Friday, February 17, 2017

Nebraska LB 60 would require registrants dating someone with kids to send humiliating letters to baby mammas/ baby daddys to warm them their exes are dating registrants

LB 60 should be reported to the Manure hotline
If I'm willing to travel a thousand miles to testify against a bill, it is definitely Shiitake-worthy.

LB 60 is promoted by third-string Huskers QB turned third-string Senator Brat Lindstrom. I find this bill to be full of manure, and as it turns out, Nebraska has a manure spill hotline. So maybe I can get them to clean up this bill.

http://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/105/PDF/Intro/LB60.pdf

A BILL FOR AN ACT relating to the Parenting Act; to amend section 43-2933, Reissue Revised Statutes of Nebraska; to change provisions relating to limitation or denial of custody or access to a child; and to repeal the original section.

(b) No person shall be granted custody of, or unsupervised parenting time, visitation, or other access with, a child if anyone residing in the person's household is required to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act as a result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor or for an offense that would make it contrary to the best interests of the child for such access unless the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the person seeking such access has overcome the presumption and burdens of production and persuasion in subdivision (1)(c) of this section and that there is no significant risk to the child and states its reasons in writing or on the record. Any person who has been granted custody of, or unsupervised parenting time, visitation, or other access with a child must provide written notice to all other persons who have custody or access rights to the child before such person allows any sex offender described in this subdivision to reside in such person’s household or to have unsupervised access to the child.
(c) The fact that a child is permitted unsupervised contact with a person who is required, as a result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor, to be registered as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act shall be prima facie evidence that the child is at significant risk and such unsupervised contact shall be presumed to not be in the child’s best interests. The person who is seeking to allow such unsupervised contact shall have the burden of production and the burden of persuasion that such unsupervised contact is in the child’s best interests. 

http://update.legislature.ne.gov/?p=20677

Judge’s ok suggested before sex offender access to children
 February 9, 2017 Sen. Brett Lindstrom, LB60

Members of the Judiciary Committee heard testimony Feb. 9 on a bill that would provide stronger protections for children against registered sex offenders.

Under LB60, introduced by Omaha Sen. Brett Lindstrom, registered sex offenders found guilty of felony child sexual abuse would not be allowed unsupervised parental access to a child unless a judge finds that the adult presents no significant risk to the child.

Lindstrom said a recent Nebraska Supreme Court decision found that a father could not prevent his child from living in the same home as his ex-wife’s new husband, a registered sex offender.

He said LB60 would shift the burden of proof to the person seeking to allow unsupervised contact with a child to show that such contact would be in the child’s best interest.

“[The bill] reaffirms a strong public policy that we must protect our children and provides more guidance to our judicial branch to protect them,” he said.

Written notice also must be provided to all other persons with custody or access rights before a registered sex offender would be allowed to have unsupervised access or reside in the same home as a child.

Stephanie Huddle, representing the Nebraska Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, testified in support of the bill. She said 34 percent of sexual abuse is perpetrated by family members and can have long-lasting effects on children.

“Children who are sexually abused may develop phobias, suffer from nightmares and engage in regressive behaviors,” she said. “[LB60] would ensure additional safeguards for Nebraska children and peace of mind for their parents.”

Opposing the bill was Derek Logue, an anti-registry activist and registered sex offender. As a group, he said, sex offenders have low rates of recidivism.

“The written notification requirement seems to be more about humiliation than personal safety,” he said. “Those who share my label are assumed guilty until proven innocent. How can anyone reasonably expect a registered citizen to meet such a burden when society is so quick to believe the worst about such people?”

The committee took no immediate action on the bill.

Sunday, February 5, 2017

Oh, SNAP! Leader of SNAP resigns amid lawsuit over exploiting abuse "survivors"

This perp needs jail, too
And to think some of you folks dared to criticize me over the use of the term VICTIM INDUSTRY. So SNAP has **ahem** "allegedly" been exploiting their clients by sending them to their special lawyers in exchange for some kickbacks? Why am I not surprised? I wouldn't be shocked if SNAP also coached folks into telling stories that may be complete fabrications.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-snap-barbara-blaine-resignation-20170204-story.html

Barbara Blaine, leader of priest sex-abuse survivors group, steps down
Feb. 4, 2017
Chicago Tribune staff

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests told its volunteers on Saturday that its president and founder has resigned.

Barbara Blaine, who also describes herself as a survivor, founded the group in Chicago nearly three decades ago. Her resignation, effective Friday, comes a week after SNAP announced the departure of its national director David Clohessy, effective Dec. 31, 2016.

Both were named in a lawsuit filed in Cook County last month by a former SNAP employee, accusing the leaders of referring potential clients to attorneys in return for financial kickbacks to the group.

But Blaine said her leaving had nothing to do with the suit and "no bearing'' on her leaving.

Blaine, who describes herself as a survivor, expressed gratitude for her supporters in an emailed statement.

"It has been the greatest honor of my life to have found and been your president for the past 29 years. Change however is inevitable," Blaine said in the statement.

Mary Ellen Kruger, who is on the SNAP board, said in an emailed statement they are "grateful for her 29 years of leadership."

“Her contribution to the survivors movement is unsurpassed. Her tenacity and fortitude helped expose abuse globally during the past three decades. We will carry on her vision of SNAP as we grow in new ways to better meet the needs of survivors coming forward today and in the future. We wish Barbara the best," Kruger said in the statement.

It was a horrible feeling twenty-nine years ago," Blaine said in the statement. "Church officials would not keep their promises. My perpetrator remained in ministry but more importantly, I felt such immense pain that I was not sure I could continue to live," Blaine said. 

“I knew there were other survivors out there and wondered if they felt the same debilitating hurt and if so, how they coped with it. I thought they might hold the wisdom I lacked. I looked for other survivors and asked if they would be willing to talk.

"Somewhere in the past twenty-nine years you got involved and I want to thank you for doing so. To be honest, my heart is overflowing with gratitude to each of you. Words fail to express the extent of how grateful I feel," Blaine said in the statement.

Barbara Dorris, SNAP’s outreach director, has become the managing director, according to SNAP. The group said Dorris will work closely with the board of directors to continue to engage the group's volunteer leadership nationwide to help more survivors of sexual abuse and assault, and to stop further abuse, according to the statement.

Blaine and Dorris are defendants, along with SNAP and Executive Director David Clohessy, in a lawsuit filed last month by a former employee. In that lawsuit, former director of development Gretchen Rachel Hammond says she was fired shortly after asking superiors whether SNAP was referring potential clients to attorneys in exchange for donations.

“Please know that the recent lawsuit filed against SNAP, as the others in the past which have no merit, had absolutely no bearing on my leaving. The discussions and process of my departure has been ongoing, Blaine said in the statement.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-snap-lawsuit-met-20170119-story.html

Ex-worker sues priest sex-abuse victims advocacy group, says it exploited survivors 
Manya Brachear Pashman
Chicago Tribune
1/17/17

A former employee of the Chicago-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests has sued the victims advocacy group, alleging that SNAP exploited victims of sexual abuse by clergy in return for financial kickbacks from attorneys.

According to a lawsuit filed this week in Cook County Circuit Court, Gretchen Rachel Hammond worked as a director of development from July 2011 until she said she was fired in February 2013, shortly after asking superiors whether SNAP was referring potential clients to attorneys in exchange for donations.

In addition to the organization, defendants named in the lawsuit are Barbara Blaine, its founder and president; David Clohessy, executive director; and Barbara Dorris, outreach director.

Blaine said in a statement that "the allegations are not true."

"This will be proven in court," she said. "SNAP leaders are now, and always have been, devoted to following the SNAP mission: To help victims heal and to prevent further sexual abuse."

Neither Clohessy nor Dorris could be reached for comment.

Though it did not name attorneys, the lawsuit said donations from several high-profile litigators across the country comprised a large percentage of SNAP's income.

Jeff Anderson, a prominent Minnesota attorney for victims of clergy sex abuse who was not named in the lawsuit, confirmed that he makes regular donations to SNAP, as well as other nonprofit organizations that advocate for the safety of children. But he said he does not do it in exchange for referrals.

"I have supported SNAP and a lot of other organizations that help survivors throughout the country, unapologetically," he said.

"The allegation is explosive because it's unethical," he added. "I've never done it nor would I ever do it."

According to the lawsuit, Hammond grew suspicious of SNAP's methods when she was not permitted to participate in an internal audit of SNAP by an accounting firm and was barred from attending survivors' meetings, group therapy sessions or counseling sessions to help generate material for grant proposals.

She also was given access to a list of lawyers who regularly donated to SNAP but was told to never tell anyone that lawyers donate to the organization, according to the lawsuit. At a news conference, Hammond said she raised more than $950,000 for SNAP during her 19 months there.

A Missouri judge ruled in 2012 to open more than two decades of correspondence with victims, lawyers, witnesses and journalists to shed light on whether SNAP had coached victims to fabricate claims of repressed memory.

Shortly after that, Hammond said, she was accidentally copied on an email from Clohessy to an attorney, asking when he could expect the next donation, the lawsuit said. It was then she began to ask questions and the workplace climate dramatically changed, she alleged in the lawsuit.

She said she began to collect evidence of what she believed to be a kickback scheme, copying reams of documents and downloading records on a flash drive she used to do work at home. When SNAP sent a volunteer to her apartment to collect the flash drive, she did not disclose that she had copied it, the lawsuit said. She was fired two days later, she said.

Though she decided not to go to authorities at the time, the movie "Spotlight" renewed her concerns and she sought legal counsel. Hammond alleges she could not find employment that paid as much as she made at SNAP and is seeking compensatory damages, attorney’s fees and expenses.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Dolce de bleche: Victim Cultist Michael Dolce doesn't believe in positive treatment programs

Oh great, it is yet another biased victim cultist spewing nonsensical tripe. As typical of victim cultists, he uses nominal & dubious "research" and statements of personal belief as "fact." He also makes bogus claims of high recidivism rates and the same tired myths of all registered persons being 'psychopathic," which is ironic considering that lawyers are the profession with the second highest rate of psychopaths within its ranks.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/crime/317111-say-no-to-restorative-justice-for-sex-offenders

Say no to restorative justice for sex offenders
BY MICHAEL DOLCE, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 01/31/17 03:00 PM EST  21

The debate around the Senate’s possible confirmation of Betsy DeVos, President-elect Trump’s nominee for Education Secretary, should kick start a national discussion on how colleges and universities handle sexual assault.

Recently, much of that conversation has revolved around “restorative justice,” programs that aim to respond to misconduct or crime by redressing the harm inflicted on victims and the community, rather than simply punishing offenders. 

As a victim of childhood sexual abuse myself and an attorney who now represents sexual assault survivors every day, I can say without doubt that restorative justice is not only horribly insufficient for handling sexual abuse but, in many cases, actually serves to leave an offender free to offend again.

Whether as an alternative or a supplement to traditional discipline, restorative justice programs require offenders to make amends with victims — often with apologies and mediation — and participate in reformative programs like anger management or cultural sensitivity training, measures rarely imposed by the criminal justice system. In an education setting, employing these programs for offenses like racial harassment and alcohol misuse have had some success, leading to understandable calls from some criminal justice reform advocates and college administrators to expand their use to college sexual misconduct cases.

It’s true that our colleges and universities routinely fail victims of sexual assault, as last year’s abhorrent handling of the Brock Turner case at Stanford University reminded us. It’s also true, as the Chicago Tribune reported late last month, that the future of campus sex assault investigations under President Trump are “uncertain,” particularly since GOP convention platform calls for a reduced federal government role in investigations of campus sexual assault.

But, for several important reasons, restorative justice is not the answer for handling sex offenders. First, this method only works if offenders feel empathy when confronted with the impact of their misconduct. 

According to prominent forensic psychology researchers Drs. Daryl Kroner and Adelle Forth, about half of convicted sex offenders exhibit psychopathology, meaning they are incapable of feeling remorse or empathizing with their victims. Sex offenders are often skilled at manipulating others into believing they are safe, which helps them gain their victims’ trust before attacking.

Imagine that same manipulation in a restorative justice program setting where the offender fools college administrators and the victim with fake remorse. College administrators, often despite their best intentions, do not have expert command over the dynamics of sex offenders and victim behavior and shouldn’t be entrusted with safe and effective use of restorative justice programs for sex-based offenses.

Second, advocates for restorative justice programs in this context often make the flawed assumption that sex offenders are similar to repeat offenders of other habitual offenses like drunk driving. 

But while underage drinking and alcohol abuse are certainly a common problem on university campuses, alcohol does not turn a college student into a sex offender. In fact, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, some offenders actually drink alcohol before committing sexual assault specifically to later justify their behavior. Relying on restorative justice to ‘treat’ this group would be a dangerous validation of their criminal deceit.

The third common argument – that schools might be safe relying on restorative justice methods in cases of sexual harassment that don’t involve physical assault – is risky at best. Those who sexually harass others are objectifying and dehumanizing their victims, behavior that is often a prelude to assaults.

In my work as a victims’ attorney at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, I repeatedly see rapists whose behavior escalated from lesser offenses like voyeurism and other forms of harassment.

Finally and most critically, we must consider the victims of these heinous crimes. As a society, we are too quick to blame victims, overtly or subtly, especially on college campuses. 

Student victims regularly hear: “You were both drunk,” or “Don’t ruin someone’s life over one drunken night.” I routinely see offenders and even school administrators attempt to blame the victim. One student’s complaint of rape was rejected by school administrators because she gave the rapist a ride after the attack, despite her explanation that she feared she would be hurt further if she did not do as he asked.

The impact on those subjected to sexual assault can be profound, life-altering and permanent. Furthermore, the effects can be substantially worsened if a community deflects the offender’s responsibility onto things like alcohol, or worse yet, suggests that the victim is partially at fault.

The reality is that I believe the majority of sex offenders are largely incapable of empathy. Two-thirds of male sex offenders will re-offend if they are not treated and restrained as criminals. The consensus among mental health and criminal justice professionals is that most sex criminals cannot be reformed; they can only be monitored, controlled and contained.

These are people who look at the tears and agony on victims’ faces, show no mercy and then quickly move on to their next victim.

Restorative justice can be a wonderful tool for certain types of offenses, but let’s not ask victims of sexual assault to suffer an even greater burden by making them take part in their attackers’ so-called “reformation.”

Michael Dolce is on the board of directors of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence and was the former political committee chair of Protect Our Kids First. He was instrumental in the passage of landmark legislation in the state that repealed all statutes of limitation for civil and criminal prosecution of child sexual battery. He is of counsel at premier national plaintiffs' firm Cohen Milstein and has dedicated his career to seeking justice for the victims of abuse. 

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

FloriDUH woman launches campaign to bend state residency restriction law to fuel her desire for vengeance

Christin Olsen [FACEBOOK PAGE] feels the law should bend to her personal quest of vengeance. She wants to increase residency restriction laws just to get her revenge on someone who allegedly harmed her.

http://www.winknews.com/2017/01/30/loophole-in-florida-sex-offender-law-draws-call-for-change/

Loophole in Florida sex offender law draws call for change
Published: January 30, 2017 11:26 PM EST
Updated: January 31, 2017 12:19 AM EST

NAPLES, Fla. — A Golden Gate Estates woman whose stepfather molested her was horrified to learn he had moved into a house less than a mile from an Orlando elementary school.

“It hit me like a ton of bricks,” Christin Olsen said. “It slapped me in the face.”

A Florida law banning sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school was enacted in 2004, but that law doesn’t automatically apply to those convicted before then. It was in 2002 that a jury delivered a guilty verdict against Kenneth Ford, Olsen’s stepfather.

Ford molested Christin Olsen for five years, beginning when she was 9. He served less than 15 years in prison before his release and before he purchased his new home.

“His front yard is the sidewalk to the school,” said Stephen Olsen, Christin’s husband. “His backyard bumps up to the playground. He is surrounded by children.”

It’s a situation that could play out anywhere in the state.

“Its sickening,” Christin Olsen said. “I lose sleep over it.”

The Olsens have a child of their own who’s a major reason why Christin is determined to close the loophole. She started a petition to have the law changed to cover sex offenders convicted prior to 2004, and she plans to take up the issue with Collier County commissioners. Some counties, like Miami-Dade, have already enacted municipal codes to stiffen the law.

“My child deserves it. Our children deserve it,” she said. “They deserve better than the current laws that are in place.”

Her response to someone who told her to let it go...

If she was in the business of "deterrence," then you'd think she'd use better numbers. 

Saturday, January 28, 2017

To combat human trafficking, South Korealina will install ransomware on your computer... unless you pay $20 to remove it

So let me get this straight-- I have to have ransomware installed by law on my computer but I can pay the state $20 to remove it? What is the point of doing this in the first place, except extorting citizens for money?

South Carolina General Assembly
122nd Session, 2017-2018

H. 3003

STATUS INFORMATION

Introduced in the House on January 10, 2017
Currently residing in the House Committee on Judiciary

Summary: Human Trafficking Prevention Act 

A BILL

TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 5 TO CHAPTER 15, TITLE 16 SO AS TO ENACT THE “HUMAN TRAFFICKING PREVENTION ACT”, TO REQUIRE A BUSINESS, MANUFACTURER, WHOLESALER, OR INDIVIDUAL THAT MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTES, OR SELLS A PRODUCT THAT MAKES CONTENT ACCESSIBLE ON THE INTERNET TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE AND TO SET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BLOCKING CAPABILITY; TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR THE CONSUMER TO DEACTIVATE THE DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY; TO ALLOW A REPORTING SYSTEM TO UNBLOCK CONTENT THAT IS NOT OBSCENE, SUCH AS SOCIAL MEDIA WEBSITES, AND AUTHORIZE A CONSUMER TO SEEK JUDICIAL RELIEF IF THE FILTERED CONTENT IS NOT UNBLOCKED WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME; TO ESTABLISH CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR A BUSINESS OR INDIVIDUAL THAT VIOLATES THIS ARTICLE; TO AUTHORIZE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST A BUSINESS, MANUFACTURER, WHOLESALER OR INDIVIDUAL THAT MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTES, OR SELLS ANY PRODUCTS IN THIS STATE WITHOUT A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY, TO ESTABLISH THAT A CONSUMER OR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY FILE A SUIT AGAINST A PARTY THAT IS UNRESPONSIVE TO A REPORT OF OBSCENE MATERIAL BREACHING THE FILTER AND TO PRESCRIBE DAMAGES FOR EACH VIOLATION.

Whereas, the State of South Carolina has a compelling interest in protecting the public health and protecting minors from being exposed to obscenity; and

Whereas, studies have shown that pornography is a public health hazard, leading to a broad spectrum of well documented individual impacts and societal harms; and 

Whereas, easily accessible pornography on products that are distributed through the Internet is impacting the demand for human trafficking and prostitution; and 

Whereas, the General Assembly has a compelling interest to impose a narrowly tailored, common sense filter system that combats the growing epidemic of  dissemination of pornographic images and the resulting demand for human trafficking while balancing the consumer’s fundamental right to regulate his own mental health. Now, therefore, 

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina: 

SECTION 1. Chapter 15, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding: 

“Article 5

Human Trafficking Prevention Act

Section 16 15 500. This article may be cited as the ‘Human Trafficking Prevention Act’. 

Section 16 15 510. (A) A business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual that manufactures, distributes, or sells a product that makes content accessible on the Internet is prohibited from doing business in this State unless the product contains an active and operating digital blocking capability that renders any obscenity, as defined in Section 16 15 305, inaccessible. 
(B) The business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual must: 
(1) make reasonable and ongoing efforts to ensure that the digital content blocking capability functions properly, including establishing a reporting mechanism such as a website or call center to allow for a consumer to report unblocked obscene content or report blocked content that is not obscene; 
(2) ensure that all child pornography and revenge pornography is inaccessible on the product; 
(3) prohibit the product from accessing any hub that facilitates prostitution; and
(4) render websites that are known to facilitate any trafficking of persons, as defined in Section 16 3 2010(9), inaccessible.

Section 16 15 520. Any digital blocking capability may be deactivated after the consumer: 
(1) requests in writing that the capability be disabled; 
(2) presents identification to verify that the consumer is eighteen years of age or older;
(3) acknowledges receiving a written warning regarding the potential danger of deactivating the digital blocking capability; and 
(4) pays a one time twenty dollar digital access fee. 

Section 16 15 530. (A) If the digital blocking capability blocks content that is not obscene and the block is reported to a call center or reporting website, the content must be unblocked within a reasonable time but in no event later than five business days after the block is reported. 
(B) The digital blocking capability may not filter social media websites that are primarily used for social interaction if these websites have a reporting center and remain reasonably proactive in removing reported obscene content.
(C) The consumer may seek judicial relief to unblock filtered content. 

Section 16 15 540. (A) A manufacturer or wholesaler that manufactures, distributes, or sells a product that makes content accessible on the Internet may elect to pay a twenty dollar opt out fee for each product that enters this State’s stream of commerce. 
(B) A business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual that manufactures, distributes, or sells a product that makes content accessible on the Internet must submit the funds collected as the digital access fee or the opt out fee to the State Treasurer each quarter. The State Treasurer must disburse the funds collected to the Attorney General to help fund the operations of the Human Trafficking Task Force and the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. 

Section 16 15 550. (A) A business or individual that violates the provisions of this article by manufacturing, distributing, or selling a product that makes content accessible on the Internet without the digital content blocking capability, selling the product to a minor without activated filters, or providing the means to disable the digital content blocking capability is guilty of violating Sections 16 15 250, 16 15 345, and 16 15 385 and, upon conviction, is subject to the penalties provided by those sections. 
(B) A business or individual who complies with the provisions of Section 16 15 520 is not subject to criminal liability for violating the provisions of this article. 

Section 16 15 560. (A) The Office of Attorney General is authorized to seek injunctive relief against any business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual that manufactures, distributes, or sells any products in this State that violates the provisions of this article.  
(B) If a business, manufacturer, wholesaler, or individual is unresponsive to a report of obscene material that has breached the filter, the consumer or Attorney General may file a civil suit. The consumer or Attorney General may seek damages of up to five hundred dollars for each piece of content that was reported but not subsequently blocked. 
(C) The prevailing party in the civil action may seek attorneys’ fees.” 

SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
    XX    

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Mississippi looks to quadruple annual fees because the state needs more pigs to harass registrants

Andy Gipson obviously didn't get the memo registered citizens are far more likely to be unemployed. Imagine having to quadruple that pound of flesh to have MORE tormenters harassing you for that money.

Read the full bill HERE

http://newsms.fm/sex-offenders-could-pay-for-trooper-school-under-new-bill/

Sex offenders could pay for trooper school under new bill 
ByCourtney Carter
Posted on January 17, 2017

JACKSON, MISS– One of the main talking points of this legislative session is the incredible shortage of state troopers. 

Representative Tom Miles told News Mississippi just how critical the shortage is Monday, outlining that only 489 highway patrolmen are on the roadways, and 189 of those are ready to retire.

The state needs an ongoing school for state troopers, and the idea has pitched to the state legislature before. The problem has always been how to fund it.

Representative Andy Gipson has a solution, at least a long term one.

Tuesday, House Bill 505 was filed to increase sex offender registration fees and put the difference toward funding a trooper school.

“Right now, sex offenders are paying $25 (annually),” said Rep. Gipson. “We could up that to $100 dollars, which frankly, is a lot lower than surrounding states.”

Rep. Gipson said that amount of money would fund a small trooper school, but the option serves as more of a “down-the-road” solution. Immediate action is still necessary, and many bills are expected to be drawn up this session to increase the funding for more officers.

The representative has also stated that there are many bills surrounding the protection of law enforcement officers in the state. These “Blue Lives Matter” bills could increase the penalties of harming a police officer.

“I plan to take the best of these pieces of legislation,” said Rep. Gipson. “And draft a bill from that.”

There are four “Blue Lives Matter” pieces of legislation:

HB 640 would create “Blue Lives Matter” legislation and define those protected as police officers, state troopers, firefighters, and paramedics.
HB 647 could double the normal penalty for a misdemeanor or felony charge if a crime is committed against an officer.
HB 747 would allow the judge to refer to the jury as to whether or not the fine or penalty for a misdemeanor or felony charge should be enhanced because the victim was an officer.
HB 754 would allow for the crime against an officer to be treated as a hate crime.
News Mississippi will continue to follow the “Blue Lives Matter” legislation through the legislative session.

Sunday, January 15, 2017

PA: Allegheny County Judge Donna Jo McDaniel caught redheaded... er, "redhanded," regularly exceeding sentencing guidelines


Supporters of specialized "sex offender courts" should take notice, as this corrupt judge has been caught abusing her powers by exceeding state sentencing guidelines. Of course, she isn't going to be punished despite showing a pattern of this behavior. She shouldn't even have a job at this point.

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2017/01/15/Pennsylvania-Superior-Court-questions-whether-Allegheny-County-Common-Pleas-judge-is-over-punishing-sex-offenders/stories/201701120030

Superior Court questions whether Common Pleas judge is over-punishing sex offenders
January 15, 2017 12:00 AM
By Paula Reed Ward / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The Pennsylvania Superior Court questioned whether a veteran Allegheny County judge is meting out overly harsh sentences in sex assault cases in a strongly worded opinion ordering that a defendant be resentenced.

In the 36-page opinion last week, the appellate panel suggested that Common Pleas Judge Donna Jo McDaniel, who presides over sex offender court, has shown a pattern in those types of cases. 

“We note our awareness of a possible emerging pattern in this particular sentencing court of routinely sentencing sex offenders in the aggravated sentencing range and/or outside the guidelines,” wrote Superior Court President Judge Emeritus John T. Bender. 

The opinion then cited in a footnote another of Judge McDaniel’s cases, that against Gabino Bernal, who last month also was awarded a second new sentencing hearing on charges of unlawful contact with a minor, indecent assault of a person less than 13 and corruption of minors. The Superior Court panels in both cases included the same members, Judge Bender, Judge Lillian Harris Ransom and Senior Judge John L. Musmanno.

Judge McDaniel did not respond to a request for comment.

In Bernal’s appellate brief, filed by the Allegheny County Public Defender’s office, his attorneys listed 14 cases currently on appeal — 10 for sexual offenses —  in which Judge McDaniel sentenced the defendants to serve the maximum possible penalty and ran multiple sentences consecutively. 

“There will always be cases where circumstances call for, if not practically compel, sentences which exceed the standard guideline recommendations,” Judge Bender wrote, noting that trial judges have wide discretion. “However, we expect that sentencing courts understand that a standard range sentence is the norm and, consequently, that sentences which exceed (or fall below) the standard recommendation should be relatively infrequent by comparison.

“The appearance of bias, and doubt regarding a court’s commitment to individualized sentencing, both rationally emerge when such a pattern of routine deviation from sentencing norms is demonstrated by adequate evidence.”

In the most recent case, captioned as the Commonwealth vs. A.S., the defendant, now 21, pleaded guilty on Feb. 17, 2015, in two separate cases to four counts of indecent assault of a child less than 13, two counts of unlawful contact with a minor, two counts of endangering the welfare of children, two counts of corruption of minors, sexual assault, indecent assault and incest.

The charges involved his siblings, which is why he is identified in the opinion only by his initials.

At sentencing on June 24, 2015, Judge McDaniel ordered A.S. to serve 7½ to 15 years in prison.

However, under the sentencing guidelines in the case, the standard range on the first case would have been 3 to 12 months incarceration -— she gave him 30 to 60 months, which was outside of the aggravated sentencing range.

In the second case, the standard recommended range was 36 to 54 months, and Judge McDaniel gave A.S. 60 to 120 months, which was in the aggravated range.

A.S. challenged the sentence, arguing that Judge McDaniel relied on information not present in the case to support the punishment she meted out. 

Among the statements made by Judge McDaniel at sentencing that the defense -— and subsequently the Superior Court -— said were untrue were: 

• That the defendant had prior sexual contact with the victims, as well as with another minor, several years earlier.

The Superior Court said that the record in the case does not substantiate that claim, and that the pre-sentence investigation showed that the defendant had no prior convictions as a juvenile or adult, and there was no evidence he was ever charged with another offense.

• That the defendant did not seek psychiatric help for his sexual misconduct until after he was arrested.

The appellate panel found that the court record directly contradicted that finding, and that it was A.S. who went to an area hospital with depression and suicidal ideation and disclosed what he had done, prompting the investigation to begin.

Then, when interviewed by the police, A.S. again admitted his crimes, the court found.

“The clear impression given by the sentencing court was that [A.S] only self-servingly sought mental health treatment for his sexual dysfunction after he was arrested. This is a clear misrepresentation of the record,” Judge Bender wrote.

• That the impact of the crimes on the victims must be “absolutely horrendous.”

At sentencing, Judge McDaniel received letters from the two victims in the case, who wrote that they have forgiven their brother and miss him. Both wrote that they did not want him to go to jail and that they would like him to continue treatment.

“I think in spite of the letters that your brother and sister sent me, that the impact on them must be absolutely horrendous,” Judge McDaniel said at sentencing. “I can’t imagine a child of that age, children of that age going through being attacked by someone that they loved and trusted.”

But the Superior Court wrote that outside of those letters, there was nothing in the record concerning the impact of the crime.

Most concerning, the opinion continued, all of those impermissible factors considered by Judge McDaniel, appeared to guide her sentence above the recommended guidelines. 

The court found a “disconnect” in evidence presented in the case which “told a wildly different story” than the sentence crafted by Judge McDaniel. 

A.S. is a young man with no prior record of any kind, Judge Bender wrote, who has admitted his crimes and is seeking treatment. He has a supportive family that has forgiven him and wants to assist him in continuing his treatment.

Referencing the possible trend presented by the Bernal case, Judge Bender wrote that Judge McDaniel’s sentence of A.S. tends “to match such a pattern, given the extreme dissonance between the circumstances of this case and the sentence(s) imposed. This invites the obvious question: if the circumstances at issue here do not warrant a standard or mitigated range sentence, when, if ever, will such a sentence be warranted?” Judge Bender wrote. 

Although the court did not go so far as to remove Judge McDaniel from the case against A.S. -— saying it did not have the authority to do so on its own -— it did suggest that he is able to ask for her to recuse herself from the resentencing. “in which context he may seek to develop a record of a pattern of bias, if one can be demonstrated by competent evidence.”

The Superior Court made a similar recommendation in its Dec. 19 opinion on Bernal, which it remanded for resentencing a second time.  

Bernal was first sentenced by Judge McDaniel in 2013 to serve nine to 18 years in prison. However, the Superior Court found that punishment to be in error and ordered a new sentencing hearing. 

Judge McDaniel then resentenced Bernal in 2015. Although the defense said at that hearing the guidelines called for three to 12 months incarceration in the standard range for the felony count, and probation for the misdemeanors, Judge McDaniel ordered Bernal to serve a total of six to 17 years in prison. That punishment included the statutory maximum for each count and stacked each one to run consecutively. 

Bernal argued in his second appeal that Judge McDaniel abused her discretion and used the sentence as “retribution” for the crime.

“[T]he record reflects that the sentencing judge was determined to impose the maximum sentences permitted by statute, regardless of the guidelines,” the Superior Court wrote. 

Paula Reed Ward: pward@post-gazette.com, 412-263-2620 or on Twitter: @PaulaReedWard. 

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Fool's Goldy: Faith Goldy of Rebel Media reminds us again the Alt-Right is All-Wrong in the worst way possible

It seems like the "Alt-Right" media is getting worse and worse.

So this nutjob is Faith Goldy from "The Rebel Media," an independent Alt-Right cesspool. Pretty much the only allure of this channel is to listen to folks make fun of "Social Justice Warriors," which I admittedly watch for kicks. But lets be honest here, these independent All-Wrong outlets are already proving to be troublesome, unless you host a page like this and you need nominees for dumbest news media personalities to keep up interest. 

Anyways, back to Goldy. The Rebel Media's website describes Goldy as "a fearless journalist and devout Catholic who stands up for family values, freedom, and firearms." (God & Guns, how typical of extreme right-wingers.) Fearless? Brainless, more like, especially after seeing the video below. 

Now, if you don't want to see the video, the argument boils down to something like this. She starts off by criticizing the trailer for a new Fox comedy show which uses very crude humor to promote an upcoming show called "The Mick." Being a All-Wrong nut, Goldy take a potshot at Hillary, BTW, and by name dropping she hopes to associate Hillary with "pedophile," which is all Goldy discusses the rest of the video. She jumps into criticizing a couple of media outlets like Salon and other mainstream outlets which featured a self-professed "pedophile" describe how he prevents himself from acting on his sexual urges. 

To summarize, Goldy compares toilet humor with "normalizing pedophilia," a term the "Antis" have used for nearly a decade to minimize or outright silence the voice of anyone challenging sex offense laws. For all of the so-called Alt-Right's talk of "freedom," it seems she doesn't want us to hear the voice of those who wish to prevent child abuse by discussing their struggles through the media. Like it not, Goldy, persecuting people into silence has been proven ineffective. Maybe if this idiot researched the history of the Christian faith she professes, she'd realize 300 years of persecuting Christians failed to eradicate Christianity from the Roman Empire. The All-Wrong does one thing and only one thing well-- bully those they hate, and it seems they never run out of groups to target. 



Wednesday, January 11, 2017

TexASS HB 821 will prevent inmates convicted of sex offenses from seeking prison penpals

I can't imagine why this law is even necessary, other than to win a Shiitake Award for Texas.

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/No-pen-pals-Texas-seeks-to-restrict-letters-to-10847341.php

Texas legislator aims to block sex offenders from getting pen pals
Brett Barrouquere Published 12:05 pm, Tuesday, January 10, 2017

It's a common refrain online: An inmate posts a want ad seeking a pen pal while describing themselves in the most flattering terms someone behind bars can come up with. The inmates often described the loneliness of being incarcerated. But, few, if any, ever disclose why they are behind bars on sites like WriteAPrisoner.com or Prisoninmatepenpal.com. Someone choosing to correspond with them could end up writing to a person convicted of most any crime.

But, that may be a bit more limited under House Bill 821 as lawmakers return to Austin on Tuesday to begin the next legislative session. The measure, sponsored by state Rep. Matt Shaheen, R-Plano, would require the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to impose rules barring anyone required to register as a sex offender from advertising for a pen pal. The legislation doesn't impose a penalty on any inmate who violates the proposed rule. It appears that would be left up to the prison system. So, the lonely existence of an imprisoned sex offender may soon become even more solitary.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx?ID=85RHB008211B&QueryText=%22821%22&DocType=B

By: Shaheen H.B. 821

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
 
AN ACT relating to the solicitation of pen pals by certain inmates of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Chapter 500, Government Code, is amended by adding Section 500.009 to read as follows:
     
Sec. 500.009.  PEN PAL SOLICITATION PROHIBITED. (a) This section applies only to an inmate confined in a facility operated by or under contract with the department who is serving a sentence for an offense for which registration as a sex offender is required under Chapter 62, Code of Criminal Procedure.
(b)  The department shall adopt a policy that prohibits an inmate described by Subsection (a) from placing an advertisement soliciting a pen pal on an Internet website operated for that purpose, regardless of whether another person submits or pays for the advertisement for the inmate.

SECTION 2.  Not later than December 1, 2017, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice shall adopt the policy required by Section 500.009, Government Code, as added by this Act.

SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2017.

Monday, January 9, 2017

Alt-Right once again caught spreading fake news by claiming Ft Lauderdale shooter was a registered citizen. But that's not even the most bizarre part of the story

Now look, we give the mainstream media here a lot of flak, and they make good cannon fodder for this award, but over the past year, I've had the chance to see (and deride) the alternative, specifically the "alt-right," who seemingly have less reason to fact check before publishing steaming piles of bovine excrement. 

I have pretty much figured out how this happened. You see, FloriDUH is one of only a handful of states that publishes their registry info in a way that comes up in a Google search. (Normally you have to go to a state registry website to pull up the information.) Some Alt-Right wacko googled the name, found some guy who just happened to have a similar name, and then use the first pic he found to create a fake news story. I believe whoever started this didn't make an honest and simple mistake in an attempt to be the first to post news, like the mainstream media may do. This was intentionally false in order to advance the Alt-Right agenda. 

My biggest worry is that someone targets the registrant because some Alt-Right schmuck believes the fake news propagated by the Alt-Right media. Remember the guy who shot at a pizza joint to rescue non-existent sex trafficking victims?

Snopes.com has already exposed this farce, too. 


Alt-Right Frames Wrong Esteban Santiago for Shooting, Kickstarts Racist Conspiracy Theory
As soon as the Fort Lauderdale airport shooter’s identity emerged, so did the alt-right’s racist conspiracy hoaxes.

BEN COLLINS
01.06.17 5:40 PM ET

Far rightwing figureheads immediately invented an elaborate and racist conspiracy theory that CNN had lightened a photo of alleged Fort Lauderdale airport shooter Esteban Santiago shortly after the Friday attack.

In reality, CNN had yet to air a picture of Santiago, let alone lightened a picture of him. The conspiracy also used a picture of an entirely different man named Esteban Santiago—not the alleged shooter.

Still, writers at websites like InfoWars and Gateway Pundit tweeted about CNN’s nonexistent Photoshop job. Former Republican Florida Congressman Allen West, who represented Fort Lauderdale itself, even tweeted about the conspiracy and linked to an article about it on his own website.

“Why is CNN attempting to make the shooter look more white? Bizarre,” reads InfoWars editor Paul Joseph Watson’s tweet, which had 3,500 retweets at press time.

Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft even wrote a story about the so-called incident, titled “Look How CNN Doctored Photo of Ft. Lauderdale Shooter Esteban Santiago,” which had 2,500 shares in its first hour on Facebook, according to BuzzSumo.

“It appears CNN doctored the photo to make the suspect look more white,” wrote Hoft. “Sad.”
The attached picture, which was neither aired nor lightened by CNN, is of a 39-year-old Esteban Santiago, who lives in New York state. The image was pulled from a Florida sex offender registry.

Instead, the Esteban Santiago who shot 13 people and left five dead in Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood Airport on Friday was born in New Jersey and spent the last several years living in Anchorage, Alaska. According to officials, he is 26, not 39, and is currently in police custody.

A real image of the shooter circulated on the internet hours later, confirming that he is not the 39-year-old Santiago showed in Watson’s tweet and Gateway Pundit’s article.

Alt-right Twitter accounts appear to have helped create the confusion. After media personality Tariq Nasheed tweeted, “there are reports that the identity of one of the Ft. Lauderdale shooting suspects is a white Hispanic named Esteban Santiago,” verified alt-right Twitter user @BakedAlaska tweeted a screenshot of Nasheed’s tweet, along with a picture of the wrong Santiago.

“Esteban Santiago is not white. He’s hispanic,” wrote @BakedAlaska, whose real name is Tim Treadstone and recently made headlines for anti-Semitic comments.

Hoft’s story links to a tweet by the user @alphakangz, whose account has only existed since November.

“UNDOCTORED PHOTO vs. photo @CNN USED PHOTO of Esteban Santiago, the alleged FLL airport shooter #FortLauderdale pray for the victims,” the account tweeted.

Minutes later, a copy of the lightened photo of the 39-year-old Santiago, falsely claiming CNN attribution, appeared on Watson’s Twitter feed.

Update 6:31 p.m.: Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft emailed The Daily Beast about an hour after this story's initial publication.

"I pulled the post," he said.

"UPDATE — THIS MAY BE A DIFFERENT ESTEBAN SANTIAGO," the story now reads.
The Daily Beast reached out to Watson for comment. His tweet is still visible on his account.

Friday, January 6, 2017

So now the B in FBI stands for Best Buy? The FBI makes our list a second year in a row for dubious investigation practices


I might have to stop spending my money at Best Buy. Apparently, the FBI has given the minimum-wage zit faces working the Geek Squad $500 to help the FBI find CP. So now you have yet another private agency acting as a government agency.

UPDATE (1/11/17): Now it seems the recovered picture may not even be CP after all, so now FBI must be shorthand for Fucked up BIg time

http://www.ocweekly.com/news/best-buy-geek-squad-informant-use-has-fbi-on-defense-in-child-porn-case-7794252

Best Buy Geek Squad Informant Use Has FBI on Defense in Child-Porn Case
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2017 AT 2:59 P.M. BY R. SCOTT MOXLEY

FBI agents and prosecutors usually strut inside Santa Ana's Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse, knowing they've focused the wrath of the criminal-justice system on a particular criminal. But an unusual child-pornography-possession case has placed officials on the defensive for nearly 26 months. Questions linger about law-enforcement honesty, unconstitutional searches, underhanded use of informants and twisted logic. Given that a judge recently ruled against government demands to derail a defense lawyer's dogged inquiry into the mess, United States of America v. Mark A. Rettenmaier is likely to produce additional courthouse embarrassments in 2017.

Rettenmaier is a prominent Orange County physician and surgeon who had no idea that a Nov. 1, 2011, trip to a Mission Viejo Best Buy would jeopardize his freedom and eventually raise concerns about, at a minimum, FBI competency or, at worst, corruption. Unable to boot his HP Pavilion desktop computer, he sought the assistance of the store's Geek Squad. At the time, nobody knew the company's repair technicians routinely searched customers' devices for files that could earn them $500 windfalls as FBI informants. This case produced that national revelation.

According to court records, Geek Squad technician John "Trey" Westphal, an FBI informant, reported he accidentally located on Rettenmaier's computer an image of "a fully nude, white prepubescent female on her hands and knees on a bed, with a brown choker-type collar around her neck." Westphal notified his boss, Justin Meade, also an FBI informant, who alerted colleague Randall Ratliff, another FBI informant at Best Buy, as well as the FBI. Claiming the image met the definition of child pornography and was tied to a series of illicit pictures known as the "Jenny" shots, agent Tracey Riley seized the hard drive.

Setting aside the issue of whether the search of Rettenmaier's computer constituted an illegal search by private individuals acting as government agents, the FBI undertook a series of dishonest measures in hopes of building a case, according to James D. Riddet, Rettenmaier's San Clemente-based defense attorney. Riddet says agents conducted two additional searches of the computer without obtaining necessary warrants, lied to trick a federal magistrate judge into authorizing a search warrant, then tried to cover up their misdeeds by initially hiding records.

To convict someone of child-pornography charges, the government must prove the suspect knowingly possessed the image. But in Rettenmaier's case, the alleged "Jenny" image was found on unallocated "trash" space, meaning it could only be retrieved by "carving" with costly, highly sophisticated forensics tools. In other words, it's arguable a computer's owner wouldn't know of its existence. (For example, malware can secretly implant files.) Worse for the FBI, a federal appellate court unequivocally declared in February 2011 (USA v. Andrew Flyer) that pictures found on unallocated space did not constitute knowing possession because it is impossible to determine when, why or who downloaded them.

"The government concedes it presented no evidence that Flyer knew of the presence of the files on the unallocated space of his Gateway computer's hard drive," declared judges at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit before overturning that conviction. "The government also concedes it presented no evidence that Flyer had the forensic software required to see or access the files. . . . Deletion of an image alone does not support a conviction for knowing possession of child pornography on or about a certain date within the meaning of [federal law]. No evidence indicated that Flyer could recover or view any of the charged images in unallocated space or that he even knew of their presence there."

That ruling, made a year before the launch of the Rettenmaier case, left the FBI in a quandary. Agents noted among themselves in an email thread that "our [assistant United States attorney] won't charge on carved images." In hopes of overcoming this obstacle, they performed a sleight-of-hand maneuver, according to Riddet. The agents simply didn't alert Judge Marc Goldman that the image in question had been buried in unallocated space and, thus, secured deceitful authorization for a February 2012 raid on Rettenmaier's Laguna Niguel residence. "The omission was critical because the mere presence of child pornography in a computer's unallocated space is insufficient to establish knowing possession as a matter of law," Riddet wrote in a November 2016 brief. "And the unwitting possession of child porn will not support probable cause [for either a raid or charges]."

But Assistant U.S. Attorney M. Anthony Brown, who specializes in sex-crime cases and is handling prosecution duties, claims the omission was not legally important or malicious. Brown believes the "Jenny" image shouldn't be suppressed because it's only "wild speculation" that the Geek Squad performed searches at FBI instigation. To him, the defense is pushing a "flawed" theory slyly shifting focus to innocent FBI agents; he maintains that Rettenmaier—who is smart enough to have taught medicine at USC and UCLA—was dumb enough to seek Best Buy recovery of all of his computer files after knowingly storing child porn there.

The case is presently so tenuous that Riddet, who has 47 years of court experience, believes the Geek Squad search was extracurricular to required repairs and suggests that federal officials sloppily pushed for an unnecessary arrest. He has demanded to know if agents showed the photo evidence to Assistant United States Attorney Anne Gannon before she initiated charges. The defense lawyer is suspicious because FBI records reviewed by OC Weekly contain discrepancies about the picture and offer conflicting narratives about the agency's actions against his client. He also wants additional records, which he believes have been hidden.

On Dec. 19, 2016, U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney highlighted the discrepancies, noted odd memory losses among agents, and called Brown's arguments for blocking Riddet's inquiries "unavailing" and "perplexing." Carney ordered government officials to conduct a new, "diligent" search for evidence and compelled Gannon's future testimony about whether she saw the "Jenny" image before approving the search warrant.

But the biggest issue remains whether Geek Squad technicians acted as secret law-enforcement agents and, thus, violated Fourth Amendment prohibitions against warrantless government searches. Riddet claims records show "FBI and Best Buy made sure that during the period from 2007 to the present, there was always at least one supervisor who was an active informant." He also said, "The FBI appears to be able to access data at [Best Buy's main repair facility in Brooks, Kentucky] whenever they want." Calling the relationship between the agency and the Geek Squad relevant to pretrial motions, Carney approved Riddet's request to question agents under oath.

The defense lawyer believes the case was built on a false premise that should frighten all Americans. "While it may be that 'Jenny' appears in other photos which are child pornography, none of those photos, if indeed they do exist, were observed on [Rettenmaier's] hard drive," Riddet observed. "The critical point here is that the image which was viewed and described in the search warrant is not an image of child pornography."

That assertion will be debated at future hearings.

[UPDATE, Jan. 4, 5:20 p.m.: Jeff Haydock, a Best Buy vice president for communications, provided the Weekly a reaction. "Best Buy is required by law to report the discovery of certain illegal material to law enforcement, but being paid by authorities to do so would violate company policy," Haydock said. "If these reports are true, it is purely poor individual judgement. If we discover child pornography in the normal course of servicing a computer, phone or tablet, we have an obligation to contact law enforcement. We believe this is the right thing to do, and we inform our customers before beginning any work that this is our policy."] 

R. Scott Moxley
R. Scott Moxley’s award-winning investigative journalism has touched nerves for two decades. An angry congressman threatened to break Moxley’s knee caps. A dirty sheriff promised his critical reporting was irrelevant and then landed in prison. Corporate crooks won’t take his calls. Murderous gangsters mad-dogged him in court. The U.S. House of Representatives debated his work. Pusillanimous cops have left hostile messages using fake names. Federal prosecutors credited his stories for the arrest of a doctor who sold fake medicine to dying patients. And a frantic state legislator literally caught sleeping with lobbyists sprinted down state capital hallways to evade his questions in Sacramento. Moxley has won Journalist of the Year honors at the Los Angeles Press Club and been named Distinguished Journalist of the Year by the LA Society of Professional Journalists.

Sunday, January 1, 2017

NaturalNews.com's Mike Adams (Artificial news) is our first Shiitake Award nominee for 2017

This is a bio of this clown from Wikipedia:

"The site's founder, Michael Allen 'Mike' Adams, was the subject of controversy after posting a blog entry implying a call for violence against proponents of GMO foods, and then allegedly creating another website with a list of names of alleged supporters. The journal Vaccine accused Adams of spreading 'irresponsible health information' through Natural News. He has also been accused of using "pseudoscience to sell his lies". Adams has described vaccines as 'medical child abuse.' Characterized as a 'conspiracy-minded alternative medicine website,' Natural News has approximately 7 million unique visitors per month."

I am not a fan of mainstream media but idiots like Adams make the mainstream media look like saints by comparison. Imagine a guy whose health news is dubious at best interpret a law that is outside his area of expertise then make such a stupid declaration as he does. Natural News/ More like Artificial News.

http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-31-california-legalizes-child-prostitution-gov-jerry-brown-sb-1322-exploitation.html

California just decriminalized child prostitutes beginning Jan 1… “legalization” stirs outrage
Saturday, December 31, 2016 by: Mike Adams

(NaturalNews) Our world is so twisted today that “fake news” is deliberately written by the Washington Post and New York Times to sound like it’s real, but real news is so bizarre that it seems fabricated at first glance. Such is the case with California’s new law — SB 1322 — that officially legalizes child prostitution beginning January 1. “SB 1322 decriminalizes prostitution charges for minors,” explains a press release from California lawmakers (link below).

SB 1322, entitled “SB-1322 Commercial sex acts: minors”, spells it out in plain language: (click here to read the text of the law yourself)

Existing law makes it a crime to solicit or engage in any act of prostitution. Existing law makes it a crime to loiter in any public place with the intent to commit prostitution.

This bill would make the above provisions inapplicable to a child under 18 years of age who is alleged to have engaged in conduct that would, if committed by an adult, violate the above provisions.

SB 1322 was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown on September 26, 2016. “Instead of being treated as criminals, youths to get supervision and counseling services,” explains a government press release.

The law does not legalize adults soliciting sex with children, of course. Instead, it decriminalizes children and teens who engage in prostitution themselves. The idea, according to California lawmakers, is that such children should receive “counseling” instead of criminal charges.

Notably, there is no age limit on how young a legalized prostitute can now be, meaning that even children as young as 12 years old can legally sell their bodies for sex under California law. Or even nine year olds!

Gov. Brown, by the way, is the same politician who also signed SB 277, the “vaccine mandate” law that causes young African-American boys to be neurologically damaged and made autistic. That link has already been publicly admitted by a top CDC scientist.

Prostitution is still a crime if you’re 18 or older, but it’s legal if you’re 17 or younger… huh?

Now, thanks to Gov. Brown, 17-year-old boys and girls in California have legal immunity to engage in open prostitution. But when they turn 18, suddenly they’re criminals.

Meanwhile, prostitution “clients” are considered rapists or sex offenders if they engage in sex acts with children under the age of 18. So now, according to California’s totally insane Governor and legislature, 17-year-old prostitutes can openly stand on street corners and sell their bodies with complete legal immunity… all in the name of “compassion” from a “safe space” California culture that has gone so far off the deep end, the rest of the country desperately hopes #CalExit will succeed.

Governor Jerry Brown even brags about legalizing child prostitution, saying it will “stop the exploiters and help the exploited.” No one outside the fairy tale land of Collapsifornia understands how that logic works. If prostitution is legalized for children, how does that “stop the exploiters” who would then rush to recruit under-age children to serve as sex workers with the benefit of legal immunity?

If California really wants to stop the exploiters, why doesn’t the state just legalize all consenting acts between adults and stop criminalizing adult prostitution altogether? To maintain the criminality of sex acts between adults while legalizing sex acts sold by minors seems so completely insane that it could only come from a place like Collapsifornia — a delusional bubble of artificial reality run by Big Brother meddlers and an endless parade of do-gooder nanny state libtardocrats who still haven’t learned a single thing about why “good intentions” alone are never enough.

Pimps rejoice as California’s lunatic liberal lawmakers open the floodgates to exploiting young teens for the sex trade

“The unintended but predictable consequence of how the real villains — pimps and other traffickers in human misery — will respond to this new law isn’t difficult to foresee,” writes the Washington Examiner. “But legalizing child prostitution will only incentivize the increased exploitation of underage girls. Immunity from arrest means law enforcement can’t interfere with minors engaging in prostitution — which translates into bigger and better cash flow for the pimps. Simply put, more time on the street and less time in jail means more money for pimps, and more victims for them to exploit.”

The Examiner adds:

As Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, a national leader on human trafficking issues, told the media, “It just opens up the door for traffickers to use these kids to commit crimes and exploit them even worse.” Another prosecutor insightfully observed that if traffickers wrote legislation to protect themselves, it would read like SB 1322.

In other words, California legislators, via a Democrat supermajority, just passed exactly the type of law that child sex traffickers would have written themselves if they ran the legislature. Come to think of it, maybe they do!

Thank goodness California also passed SB 277, the vaccine mandate law, because otherwise all those child prostitutes might spread the flu to their paying sex partners. Yep, that’s California’s health code for you: Vaccinate all the children before you send them onto the street corners as legalized prostitutes.

Glad to know California has its priorities straight.

Friday, December 9, 2016

If civil commitment is not prison, then why were the voting ballots of Littlefield TX "patients" thrown away?


Interestingly, same article, same author, different headline. Lets face it, most of us understand "civil commitment" is just a euphemism for indefinite detention Abu Ghraib style.

Houston Chronicle | Dec. 6, 2016
Officials leave sex offenders' election ballots uncounted
Sex offenders at treatment center sue for alleged rights violations

Now, the San Antonio Express News's headline:

Prisoners’ ballots tossed out
By Mike Ward, Austin Bureau December 8, 2016

http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Prisoners-ballots-tossed-out-10784382.php

Prisoners’ ballots tossed out
By Mike Ward, Austin Bureau, December 8, 2016


AUSTIN - Like millions of Americans who wanted to have their say, more than 100 men inside a West Texas treatment center for sexually violent predators registered to vote in last month's presidential election.

Local election officials, however, refused to count their ballots, a decision that attorneys say likely violates federal and state laws.

The tossed-out votes now are the subject of a growing legal fight in the small town that once begged to get the treatment center for the jobs and the multimillion-dollar payroll that it brought, but now appears to be having second thoughts about the more than 200 convicted sex offenders that came with it.

"They didn't want us going out into their community, so they made us vote by mail, and now they're denying us the right to vote at all," said Clarence Brown, 54, one of the men in the Billy Clayton Center whose ballots were rejected. "This place isn't supposed to be a prison, but this run-down, bigoted little town is trying to make it one so we can't exercise our constitutional right to vote. Even if they don't like us, what they have done is not legal."

Brown said he and 65 other men at the center have filed a challenge to the decision to reject their ballots by Early Voting Ballot Board Judge Steve Busby. They said they plan to ask the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the case as a violation of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which makes it a federal crime to prevent a qualified voter from casting a ballot.

Officials with the Texas Civil Commitment Office that operates the sex offender program and top elections officials at the Texas Secretary of State Office acknowledged the problem but said there is little they can do.

Lamb County elections officials contend it was not their decision and referred questions to Busby. He did not return repeated phone calls.

Documents obtained by the Chronicle show the state laws that Busby cited in rejecting the ballots were the same ones state officials used to allow the men to vote by mail: They were disabled, they were confined and could not get to a polling place to vote and that they had fully discharged their prison sentences.

"It sounds like a pretty clear violation," said Buck Wood, an Austin lawyer and expert on Texas elections law. "If they completed their sentences, they should have been allowed to vote."

'There was grumbling'

Under Texas law, felons who have completed their prison sentences are entitled to vote.

State files show the fight began earlier this year when Brown and as many as a dozen other men at the Clayton Center registered to vote in the March primaries. County officials advised them to vote by mail, records show, but none were counted.

"There was grumbling, and I asked the county how they could vote, to resolve this in the future," said Marsha McLane, executive director of the Texas Civil Commitment Office. "There were three options: They could either go a polling place on Election Day or they could bring a polling place to the center to let them vote there or they could do it by absentee ballot."

Officials confirmed that before all the men in the state's civil-commitment program were moved to Littlefield in September 2015, many had voted in Houston, Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth and other locations where they were housed in jails and halfway houses.

Because many of the men at the Littlefield facility did not have proper identification cards to cast ballots in person, the civil commitment agency transported the prospective voters - about 50 of them - to a Texas Department of Public Safety office in Lubbock to get state-approved ID cards. Each man paid the $21 cost for the cards, McLane said.

Internal state emails show Lamb County officials in May nixed in-person voting as an option and again urged absentee ballots to avoid problems with local residents, including the possibility of violence.

"I will assure you that if the ballot by mail does not work, I will not intentionally violate anyone's constitutional right to vote," County Judge Mike DeLoach wrote in a May 24 email to McLane. "I am gravely concerned if you bring your residents into town to vote, it is going to cause problems - in fact, it is not a 'maybe' or a possibility' - it is going to My concern is not only for the public and their safety, but also for your facility/staff and your residents' safety; neither the county nor the city maintain resources to provide security at polling places."

DeLoach also noted that while 30 men wanted to vote at the time, up to 300 eventually may want to vote in the future, a number that could impact local election races.

As of Monday, the center housed about 240 men.

DeLoach did not return calls requesting comment.

'Disabled' option OK'd
By late May, DeLoach said he had asked County Attorney Scott Say to request a legal ruling from Attorney General Ken Paxton on whether the men could vote absentee by claiming the "disabled" exemption. The Secretary of State's Office soon signed off on the mail ballots for the men.

"It can reasonably be argued that a person who has been clinically assessed ... to the point where the individual civilly committed and is unable to leave the commitment facility without being accompanied is disabled for purposes of voting by mail," Caroline Geppert, a staff attorney in the Elections Division, wrote in a May 31 email to the civil commitment agency. "Such an individual may credibly claim to have a sickness or condition that prevents the person from voting in person without the need for personal assistance."

Alicia Pierce, a spokesperson for Secretary of State Carlos Cascos, confirmed that election officials had approved mail ballots for the men. In a message to the agency, DeLoach said that was good enough to resolve the issue for county officials.

Then, Nov. 17, Brown and 65 other men received notice that the ballot each had mailed was rejected by the Early Voting Ballot Board and was not counted.

Three state laws were listed: Those covering disability, confinement in jail and the qualifications to be a voter.

Defining coercion
Privately, several local and state officials said they disagree with the decision, noting that Early Ballot Voting Boards in most counties only compare signatures on mail ballots to validate their authenticity, as well as other record-keeping details, and do not disqualify ballots for other reasons.

The state handbook for those boards confirms that.

Ten days after the election and a day after Busby officially rejected the ballots, Say, who serves as both the district and county attorney in the community of 6,300 residents, asked the attorney general to determine whether the men who voted can claim a "disability," a ruling that could block future voting if that option is nixed.

If that happens, McLane said she plans to transport eligible voters from the center to a local polling place despite the objection of local officials. "The law appears to be clear. I don't want to get sued," she said.

While advocates insist Texas law makes it a misdemeanor for anyone who "influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner," state election officials said they do not believe that law covers the Littlefield situation.

"It seems to be applicable to bribery or coercing someone to vote or not to vote, not specifically relayed to counting the vote," Pierce said.

Wood disagreed.

"Taking a person's ballot and throwing it out is coercion," he said.

Bill Marshall, a Houston attorney who represents Brown and other men at the treatment center, said the case appears to be a clear denial of voting rights, especially since some of the men's ballots were counted and others were not.

"The feds should go after this," he said.