Thursday, December 26, 2013

Kevin Alan Tussy is putting the ASS in Google Glass

I can't trust a guy who looks this stupid, especially anyone who refers to himself as an "entrepreneur" (so is every street vendor and dope boy in town), much less an "angel investor." Angel investor has to be the silliest thing I have ever heard!

By the way does Tussy rhyme with pussy?

Anyways, the gist is this asshat is ignoring Google's ban on facial recognition software and releasing a software that will allow you, in theory at least, to scan faces to see if someone is a sex offender. The software is a flop in practice but it is Shiitake Worthy nonetheless.

New Google Glass App Can Recognize Up to 450,000 Sex Offenders so You Know When to Run
BY J. DUAINE HAHN | DEC 20, 2013 | 1:27 PM | PERMALINK
Though Google has banned facial recognition from Google Glass, one company is throwing that to the wind and is doing their own, anyway—and it's specializing in sex offenders.

NameTag, the Nevada-based company, has developed a Glass app that can recognize up to 450,000 sex offenders, and pulls its data from “I believe that this will make online dating and offline social interactions much safer and give us a far better understanding of the people around us,” said NameTag’s founder Kevin Tussy. “It’s much easier to meet interesting new people when we can simply look at someone, see their Facebook, review their LinkedIn page or maybe even see their dating site profile.”

For all of you sex offenders out there that would rather your information not be made available on the app, there is a way around it. “People will soon be able to login to and choose whether or not they want their name and information displayed to others," Tussy says, "It’s not about invading anyone’s privacy; it’s about connecting people that want to be connected. We will even allow users to have one profile that is seen during business hours and another that is only seen in social situations. NameTag can make the big, anonymous world we live in as friendly as a small town.”

If you're wondering how NameTag will be available on Glass though Google has banned facial recognition, it's because users can still jailbreak the device to do so, and Google has released instructions on how to do it. 

So, the next time you're out at a bar, you'll be able to quickly recognize if the dude your chick friend is talking to is a major concern. Well, that's if Google Glass doesn't keep getting banned from bars, that is. 

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Sally Kestin and Dana Williams are the Beavis and Butthead of the Sun Sentinel

 Beavis and Butthead are all grown up, got sex change operations, and found jobs at the Sun Sentinel. Well, maybe not, but the reporting of Kestin and Williams remind me of the episode where Beavis and Butthead work in a real estate office for a day. That's the only explanation for this turd that was recently passed off as investigative journalism.

Worst of all, their yellow journalism set off a panic in FloriDUH, causing the head of the state's sex offender program to resign and be replaced with a prosecutor with no psychology training. only in FloriDUH!

“Sex Predators Unleashed,’’ an 8-month Sun Sentinel investigation published Aug. 18, found shocking failures in a Florida law meant to protect the public from repeat sex offenders. Rapists and pedophiles freed by the state went on to molest 460 children, rape 121 women and kill 14.Read the investigation.

Reaction reached across Florida. Outraged readers wrote letters, with one calling the series “one of the most disturbing exposes I have ever read. ’’ Don Ryce, the father of the boy in whose memory the law was passed, said: “Something needs to be done. I want Jimmy's law to work the way it was supposed to work in the beginning." Read more.

The Florida Legislature immediately began working on wide-ranging reforms. The head of Florida’s Sexually Violent Predator Program (left) resigned, and the state tightened its sex predator screening procedures to emphasize public safety. Read more.
Sally Kestin
Dana Williams

Sunday, November 3, 2013

Maxine Bernstein turns The Oregonian into the Weekly World News

There is a difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge on a subject, mainly the result of inexperience or total lack of exposure on a topic. Stupidity is when you continue a pattern of beliefs or behavior after given extensive knowledge on the subject at hand.

When The Oregonian promoted an upcoming expose on sex offenders by offering a sneak preview of the story on Oregon Live, they were kind enough to put enough info out there to help people like me know exactly what the article is about. So a number of legal reformists, including myself, flooded Oregon Live (The Oregonian's website) with the facts.

It certainly got enough attention that Oregon Live posted an article just on the early comments. Again, not bad, and Maxi sounded receptive to the facts.

But in the end, she still went for shock value over facts by writing her poorly researched article "Sex Offenders in Oregon: State Fails to Track Hundreds." This fluff was an ad disguised as a news article. In addition to relying on a "per capita" rate to fool readers into thinking Oregon is a "sex offender haven," she boldly stated Oregon is one of the worst states for complying with the federal clusterfuck that is the Adam Walsh Act. (Of interesting note is the county with the highest per capita rate, Harney Co., has a population of less than 8000 people and 73 registrants in a land mass the size of Vermont).

This turd was followed by five anecdotal examples of failure to register cases that Maxi argues would not have happened if Oregon would adopt the "federal standards."

And yesterday, Maxi follows up with another anecdotal example on reservation land, and claiming, "That's because a loophole has kept his tribal sex offense record out of Oregon's criminal database." She glosses over the fact that the tribe is AWA compliant. So much for that federal guideline!

Maxi Bernstein is beyond the point of mere "ignorance." This kind of reporting is stupid. And Shiitake-worthy.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Bubba the Contraceptive Sponge mimics FloriDUH sheriff, posts illegal harassment signs

If there was ever a waste of airspace, it is Todd Alan Clem, better known by his legal name Bubba the Love Sponge Clem. Just who is this clown? Some lowlife wannabe Howard Stern whose only real claim to fame besides being a douchebag is his relationship with wrestler Hulk Hogan; Bubba apparently has such a mancrush on Hulk Hogan, Bubba let Hogan sleep with his bimbo wife and video tape the event. There's also the myriad of allegations that SpongeBub is a RACIST. Of course, there was that one time Bubba went after Mark Lunsford, and that was funny as hell. But he's so grating, no one wants to run his show on their stations.

My guess is this latest stunt by SpongeBub Squarepanties is an attempt to distract us from his latest racism controversy much like the Mayor West-Dig Em the Frog incident (from Family Guy if you don't know the cultural reference). I dare that SOB to come to my place and do this.

Bubba the Love Sponge warns communities about sexual offenders
Posted: Oct 23, 2013 1:39 PM EDT
Updated: Oct 23, 2013 4:14 PM EDT
By Jeff Patterson - bio | email

It's nearly Halloween. A time for little ghouls and goblins to dress up for Trick or Treat.

Tampa radio personality Bubba the Love Sponge is worried about some real scary people.

Bubba asked listeners to let him know where sexual offenders are located in their neighborhoods.

He says he then went onto the FDLE web site to verify the information and went says he went one step further to verify the offenders information on individual county law enforcement web sites.

Bubba then had yard signs printed on a red background with bold white letters that notify people that a convicted sexual predator lives at the address.

Bubba says, "This is the season that a lot of kids are going to be running in a lot of peoples neighborhoods. Ok, things like that and I just want to bring public awareness to where these people, that have been convicted in a court of law, for some type of sexual deviant live."

Each year, local law enforcement officers knock on the door of sexual offenders to verify their address and to remind them not to hand out candy at Halloween.

Bubba says, "Your kids need to stay away from this address, not just October 31st, but year around, but particularly next week."

As Bubba placed yard signs in one Hillsborough County neighborhood, he quickly drew a crowd.

People recognized him and wanted to come shake his hand.

Most in the neighborhood support what he is doing.

Candy Derolf lives in the neighborhood where Bubba placed the signs.

Derolf says, "I think it's a good idea, it's great. Cause we have a lot of young, young kids around here that unfortunately get around a lot by themselves."

Moments after Bubba left the area, one man came out of his home to take the sign out of his yard.

The man explained to a news crew, " I'm a sexual offender, not a sexual predator. Bubba got it wrong, there's a difference you know."

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Assistant US Attorney Bruce M. Ferg feels putting a ten year old kid is the "best thing that could have happened to the kid."

A ten year old boy is prosecuted in federal court and is forced to register as a sex offender, and the man responsible for prosecuting him says this:

"My opinion is this is the best thing that could've happened to the kid..."It is not vague to say, 'If you do this kind of activity, we don't care what age you are, you are liable for prosecution.' "" --  [Zusha Elinson (Oct. 7, 2013). Federal Youth Case on Trial: Prosecution of 10-Year-Old on Sex Charges Stokes Debate Over Juvenile Justice. WSJ]

Wrap your mind around that for a minute. I would just love to ask this smug son of a bitch how putting a child on the sex offender registry is the "beat thing that could've happened" to this kid. 

If you want to write this asshat:

Bruce Ferg
United States Attorney's Office
405 W Congress St Ste 4800
Tucson, AZ 85701
Office: 520-620-7300

Friday, September 20, 2013

Is Neil O'Brien of Fresno State Valigator's illegitimate son?

This guy is Neil O'Brien. He is a student "Senator" at Fresno State University. He is also a guy with a bit of a checkered past. A couple of years ago, he started an anti-immigration campaign. His hatred of Hispanic people was so pronounced, he apparently threatened faculty members:

Neil O'Brien arrived at Fresno State in fall 2010, and before the semester was over he had spearheaded a conservative movement aimed at driving out illegal-immigrant students and challenging what he calls radical ideas espoused by Fresno State administrators.

Now he has gone a step further. After Fresno State took disciplinary action against him for allegedly threatening two faculty members in the Chicano and Latin American Studies Department, O'Brien hired a lawyer.

I'm amazed this clown is even allowed on-campus after that fiasco. But now he managed to get on student council. How that happened was beyond me. He reminds me a lot of that idiot Valerie Parkhurst. Who knows? This may be one of her bastard children.

At any rate, he sought out a group he could harass and get away with, so he settled on registered citizens. He tried in vain to pass a resolution to harass... er, "disclose the identity" of registrants going to classes:

Neil O’Brien, senator for the College of Health and Human Services, said he wrote the six-page resolution in an attempt to protect students at Fresno State.
“If a criminal is required to register as a sex offender, they’re required to register because there’s a need-to-know basis,” he said. “There’s a need for closer monitoring of these kinds of people, especially considering the rate of re-offense.”
But not all of O’Brien’s fellow senators agreed. Six ASI members voted against the resolution, while four voted for it.
Kaitlyn Sims, senator of the Craig School of Business, voted against the proposal because she said it might infringe on the constitutional rights of registered sex offenders, who she said are a protected class under the U.S. Department of Labor.
“How does this [resolution] avoid discriminating against what is now, in the federal government’s eyes, a protected class?” she said. “If we’re ruling this, we are discriminating against a class that we’re presuming will be re-offending. In essence, we’re basically saying that they’re guilty until proven innocent.”
Additionally, Sims and other ASI senators feared that identifying sex offenders on campus might trigger violent backlash against them.

Thankfully the student body had some sensible people. O'Brien has no reservations about exposing his true intentions:

This guy has issues. But is he Shiitake Worthy? The elections will be here before you know it.

Saturday, September 7, 2013

Jay Nixon exemplifies why people refer to Missouri as "Misery"

Misery Governor Jay Nixon wants to keep children on the registry. It makes me wonder what kind of money he is getting to keep kids on the registry? Hopefully the legislature will do the right thing and override his veto.

In May, the Legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill that would strike juvenile offenders from public-notification websites and eventually allow their removal from the sex-offender lists compiled by police.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed the bill earlier this summer, warning it could endanger the public by hiding the whereabouts of violent sex offenders. But the battle is not over. Missouri lawmakers are to convene Wednesday to consider overriding the veto.

The juvenile sex offender legislation originally passed the House 153-0 and the Senate 28-4. As recently as last month, House Speaker Tim Jones said the bill seemed "ripe for an override." But as Nixon has traveled the state defending his veto, some lawmakers began having second thoughts about their support for the bill and the potential ramifications of an override.

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Ron Book Jr. (Lauren Book) is pimping Cherish's Law

First off, lets NEVER forget that Laren Book-Lim, aka Ron Book Jr., was just as much responsible for the Julia Tuttle Causeway debacle as her crooked lobbyist/ convicted criminal father Ron Book. A picture is worth a thousand words (just not worth what Getty is charging). 

So now Lauren Book is getting in on the Cherish's Law. What's a Cherish's Law? No one knows! It is just a petition started by a bunch of paranoid soccer moms 

So now, Lauren Book is spewing the same tired DEBUNKED MYTHS, like the claim of 117 victims on average myth. The irony is the laws Book supported increases crime. In other words, she MAKES "time bombs."

[Source: Jones, Brittany. "Petition gains support for 'Cherish Law.'" WTXL-ABC-27. Web. 3 Sept. 2013. <>]

"That's really what we're seeing with these petitions, everybody being passionate and standing up around the issue and working together to protect our children," said Lauren Book.

Lauren Book, the founder of Lauren's Kids for victims of childhood abuse supports tougher laws to keep those who commit those crimes behind bars longer.

"These monsters can be put away for the rest of their lives, they murder children's childhood, my childhood was taken from me," said Book.

"In so many instances these individuals should never ever be allowed out for a second chance, they're ticking time bombs, its not a questions if they a re-offend, it's a question of when they re-offend," said Book.

Senator Julia Lynn needs to re-research residency restriction laws

My condolences to my readers in Kansas, but you live in a boring ass state. That being said, at least Kansas has held a longstanding policy against residency restrictions. And state senator Julia Lynn was part of the reason why Kansas pass a moratorium against such laws.

Here is Julia Lynn in a 2007 article about why she voted in favor of the statewide mortorium on residency restrictions:

Sen. Julia Lynn, R-Olathe, said it is a matter of education. She said she probably was in favor of restrictions when she first came to the Legislature.

"But then I received all this information that most people don't get to see, and I have to vote based on that. (Restrictions) just don't work," she said.

Sen. Lynn voted this way because of the RESEARCH:

According to Roger Werholtz, secretary of the Kansas Department of Corrections, certain restrictions destabilize sex offenders by removing them from family networks, employment and housing. "Everybody agrees we want to keep kids safe, but the reality is these laws make things worse," he said.

Iowa passed a 2005 law that created a 2,000-foot buffer around schools and day cares, inside which registered sex offenders couldn't live. The Iowa County Attorneys Association and the Iowa State Sheriffs' and Deputies' Association have since asked for the buffer's repeal.

Werholtz said studies in Florida, Minnesota, Colorado and Arkansas also showed restrictions don't work.
"The conclusions were that there was no impact on incidents at best, and at worst they increased the possibility of reoffending," he said.

BUT, as the years gone by, Julia Lynn forgot her research. Fast forward to 2013. And now, she's in favor of residency laws:

State Senator Julia Lynn represents the part of Olathe in question. The State Senate has passed buffer zones before, but they never get final approval.

“I do think it’s a legitimate concern. I would like to see some sort of a buffer zone, I think that that is reasonable,” Lynn said...

Senator Lynn predicts residency restrictions for sex offenders will probably come up again in the next session; even though she admits law enforcement experts don’t support buffer zones because it can drive some offenders underground.

Translation: Don't let the facts get in the way of good politics.

It could be that Julia's just having a blonde moment. She needs to "re-research" this issue.

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Chris Smith of NJ is using a backdoor policy to ban registrants from obtaining passports

Chris Smith of New Jersey tried pushing International Megan's Flaw to the populace a couple of years back, but it stalled. Now Smith is trying to attach this bad piece of legislation to a current bill, H.R. 2848. I wonder how deep he dug in his ass to pull this out.

Int’l Megan’s Law Amendment to Protect More Kids 
Smith Provision Made Part of the State Department Bill 

Washington, Aug 1 - A legislative effort by U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (NJ-04) to restrict the passports of U.S citizens who have been convicted of sex crimes against children took a leap forward today when it was unanimously approved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

    Smith wrote an amendment which is now part of the U.S. State Department authorization bill, H.R. 2848, which is expected to be on the House floor in September. It grants the Secretary of State discretion to limit the valid duration of passports for convicted sex offenders listed on the National Sex Offender Registry, or to revoke the passport of an individual convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction in a foreign country of a sex offense.

    “The amount of travel by known predators is staggering,” said Smith, who has worked for years with the family of Megan Kanka to promote legislation that would protect children from sex offenders. “A report released by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that nearly 4,500 registered sex offenders apply for U.S. passports each year. Since a passport is valid up to 10 years, some offenders can remain unwatched for years. According to the Protection Project of Johns Hopkins University, sex tourists from the United States who target children make up a significant percentage of child sex tourists around the world.” Click here to read Smith’s statement to the full committee.

    “Authorizing the State Department to restrict the passports of registered sex offenders has the ability to deter and protect,” said Smith, a leader in Congress on human rights issues, including sex trafficking of women and children. “Predators who have been convicted for sexually exploiting children have used long-term passports to evade return to the United States and have moved to a third country where they continue to exploit and abuse children. By requiring child sex offenders to renew their passports, more regularly, we can curtail the current 10-year window of unchecked travel and offer greater protection for vulnerable women and children around the world.”

    Megan Kanka, a seven-year-old from Smith’s district in Hamilton, N.J., was kidnapped, raped, and brutally murdered in 1994. Her assailant was a convicted, repeat sex offender living across the street, unbeknownst to families in Megan’s neighborhood. Due to public outcry in response to the tragedy and to hard work by Megan’s parents, Richard and Maureen Kanka, the New Jersey State Legislature passed the original Megan’s Law (NJSA 2C: 7-1 through 7-II) to require public notification of convicted sex offenders living in the community. Smith supported a federal Megan’s Law which became law in 1996 and other child protection measures.

    “In order to better protect children, this amendment would allow the Secretary of State the discretion to revoke the passport of an individual who has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction in a foreign country of a sex offense,” Smith said. “It also allows the Secretary the ability to determine the appropriate period of validity of any passport that is issued to a sex offender.”

    Smith authored similar legislation to protect children in 2010 called The International Megan’s Law. That bill would establish a model framework for international law enforcement notifications when convicted child sex offenders pose a danger to children in a destination country. The bill passed the full House in 2010, but the Senate failed to act on the bill.

Sunday, August 11, 2013

Lynna Lai's lies

Lynna Lai is featured here today because she takes her yellow journalism to the next level. It is bad enough Lai lies to the public by using the perennial buzzword "loophole" to describe a bad law that cannot be applied retroactively. The story is made worse when she targets one registrant and begins showing the man's registry poster to the neighbors for good measure.

There is no "loophole" when the law allows one to reside where he wants.

Cleveland Sucks.

CLEVELAND -- In two weeks, kids will soon fill the sidewalks, heading back to school. Near Cleveland's Rickoff Elementary School, young students will walk by the home of registered sex offender who lives across the street.

Another registered sex offender, whose victim was also a juvenile, lives 2 houses away from the school.

Meanwhile in Columbia Station, in Lorain county, the newest resident on Fremont Drive, is not welcome here.

"Most of the neighbors are concerned. Most of us have young children," said Chris Candella. "He's a convicted sex offender and he's living directly next to a day care."

Joseph Lapinta, convicted of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, is now living right behind a day care -- a violation of the law.

Lapinta was defensive when asked about neighbors' concerns.

"I'm not a bad f------ guy, you know what I mean?" he said.

But Candella and his neighbors want him out of the neighborhood.

"He just keeps slipping through the system, and he's now living next door to us," he said.

Lapinta and other registered sex offenders slipping through a loophole in the law, banning sex offenders from living within 1000-feet of a school or day care. And there's not a thing that sheriff's deputies can do about it.

That's because the Ohio legislature made enforcement of the law -- up to civil courts.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine says it's up to neighbors or city officials to sue the sex offender, and ask a judge to order an eviction.

"I don't want anyone to think that there isn't a remedy," said DeWine. "There's teeth in the law in the sense that a lawsuit can be brought, the person can be evicted from that house."

However DeWine agreed that the lack of a criminal penalty for violations makes it easier for sex offenders to ignore the residency law.

Using the online Cuyahoga Sheriff's Office Sex Offender Registry, Channel 3 News analyzed the number of registered sex offenders living near Cleveland public schools. We found that 63 out of 70 pre-K through 8 schools had at least one registered sex offender living within 1000-feet of school property.

A total of 166 registered sex offenders are living very close to the city's elementary and middle schools. Most of them committed their crimes before the ban took effect in 2003, so the restrictions do not apply.

However, we found 28 registered sex offenders are clearly living in violation of the law.

One of them is Radames Gonzalez, who was convicted of gross sexual imposition of a girl under the age of 13. Gonzalez now lives near Cleveland's Orchard-Halle Elementary School on the city's west side.

"Oh, heck no!" exclaimed neighbor Perry Mitchell, a father of 6 girls. "I can tell you my kids won't be going across the street."

Whether in the city or the suburbs, it's up to citizens to be aware -- by using your sheriff's department's sex offender search website.

"We tell the community to use it as an investigative tool, " said Detective Katie Oleksiak from the sex offender unit of the Cuyahoga Sheriff's Office. "Whether it's for your neighborhood, to buying a house, to even dating, or a new neighbor."

Other states with similar residency restrictions for sex offenders are now considering attaching criminal penalties for violations. Such a bill is currently pending in the New York state legislature.

Thursday, July 25, 2013

David "The Diaper" Vitter at it again! Adds another anti-registrant amendment to another spending bill

Earlier this year, David Vitter sought to ban registrants from the Food Stamp program through a farm bill amendment. Now, Vitter is injecting his self-loathing into HUD. I know that registrants with a lifetime reporting requirement is already banned from HUD, but apparently Vitter wants that rule extended to all registered citizens.

Now, I don't think registrants CAN even get housing assistance from HUD. But I wonder why he feels the need to do this? Does his diaper need changing again?

eAdvocate pointed out that Vitter moved to avoid having the bill read. Why is he embarassed to have the amendment read?

SA 1744. Mr. VITTER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1243, making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other purposes; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec. __X. None of the funds made available under this Act shall be used to provide housing assistance benefits for an individual who is convicted of aggravated sexual abuse under section 2241 of title 18, United States Code, murder under section 1111 of title 18, United States Code, an offense under chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code, or any other Federal or State offense involving sexual assault, as defined in 40002(a) of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13925(a))

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Ken Cuccinelli exploits Predator Panic (tm) to revive defeated anti-sodomy laws

Ken Cuccinelli is doing all he can to bring back sodomy laws. What better way to do so than by telling people if you don't brink back these laws, you'll release 90 sexual predators from prison? I wonder if Virginia will buy it.

Ken Cuccinelli Really Wants to Ban Oral Sex


Screen grab from
Ken Cuccinelli wants to keep kids safe from sexual predators by banning oral and anal sex—between consenting adults. On a website his campaign just launched, Cuccinelli, the Republican candidate for governor in Virginia, paints himself as the only real protector of children, because of his efforts as Virginia attorney general to reinstate a law banning all naked fun-time acts besides vaginal intercourse. 
Cuccinelli's claim is that only by reinstating the Crimes Against Nature law, which Cuccinelli dishonestly calls the "Anti-Child Predators Law," can the state of Virginia prosecute people who rape children. Never mind that rape is already illegal, child molestation is already illegal, and statutory rape is already illegal. His website says that a full 90 sexual predators may come off the sex offenders registry (the site is vague on how) if oral and anal sex isn't banned outright for everyone, a claim that hopefully will remind voters that enforcing such a law would mean that adults having consensual sex in their bedrooms could become "sex offenders" if they're caught. 
Like his peers, Cuccinelli knows that you're supposed to come up with a reason these anti-sex measures aren't really about sex, but never has a man been so bad at maintaining a cover story. He swears that the law won't be enforced as written to prosecute consensual sex between adults, even though the Supreme Court ruling that made this type of ban unconstitutional, Lawrence v. Texas, was in fact about arresting a couple having consensual sex in private. Cuccinelli's "just trust me" argument is especially hollow in light of his past behavior, as reported by Think Progress:
In 2004, a bipartisan group in the Virginia General Assembly backed a bill that would have brought the law in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling. They proposed to eliminate the Crimes Against Nature law’s provisions dealing with consenting adults in private and leaving in place provisions relating to prostitution, public sex, and those other than consenting adults. Cuccinelli opposed the bill in committee and helped kill it on the Senate floor.
Oral sex is almost universal among sexually active adults. The Centers for Disease Control finds that nearly 82 percent of men and 80 percent of women ages 15-44 admit to having had it. The Kinsey Institute's research shows that nearly everyone who is having vaginal intercourse also admits to having oral sex. The very few who don't cop to this no doubt want to keep their jobs working for the Cuccinelli campaign.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Rachel Jeantel on Piers Morgan: Zimmerman "Might be a Rapist"

The entire Trayvon Martin case has been a train wreck, but otherwise irrelevant to this blog, until now. The controversial "star witness," Rachel Jeantel, has not helped her cause with her racist comments, but of all her comments, this one takes the cake.

After hearing Rachel on the "Piers Morgan" show, her "creepy ass cracker" comment seems tame by comparison:

"PIERS MORGAN: And he was freaked out by it? 

RACHEL JEANTEL: Yes. Definitely, after I say ‘may be a rapist,’ for every boy, for every man, every — who’s not that kind of way, seeing a grown man following them, would they be creep out? … 

And people need to understand, he didn’t want that creepy ass cracker going to his father or girlfriend’s house to go get — mind you, his little brother was there. You know — now, mind you, I told you — I told Trayvon it might have been a rapist."

Only part of the interview is online:

Monday, July 15, 2013

Well, Joe Arpaio must have FINALLY done something wrong, because NOW he wants to harass registrants with a "volunteer posse"

It is hard to believe that America's DUMBEST sheriff, Joe Arpaio, has never been featured in the long history of the Shiitake Awards. And we all know that politicians tend to focus on sex offender issues only as a last resort, if they are in a scandal, or if that person needs to look like he's working. Well, we know Sheriff JOKE isn't a stranger to the scandals, nor has he needed attention. Thus, one can only wonder what his motivation is behind his "volunteer posse" to check on registered citizens. Did Joe FINALLY cross the line and is in danger of getting in trouble?

Sex Offenders: Are they obeying the law?
Posted: Jul 13, 2013 5:48 PM EDT
Posted by Ceasar Hernandez 

Approximately 20 teams made up of deputies and volunteer posse will be checking on the compliance level of 81 level two and level three sex offenders currently residing in the Sheriff's jurisdiction.

The Sheriff's mission is to verify that these more serious sex offenders are obeying the law by truly living at the addresses they have on record with the criminal courts. Per Sheriff Arpaio's policy, these verifications must be conducted every six months.

If deputies/posse determine that the offender is not at the proper address, a detailed report will be given to the Sheriff's Sex crimes unit to follow up for potential criminal charges.

Failing to properly register is a class four felony.

While the Sheriff's Office does not believe that a high volume of sex offenders are out of compliance, this operation is to ensure total compliance, as the Sheriff has requested.

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Poor Nicholas Elizondo just can't catch a break: Bakersfield Barney Fife arrests him for finding one bullet

I thought I had crappy luck, but Nicholas Elizondo makes me look like a lottery winner by comparison. First, the guy served time for a crime he most assuredly didn't commit after being prosecuted by one of the chief proponents of the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic in Bakersfield. Then, the guy has been ridiculed for winning custody of his child after the mother was proven to be an unfit parent. Then, just a few days ago, this very site added a nomination to a woman who suggested the unfit mother kidnap the child because this man is on the registry. 

Now, the guy was arrested, and his child taken away, because cops say they found a single bullet in his car. A bullet. Poor guy just can't catch a break!

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) — A convicted sex offender has temporarily lost custody of his 6-year-old daughter after he was arrested at a traffic stop.

Nicholas Elizondo was arrested Sunday after a Bakersfield police officer found a bullet in his truck while conducting a traffic stop.

Elizondo said Monday that the bullet belonged to his 20-year-old son.

"I think the fact that I was convicted of a sex crime and my daughter was with me,” said Elizondo, “I think that played into law enforcement's decision to make a big thing out of an old rusty bullet in the back of my truck."

His daughter was with him at the time of the arrest and was taken to the A. Miriam Jamison Children's Center, where she will remain until an investigation is completed. 

Elizondo said he believes it was unnecessary for police to take his daughter into protective custody.

“I had somebody who was available to take care of her," said Elizondo, referring to his son and 24-year-old stepdaughter. “There was no reason to take her into custody. She was not in danger” 

The custody case of the 6-year-old girl generated public attention after the girl's mother contacted media. An Oklahoma judge awarded custody to Elizondo, who was convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 in 1995.  

Elizondo said the charges against him were false, and that the girl was coached by her mother, Elizondo’s first wife. 

The child from the 1995 incident indeed testified at a 2012 child custody hearing for the current 6-year-old girl that she fabricated the accusations, but Elizondo remains a registered sex offender.

“I just hope they give her back, so I can move on with my life,” said Elizondo. “If not, I’ll probably hire an attorney.”

The Department of Health Services inspected Elizondo’s home on Monday and has yet to determine whether to return custody.

Monday, July 1, 2013

Jeanne Sager blatantly misquotes her own source on the Cafe Mom website

I generally leave the nominations for "Worst News Mutt" to real journalists or at least the more respected websites. I'm not really sure I'd put CafeMom up there as one of the better sites, but the blatant stupidity from Jeanne Sager at CafeMom is the reason this award was created.

The gist is this- a man who was very likely falsely accused (convicted during the time of the SRA witch hunts despite his accuser stating she was not molested) on the registry wins custody of his daughter because the mother is a psycho. Yet this reporter ignores her source material and writes the psycho mother should kidnap the kid.

Mom Who Lost Custody of Daughter to Sex Offender Should Just Kidnap Her
by Jeanne Sager 6 hours ago

Under normal circumstances, divorced parents should have to share custody with one another. It's what's best for the kids. But when a judge awards sole custody of a 6-year-old girl to a convicted sex offender, a man who went to prison for molesting a (different) 6-year-old girl, all bets are off.

I think I'd run far, far, far away (with my child, of course).

I wouldn't blame Lisa Knight, a mom whose ex-husband (and registered sex offender), Nicholas Elizondo, just took her to court over visitation with their 6-year-old daughter, if she did the same.

Elizondo, who lives in California, challenged Knight in an Oklahoma court recently, claiming she wasn't granting him his visits with the girl. The judge took his side.

And I'm not talking about forcing the visitation. The Oklahoma City judge (Knight and the little girl have resided in Oklahoma since the couple divorced in 2008 when she was pregnant) gave Elizondo full custody, despite the fact that a quick search of the California sex offender registry pulls up his name and lists a conviction for "lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age," despite the fact that Elizondo was convicted of sexually assaulting a 6-year-old stepdaughter back in the '90s.

FULL custody!

Of a child.

To a convicted pedophile!

Yeah, yeah, Dad served his time and he is the 6-year-old's biological father. But whose rights are more important here? Dad's or the little girl's?

Isn't that the point of custody hearings? To decide what is in a child's best interest?

It can't be "what's good for a child" to let a sex offender who is known to have hurt children take them home. That's the point of registries of these creeps; to let us know who shouldn't be around our kids so we can keep them apart.

Even putting a guy like this alone in the room with a 6-year-old girl is risking that child's well-being. If you were a mother who hired a sex offender to babysit your kid, you'd likely be looking at child endangerment charges (or worse).

So what's a mom to do when a sex offender gets custody?

Again, I'll admit it. I'd run. I'd take my child, and I'd skip town and never, ever come back.

I'd do anything to keep my child from a sex offender, even if that sex offender is her own father.

Because my child's right to be protected is more important than his to be a father.

What would you do if you were this mother? Would you follow the court's orders?

Sunday, June 30, 2013

You can have sex with a 16 year old in Ohio, but if you talk about it you could be a sex offender

Does anyone proofread laws? Apparently Ohio does not. If you don't think some podunk sheriff won't try to convict someone for what is described below, well, you need to read this blog more often.

Hookup Shocker: The Sex Is Legal, but Talking About It Is a Felony!
Jacob Sullum
Jun. 28, 2013 4:16 pm

This week the Ohio House of Representatives unanimously approved a bill ostensibly aimed at fighting "human trafficking" that makes it a crime to "solicit" a legal act: sex with someone who is 16 or 17 years old. The age of consent in Ohio is 16. Yet under H.B. 130, a 20-year-old who asks a 16-year-old to have sex with him, or a 21-year-old who does the same with a 17-year-old, thereby commits a fifth-degree felony, punishable by six to 12 months in jail and a $2,500 fine. He also has to register as a sex offender. But if the teenager broaches the subject, or if the sex proceeds without any explicit verbal reference to it, no crime has been committed. Here is the relevant provision:

No person shall solicit another, not the spouse of the offender, to engage in sexual conduct with the offender, when the offender is eighteen years of age or older and four or more years older than the other person, and the other person is sixteen or seventeen years of age, whether or not the offender knows the age of the other person.

Since there is no requirement that money change hands, this provision criminalizes ordinary sexual propositions if one person is 16 or 17 and the other is at least four years older when it is the older person who makes the suggestion, even though the sex itself remains legal. Having sex is fine, as long as you don't talk about it beforehand.

The elimination of any knowledge requirement, which is problematic even when the "solicitation" involves someone below the age of consent, is especially so when the person approached is 16 or 17. Since the difference between a 16- or 17-year-old and an 18-year-old may be difficult to discern, someone keen to avoid a felony charge would be wise to demand proof of age before saying anything about sex. And if the object of his attention happens to have a fake ID—as teenagers pretending to be older than they are sometimes do, especially when they go to bars or clubs—that is no defense. As Granville, Ohio, attorney Drew Mc Farland notes, the bill imposes  a "strict liability" sta ndard, meaning that "even an honest mistake is unforgiven." Mc Farland, who drew my attention to this bill, suggests one such scenario:

A mature 17-year-old is lawfully in a liquor-serving establishment and meets a 22-year-old who suggests they go back to his or her place for some sexual fun. Under this change in the law, the 22-year-old is guilty of a felony.

Legislators already define "human trafficking" broadly enough to include consensual sex (when it occurs in exchange for money). Now Ohio is poised to classify merely talking about consensual sex, even when no money is involved, as a species of sexual slavery.

The Ohio Senate is expected to take up the bill after returning from its summer break.

They are coming out of the woodwork-- Tragedy Vultures swoop in to exploit a tragedy to further careers

Let us be clear-- I believe the murder of an 8-year old girl in Florida is tragic and the person who did this should be punished. But what is truly sad is people are coming out of the woodwork.

For now I'll call these people "Tragedy Vultures," people like Mark Lunsford, Florida politician Janet Adkins, Ann Duggar from the Justice Coalition, and David Rowe of No Peace For Predators are exploiting the tragic BUT RARE case to further their agendas.

The Tragedy Vultures:

Mark Lunsford: Lunsford has been well represented here at the Shiitakes and is obviously looking for a quick buck since his meal ticket Hank Asher died.

"This guy apparently wasted no time in laughing in the face of law enforcement and legislators," Lunsford said. "I can feel every ounce of pain that her parents are feeling. It tears me up inside to know that another child has been senselessly murdered."

"We've got to come to some kind of solution for these children so they're not victims," Lunsford said. "Parents need to be educated. Law enforcement needs tools. Prosecutors need laws. Legislators, what do you need? Another child to be murdered?"

Ann Dugger, of the Justice Coalition, says the current laws are good ones, but she says dangerous offenders like Smith need to stay behind bars.

"If they're off the street, absolutely, they don't need to be around society," Dugger said. "They don't need to be around children. They don't need to be around their prey."

FloriDUH state Rep. Janet Adkins, R-Fernandina Beach -- “It is my intent to ensure that the Duval Delegation take action in reviewing the current laws that relate to sexual offenders and make the necessary changes to help ensure our children are protected from those that would cause them harm,” Adkins said in a statement. As a mother of two, Adkins said the case hit close to home for her.“My heart is broken for the family of Cherish Perrywinkle and those she has left behind,” she said. PS- VOTE FOR ME!

David Rowe, No Peace For Predators: Rowe is getting fat, I might add. He's spouting the same crap, harsher penalties and the like. What a waste of space.

As this case continues to play out in the media, expect to see more vultures circle Cherish's story.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Mug shot website sues Utah sheriff for jail photos

A private business extorting registered citizens for money is being sued in California, and mugshot magazines are facing challenges in court. They are for profit ventures designed to shame and humiliate people. But one company has the audacity to sue a sheriff for refusing to release mug shots to them. I dislike cops but in this instance I have to give props to this sheriff.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The owner of a website that publishes inmate booking photos is suing a Utah sheriff for denying a public records request for more than a thousand mug shots.

The Salt Lake County Sheriff denied the records request in February, saying his office could refuse because it holds copyright control over the images.

Attorneys for Kyle Prall, who runs the website, argue in documents filed last week in 3rd District Court that if the court doesn't overturn Sheriff Jim Winder's "wrong and selective denial," it would set a "dangerous precedent" beyond mug shots into broader rights of public access to government records.

In January, Winder stopped posting booking photos to his metro jail's online roster, citing websites such as Prall's that display the images and charge former inmates a removal fee. Some of the sites charge hundreds of dollars and then fail to follow through by removing image or identifying information.

The websites are using the records created by his office to hurt people and make money, he said.

"I believe that the practice of using these mug shots to belittle and abuse our citizens is immoral and repugnant," he said when discussing the websites in general during an interview Tuesday.

"A compassionate society does not utilize the scarlet letter," he said.

Former inmates say the websites make them pay twice for their crimes, and some have contacted Winder, sometimes mistakenly believing his office is cooperating with the websites and publications.

"This has a huge impact on these people's lives," he said. "It's hurting people."

Winder said after he took down the images from the sheriff's website, "people made kind of a mad dash to get them" and the office began receiving public records requests for batches of the mug shots, such as Prall's request.

Prall did not return further messages seeking comment.

According to information on, the website will remove photos and information for free if a person can prove they were found not guilty or had the charges dismissed.

Otherwise, the website charges $98 to $178 to take down the information. The higher fee will buy a "rush" removal where the record is cleared within two business days instead of 20.

A statement on says by publishing the photos and inmate information, such as details about the person's arrest, helps the public stay informed and safe.

Prall submitted a records request in late January seeking copies of mug shots for everyone arrested or booked into the Salt Lake County Jail this year from January 11 to January 27.

In February, the sheriff's office declined the request and said the 1,388 mug shots that fall in that time period were "protected materials to which access must be limited for purposes of securing or maintaining Salt Lake County's proprietary rights."

Prall appealed to the county council, which voted to uphold the denial, so now he's taking the issue to court.

"We think it's legally unfounded," said Prall's attorney David Reymann. "Mug shots have been public records and have been routinely released for many, many years."

Using words such as "bullies," "extortionists" and "trash," Salt Lake County Sheriff Jim Winder on Thursday blasted tabloid magazines and websites that post mug shots from his jail and then demand money for the pictures to be removed.

"This is a government agency saying 'we own the public records and we can refuse to release these records to the public,'" he said.

Reymann argues in court documents that if a government agency argues it can deny access because it holds the copyright to those records, "virtually all government records would be off limits to the public," and the state public records law "would be meaningless."

Winder called that argument "ridiculous" and said that just because the government produces a record doesn't mean it can be used for any and all purposes.

Earlier this year, the Utah Legislature passed and Gov. Gary Herbert signed a measure that aimed to prevent people from using jail booking photos for mug shot websites. The legislation bars county sheriffs from handing out a booking photograph unless the person requesting it signs a statement swearing they will not place the image in a publication or on a website that charges people to remove photos.

The law wasn't signed by the governor until April 1 and became effective on May 14.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

US Congress adding amendment to deny food stamps from registered citizens

In recent years, Congress has attempted or succeeded in denying Small Business Loans, college aid, and FHA loans for people on the registry, now they want to ban registrants from obtaining food stamps. And you'll never believe who pushed for the amendment. None other than that diaper-wearing disgrace of a Louisiana Senator David Vitter. Since prostitution is a registerable sex offense in Louisiana, this asshat should be on the registry and denied his pension. If David Vitter can be forgiven by the legislature, then that forgiveness should extend to ALL registered persons.

eAdvocate has broken down the amendment added to S-954, a freaking farm bill of all things, here:

The details of the Amendment follow:

(Purpose: To end food stamp eligibility for convicted violent rapists, pedophiles, and murderers)
    At the end of subtitle A of title IV, insert the following:
    Section 6 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015) (as amended by section 4004) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(s) Disqualification for Certain Convicted Felons.--

    ``(1) IN GENERAL.- -An individual shall not be eligible for benefits under this Act if the individual is convicted of--
    ``(A) aggravated sexual abuse under section 2241 of title 18, United States Code;
    ``(B) murder under section 1111 of title 18, United States Code;
    ``(C) an offense under chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code;
    ``(D) a Federal or State offense involving sexual assault, as defined in 40002(a) of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13925(a)); or
    ``(E) an offense under State law determined by the Attorney General to be substantially similar to an offense described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C).

    ``(2) EFFECTS ON ASSISTANCE AND BENEFITS FOR OTHERS.--The amount of benefits otherwise required to be provided to an eligible household under this Act shall be determined by considering the individual to whom paragraph (1) applies not to be a member of such household, except that the income and resources of the individual shall be considered to be income and resources of the household.

    ``(3) ENFORCEMENT.--Each State shall require each individual applying for benefits under this Act, during the application process, to state, in writing, whether the individual, or any member of the household of the individual, has been convicted of a crime described in paragraph (1).''.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. 

Saturday, May 4, 2013

"Award Winning" liberal blogger Meg Lanker-Simons threatens to rape herself

All of a sudden, the internet is abuzz with false allegation arrests. Thankfully in this instance, no one was falsely arrested. Rather, this woman made a threat of rape... against herself! What a fitting end to Child Abuse Awareness Month. Seeing some of the comments on this story in the media shows how deep the "rape culture" mantra has become embedded in our society.

Meg Lanker-Simons was a liberal blogger who won an award for her blog "Cognitive Dissonance," but now she's in the running for a different kind of award. A Shiitake Award! (As a side note, I lean to the left, so I'm going to join in on the political bashing. This girl is a dingbat.) Unfortunately, the rape-culture believers have fiercely defended her, even blaming "rape culture" for this false allegation.

(A second story with more pictures, screenshots, and coverage of a protest encouraged by Meg's false threat can be found HERE)

UW Police: Facebook post was a hoax -- UPDATED
Citation: UW woman 'admitted' making controversial statement

The University of Wyoming Police Department issued a citation Monday afternoon in Albany County Circuit Court for Meg Lanker-Simons, a woman allegedly threatened last week in a social media post authorities now contend was a hoax.

The citation is for interference, a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment up to a year and a fine up to $1,000.

"Subject admitted to making a controversial post on UW Crushes webpage and then lied about not doing it," according to the citation.

She is scheduled to appear at 9 a.m. May 13 in Circuit Court.

The post was made to the UW Crushes page April 24 on Facebook and described Lanker-Simons as "that chick that runs her liberal mouth all the time and doesn't care who knows it."

The post also referenced a graphic, sexual act against Lanker-Simons.

"One night with me and shes gonna be a good Republican (expletive)," the post read.

The post created a stir on social media and at the university, with school officials issuing statements denouncing the post against Lanker-Simons and campus police opening an investigation.

Lanker-Simons could not be reached for comment.

UW released a statement Tuesday afternoon regarding the citation.

"This episode has sparked an important discussion reaffirming that the UW community has no tolerance for sexual violence or violence of any type," UW spokesman Chad Baldwin said. "The fact that the Facebook post apparently was a fabrication does not change the necessity for continued vigilance in reassuring that we have a campus where everyone feels safe.

"It's important that this event does not undermine the progress that has been made in this area."

According to the UW statement, Lanker-Simons received the citation as a "result of false statements she made to the UW Police Department."

The citation followed a police interview of Lanker-Simons and a search of her computer equipment pursuant to a warrant, UW reported.

UW Police "obtained substantial evidence verifying that the offending Facebook post came from Lanker-Simons' computer, while the computer was in her possession."

Pamela Kandt, co-convener of the Episcopal Women's Caucus and a Casper activist, came to Lanker-Simons' defense Tuesday.

Last week, after the controversial post went public, Kandt lobbied university officials for a "swift response to this outrage."

"I will tell you, I believe Meg is innocent of this outrage," said Kandt, adding she believes the citation issued by police is a "classic case of blaming the victim."

Kandt said she has spoken with Lanker-Simons following the citation's issuance.

UW Police, Kandt said, "have bullied her and they have pulled a bluff."

"This is the worst episode of 'Law & Order' you can imagine," Kandt said.

She added, "I mean, my God, who would do this to herself?"