to ensure that these children up there on Capitol Hill are protected. I'm confident he will provide whatever leadership he can to law enforcement in this investigation."

On Friday evening Speaker Boehner released a statement saying, "The Denny I served with worked hard on behalf of his constituents and the country. I'm shocked and saddened to learn of these reports." 

Saturday, April 23, 2016

Bipolar Kansas Supreme Court states the registry is punishment then states it is not punishment in four conflicting decisions published at the same time

So apparently, three cases ruled the registry is punitive (aka punishment), later in the day, there was an apparent shift change, and the majority of justices now become the minority and now the registry is NOT punishment. So ultimately the last case applies to everyone but the first three cases only apply to the people in those cases. Confused? Well, so am I. Hell, I'm not even sure I completely get it.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article73328242.html

Final case declares lifetime registration for sex offenders is not an additional punishment
 The Kansas Supreme Court
The Kansas Supreme Court
BY TONY RIZZO
trizzo@kcstar.com

In an apparently unprecedented series of events, the Kansas Supreme Court on Friday overruled three of its own opinions, also released Friday, regarding the state’s sex offender registration laws.

In three separate opinions issued Friday, the court found 2011 changes to the sex offender registry law cannot be applied retroactively to offenders convicted before the law took effect.

But then in a fourth opinion, also released Friday, the court found that those rulings were incorrect.

Attorneys across the state said they couldn’t recall a situation where the court reversed itself in rulings issued on the same day.

“We continue to study today’s peculiar group of Kansas Supreme Court decisions involving the offender registration act,” Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt said in a written statement. “In the coming days, we will endeavor to discern what the court actually has done and will assess all options for next steps.”

The highly unusual circumstance appear to be the result of a one-justice change in the makeup of the court.

The panel that decided the three cases concerning the 2011 changes included a senior district court judge, who sided with the majority in the 4-3 decisions. That interim judge was serving on the court while there was a vacancy.

But for the fourth case, the newest Supreme Court justice, Caleb Stegall, replaced the district court judge. That case also was decided 4-3, with Stegall casting the deciding vote.

The three justices who were part of the majority in the first three opinions became the minority in the fourth opinion.

The upshot was a finding that the Kansas law requiring lifetime registration for convicted sex offenders did not constitute additional punishment for a crime.

Therefore, the law does not violate federal or Kansas constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment, the court ruled in that fourth case.

In the three other cases, the court ruled that the law did constitute an additional punishment and said offenders convicted of crimes before 2011 could not have their 10-year registration periods extended to 25 years because the 25-year law took effect after they committed their crimes.

But those rulings apparently apply only to those three offenders.

Others will be governed by the fourth ruling Friday.

“While I’m happy that my client may get relief, it’s unfortunate that others similarly situated will not,” said attorney Meryl Carver-Allmond, who represented one of the men covered by the rulings on the 2011 law change.

She said it was “ludicrous” to say that the offender registry requirement is not punishment.

“The court had it right in the first instance,” said Carver-Allmond. “And it’s disappointing that the recent change in personnel steered them off course.”

Jeff Dazey, the attorney for one of the other men covered by the opinions in the 2011 law change, said he was “pleased, disappointed and somewhat perplexed” by the rulings.

“Virtually every year the Kansas legislature has modified the law to make registration more difficult and more expensive, while simultaneously increasing the penalties for failing to register and increasing the time that a person has to register,” Dazey said. “I firmly believe that applying these draconian terms and conditions on people whose initial registration duties expired is unconstitutional.”

Christopher Joseph, attorney for the third man covered by the 2011 change in the law, said it was an area of the law that is evolving.

Joseph said he “has little doubt” that courts across the country, including the U.S. Supreme Court, will ultimately agree that offender registration laws are “punitive.”

Friday, April 22, 2016

Today's Holy Shiitakes! nominee is brought to us by the letter C for Cookies, Cops, and Crap journalism

Also, C stands for a certain word that is an acronym for someone who Can't Understand Normal Thinking. Just how is someone "potentially" suspicious, anyways? Everyone has the potential to be suspicious-- the cops, the reporter, even the kid who made this claim.

http://www.cbs58.com/story/31552089/potentially-suspicious-man-asks-girls-about-buying-girl-scout-cookies

Potentially Suspicious Man Asks Girls about Buying Girl Scout Cookies
Posted: Mar 23, 2016 8:30 PM EDT
Updated: Mar 23, 2016 8:30 PM EDT
By Christie GreenCONNECT



Caledonia Police Department notified residents that a man suspiciously was asking two girls if they were selling Girl Scout cookies on Tuesday.

“As the intentions of the male are not known, and may in fact be nothing more than what it seems on face value, his actions were suspicious enough for him to contact his police department. Since we were not able to speak with the driver, we do not know if his intentions were as innocent as they appear to be or a ruse for something different,” said the Caledonia Police Department in a release.

The father of the two girls reported the incident occurred on Tuesday around 4:45 PM in the 4400 block of West Johnson Ave.

Two girls, ages 7-years-old and 11-years-old, were standing at the end of a driveway.

A red Ford Ranger, extended cab with stickers in the back window stopped in the street and the driver, a dark haired white man asked the girls if they were selling Girl Scout Cookies.

The girls said they were not and the subject left the scene.

This incident was witnesses by the father of the two girls who reported the incident to us.

“We are letting the public know what happened so this can be a teaching incident for the families of our community. Please remind your children how to handle contact with strangers when they are approached,” said Caledonia Police Department.

 If you have had an incident like this police are encouraging  you to contact 886-2300.

Saturday, April 16, 2016

Tina Dionne of East Millinocket, Maine reminds us that the registry is not really so much about public safety as public shaming and vengeance


Tina's Shiitake-worthy quote: “I didn’t care how much prison time he got. I wanted him to be on the list for life...No matter where he goes, people are going to have to know what he did. The sex offender registry helps people be aware of what people like him have done. They can’t just take off to another state and start over. That has to follow them.”

She just admitted she wants the registry to be a tool for vengeance, and to me, that is Shiitake-Worthy.

http://bangordailynews.com/2016/04/15/news/state/this-sex-assault-victim-says-the-offender-registry-listing-is-more-important-to-her-than-prison-time/

This sex assault victim says the offender registry listing is more important to her than prison time

By Judy Harrison, BDN Staff
Posted April 15, 2016, at 9:54 p.m.

For Tina Dionne, it’s more important for the man who sexually assaulted her as a child to register as a sex offender than serve time in prison.

Dionne was abused by her uncle, Clarence Cote, who is now 67. He was sentenced in March 2014 to 10 years in prison with all but five years suspended, but could be released from the Maine State Prison as early as June. Once released, he must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

“I didn’t care how much prison time [Cote] got,” Dionne, 33, of East Millinocket said. “I wanted him to be on the list for life. I don’t want him to be able to do this to anyone else.”

Dionne said Cote’s registration also will let her to keep track of him.

“I grew up in a time when you didn’t deal with sexual abuse — you swept it under the rug,” she said. “I have been very open with my own children.”

And as a parent, Dionne has used the registry to see how close sex offenders live to her. She told her children to avoid a neighbor after East Millinocket police notified residents in January 2015 that a registrant who had been convicted of possessing child pornography was living in their neighborhood.

That man, she said, was Philip Fournier, 55, who was arrested last month for the murder of 16-year-old Joyce McLain in East Millinocket in 1980. He is being held without bail at the Penobscot County Jail.

Dionne’s opinion of the registry is crystal clear.

“No matter where [Cote] goes, people are going to have to know what he did,” she said. “The sex offender registry helps people be aware of what people like him have done. They can’t just take off to another state and start over. That has to follow them.”

Friday, April 8, 2016

Washington's dope-smoking state Sup Ct rules in favor of vigilante troll Donna Zink of 109 N. Rowell Ave., Mesa WA 99343



It apparently does not matter that Donna Zink is violating state law by disclosing the public info, the state Sup Ct feels level ones have no rights. Looks to me like the Court has been hitting the legal weed a bit too much.

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Justices-Records-of-low-level-sex-offenders-are-7234710.php

Justices: Records of low-level sex offenders are public
Published 12:11 pm, Thursday, April 7, 2016

OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — Washington's Supreme Court says information about low-level sex offenders can be released under the state Public Records Act.

The 7-1 decision Thursday overturns a King County Superior Court holding that found the records were not subject to disclosure. The ruling came in a case involving Donna Zink, a Franklin County woman who requested a copy of the Washington State Patrol's sex-offender database.

The state patrol planned to release the records, but some Level 1 sex-offenders sued, arguing that state law blocked the release of their records. Level 1 comprises those deemed least likely to reoffend. Some of the Level 1 sex offenders were convicted as juveniles and had molested family members, and they argued that releasing the information would make it easy to identify their victims.

But the court disagreed, saying there was no exemption under the Public Records Act that would block the release.

The court decision can be found here:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/904138.pdf

One thing I noticed is that Donna Zink is using a PO Box to file her complaints. (Apparently, she doesn't even like showing up to court in person.) I guess she doesn't want HER personal info out there, eh? But, in the interest of fairness, here is Donna Zink's personal info:
Donna Zink
PO Box 263
Mesa, WA 99343
509-265-4417
dzink@centurytel.net

Last Known Home Address:

109 N. Rowell Ave.
Mesa, WA 99343

Guess Donna forgot to redact one of those letters she was willing to share. Oopsies!

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByllKq5S8CniNHpuSDRGSTNiY2c&usp=sharing

Map of 109 N Rowell Ave, Mesa, WA 99343

Thursday, April 7, 2016

Pasco Co FL sheriff Chris Nocco violates a court order not to harass registrants suing his goons in court then denies it


Some registrants decided to sue the county over residency restriction laws, so this corrupt piece of trash sent out his goons to harass the registrants to dissuade them from continuing with the lawsuit, even AFTER a judge warned them not to. This pig should be held in contempt of court. 


Lawyer suing Pasco County wants Sheriff Chris Nocco held in contempt; sheriff calls allegations "baseless"
Josh Solomon, Times Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 5, 2016 4:47pm

An attorney wants a judge to find Pasco Sheriff Chris Nocco in contempt of a court order protecting sex offenders who are suing the county from being harassed by Nocco's deputies.

The contempt motion was filed by defense attorney Patrick Leduc on Tuesday, one day after a deputy visited one of the sex offenders who joined Leduc's lawsuit. The attorney called the deputy's visit "intimidation" that amounted to "a threat."

Nocco said the allegations are "completely baseless." The Pasco County Sheriff's Office says it was just doing its job, routinely checking on sex offenders who are on probation.

Leduc is suing the county on behalf of three sex offenders to overturn a 2015 ordinance that severely restricts where certain newly classified sex offenders can live in Pasco County.

The attorney's latest motion asks a judge to hold Nocco in contempt for violating an order issued March 30 that barred county personnel, including sheriff's deputies, from contacting the sex offenders suing the county or offering them legal advice.

The protective order was issued last week after Leduc complained that two deputies visited a sex offender on March 15 and tried to dissuade him from joining the lawsuit.

Leduc asserts in his latest motion that patrol Deputy Peter Collazo violated the protective order on Monday. The deputy visited Scott Wright, 42, a sex offender and plaintiff in the lawsuit against the county.

"We are going to be seeing you a lot more often based on recent events," the deputy told Wright, according to Leduc's contempt motion.

However, sheriff's spokesman Kevin Doll said the deputy never mentioned the lawsuit or the county ordinance during his visit. Patrol deputies like Collazo routinely conduct checks on probationers and sex offenders.

Luke Lirot, an attorney hired by Pasco County to defend the ordinance, said the judge's order does not prevent deputies from doing police work, such as monitoring sex offenders.

"So, any conversation that does not discuss the case," Lirot said, "even one including pointed frivolities or harsh statements of opinion, would not violate the order as I read it."

The Sheriff's Office sent footage from Collazo's body camera to the Tampa Bay Times to show that the deputy did nothing out of line.

The video shows Collazo walk up to Wright's house and ask to see his driver's license.

"I don't know if anybody's told your or not," Collazo told Wright, "they're having patrol deputies now step up a little bit and make more contact."

In the video, Wright said his most recent visit from a deputy took place a month ago.

"I don't mind," Wright told the deputy. "The only thing I ask of you guys is … just be cool with my kids."

"There's been a lot of unfortunate situations that have occurred that have prompted this," Collazo told Wright, then specifically referred to two incidents: when John Jonchuck threw his 5-year-old daughter, Pheobe, off the approach to the Sunshine Skyway bridge in January 2015; and when 11-year-old Janiya Thomas was found dead in a padlocked freezer in Bradenton in October. Neither incident, however, involved sex offenders.

Doll said the Sheriff's Office has gone above and beyond what the state requires to check on sex offenders.

"The worst thing that can happen is for something horrible to happen because of a lack of supervision," Doll said.

The deputy and Wright spoke for about four minutes, then shook hands. Leduc's motion said the deputy spent 15 minutes with his client.

Leduc is suing Pasco to challenge the constitutionality of a new ordinance that prohibits certain sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, child care facilities, parks, playgrounds and libraries. It's more than twice as restrictive as the state's 1,000-foot limit.

Lawyer suing Pasco County wants Sheriff Chris Nocco held in contempt; sheriff calls allegations "baseless" 04/05/16 [Last modified: Tuesday, April 5, 2016 9:53pm]