Wednesday, February 20, 2019

The Dark Figure of South FL's US District Judge Paul C Huck(ster)

If you want to know why Miami-Dade County FloriDUH continues to be ground zero for residency restriction depravity, look no further than this US District Judge Paul C Huck crooked piece of shit. And if you're pissed off I'm cursing so much, read his recent decision, Does v Miami Dade Co., Case 1:14-cv-23933-PCH (So Dist FL, 18 Dec 2018), and I guarantee you that you'd be pissed too.

Senior Judge Paul C. Huck
Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. United States Courthouse
400 North Miami Avenue
Room 13-2
Miami, Florida 33128

https://floridaactioncommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Does-v.-Miami-Dade-Sorr-Order-of-Judge.pdf

There is a possible tie between Paul HUCKSTER and the recent Scurich and John report. The Defendant, Miami-Dade County, used Richard McCleary as a witness. McCleary is a colleage in the same department at U. of Cal-Irvine (UCI) as Richard John, the Shiitake nominee who wrote that idiotic report on the "dark figure of recidivism." The work of these hucksters were cited in Judge Huck's decision. Huck cited the debunked Langevin and Prentky studies as well.

The ruling is 45 pages long, so I won't post the whole thing here. Below are the lowlights:

On recidivism, Huckster ruled, "lt is meaningful that while the experts disagreed as to the extent of the risk, they all acknowledged that sexual recidivism is an existential danger. Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have not established a reliable rate of recidivism among sex offenders, but the County has a sufficient basis to determine that the risk to children 15 years old and younger is
substantial." (I've already debunked the belief of high recidivism numerous times but this judge was determined not to listen to facts.)

On effectiveness of residency restrictions: Plaintiffs also have not proven that the residency restriction is ineffective. In fact, Plaintiffs' expert Dr. Socia testified that studies show that after the imposition of residency restrictions, reoffense rates went down, although not in a statistically significant way. Moreover,Dr. Mccleary explained that to evaluate a residency restriction at the level of statistical significance, the sample size must be sufficiently large. He said that virtually all of the samples in the policy literature on residency restrictions (including those relied on by Dr. Levenson) are too small to detect their effects. Dr. Mccleary also testified that finding a residency
restriction has no statistically significant effect does not imply that the law is ineffective. Dr. Levenson cited studies to support her opinion that residency restrictions are not effective', however, these studies evaluated different laws from different states, with different outcomes. (Notice the Judge relies solely on McCleary's testimony. There is NO actual study that showed a decrease in recidivism. Instead, the judge looked solely at one state that had a decrease within a study where other states reported an increase and made the claim that residency restrictions are effective.)

Downplaying the difficulty of finding housing: Plaintiffs' expert Dr. Socia opined that after accounting for affordability and availability, there are only 338 housing rental units outside the buffer zones. The Court finds that this number is unreliable and understated. Dr. Socia did not just calculate the number of available housing limits under the Ordinance by excluding those within 2,500 feet of a school. He also added three additional criteria, only including housing that is: 1) rental in nature, 2) affordable, and 3) currently available for rent. (So the judge actually thinks a person living on disability (SSI is $770 at the moment) can afford to rent an apartment at $2500 a month. I've stretched a dollar until it hollers but I find this logic too far of a stretch.)

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

Cleveland Co NC Sheriff Alan Norman posts registrants' faces on Facebook before warning not to harass registrants


If you are concerned about vigilantes, why use the social media outlet that probably incites the most vigilante activity?

Office Telephone: (704) 484-4817
Address: P. O. Box 1508, Shelby, NC 28151-1508

https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/cleveland-co-sheriff-s-office-to-start-posting-names-of-registered-sex-offenders-on-facebook/922401491

Cleveland Co. Sheriff's Office to start posting names of registered sex offenders on Facebook
By: Ken Lemon
Updated: Feb 18, 2019 - 6:28 PM

CLEVELAND COUNTY, N.C. - Cleveland County’s Sheriff’s Office is taking unprecedented steps to make sure you know if a sex offender moves in near you.

It is posting on its Facebook page information about sex offenders who have changed their address or who have just become sex offenders.

Officials said there is a higher percentage of registered sex offenders in the county than in other counties of similar size, so people need extra help to stay safe.

Cleveland County Sheriff Alan Norman said he is fed up. "Beware," he said. "We are going to put you on social media."

Norman said that for some reason, Cleveland County has become a destination for sex offenders and he wants people to know if a sex offender has moved nearby.

"They deserve a safe environment to live in,” said Norman.

The sheriff said he has officers checking the addresses of registered sex offender two to three times more often than the state mandates because the numbers are alarming.

The sheriff said he wants registered sex offenders to understand they are being watched and to make sure they don't break the law.

"You either need to find another county to live in other than Cleveland County or you are going to be in the Cleveland County jail,” said Norman.

The Facebook posting has been met with overwhelming approval. One person thanked the Sheriff's Office for posting the information.

Some people including resident Marsha Beam, said they disagree. "I honestly think it's an invasion of privacy. If I made a mistake, I wouldn't want everybody on Facebook knowing about it," said Beam.

She said she wants to track sex offenders, but the county is already required to publish information on its website.

Channel 9 went to the home of one of the registered sex offenders to ask if the post was a problem for him, but no one answered the door.

The Sheriff's Office also added in its post that anyone who is found harassing, intimidating or threatening sex offenders can be charged.


Friday, February 15, 2019

"Poissoning" the Pot: The Dark Figure of Grossly Overestimating Sex Crime Recidivism with Nicholas Scurich and Richard S. John

Today we have a grossly biased "research paper by two complete buffoons with Ph. Ds, which in this instance stands for Piled High and Deep.

Just who are these two twits, you ask? The offensive paper, "The Dark Figure of Sexual Recidivism", was written by Nicholas Scurich and Richard S. John



Richard S. John is associate professor of psychology and a research associate at the Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events (CREATE) at the University of Southern California. His research focuses on normative and descriptive models of human judgment and decision making and methodological issues in application of decision and probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). He has consulted on a number of large projects involving expert elicitation, including analysis of nuclear power plant risks (NUREG 1150) and analysis of cost and schedule risk for tritium supply alternatives.


Nicholas Scurich, PhD, is "a tenured professor of Psychology and Criminology at the University of California, Irvine. In 2017 he joined TAG ("Threat Assessment Group") as a consultant and lecturer in workplace misconduct mitigation. Dr. Scurich's focus on misconduct risk assessment has included scientific studies of how to assess the risk of misconduct, how to deter dangerous behavior, how to make scientifically informed decisions about risky individuals, and how to communicate risk information. He frequently consults for the Department of Homeland Security on issues related to risk assessment and security. For example, he has worked with the TSA to help develop novel approaches to allocating security resources and screening of airline passengers based on risk."

IF YOU JUST WANT THE SHORT STORY-- Scurich works for a business that pimps threat assessment tests to other big business, and John works for a hokey anti-terrorism program for USC. Both work with the second dumbest and most useless creation of the Bush Administration (the AWA being first), the Department of Homeland Security.

Tweedle Scurich and Tweedle John wrote a crappy research paper, published it on SSRN, then wrote a press release in hopes of getting some cheap publicity.

I suggest you check out the Sentencing Typepad blog to read more, and to a link to the offensive report:

https://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2019/02/the-dark-figure-of-sexual-recidivism.html

"The Dark Figure of Sexual Recidivism"

The title of this post is the title of this new paper authored by Nicholas Scurich and Richard John now available via SSRN.  Here is its abstract:

Empirical studies of sexual offender recidivism have proliferated in recent decades. Virtually all of the studies define recidivism as a new legal charge or conviction for a sexual crime, and these studies tend to find recidivism rates on the order of 5-15% after 5 years and 10-25% after 10+ years.  It is uncontroversial that such a definition of recidivism underestimates the true rate of sexual recidivism because most sexual crime is not reported to legal authorities, the so-called “dark figure of crime.”

To estimate the magnitude of the dark figure of sexual recidivism, this paper uses a probabilistic simulation approach in conjunction with a.) victim self-report survey data about the rate of reporting sexual crime to legal authorities, b.) offender self-report data about the number of victims per offender, and c.) different assumptions about the chances of being convicted of a new sexual offense once it is reported.  Under any configuration of assumptions, the dark figure is substantial, and as a consequence, the disparity between recidivism defined as a new legal charge or conviction for a sex crime and recidivism defined as actually committing a new sexual crime is large.  These findings call into question the utility of recidivism studies that rely exclusively on official crime statistics to define sexual recidivism, and highlight the need for additional, long-term studies that use a variety of different measures to assess whether or not sexual recidivism has occurred.


My email sent to the duo that wrote this sorry excuse of a "research paper", obviously not expecting a response:

You report is a pile of bovine excrement. Your report has numerous fatal flaws:

1. You actually rely on the Prentky and Langevin studies, and you flagrantly ignore the fact both these studies were thoroughly debunked, and even Prentky himself says his study is not indicative of overall sex crime rates. The Langevin study purged non-recidivists from their study. Using two studies that utilized only high-risk previously recidivist offenders to come up with a recidivism rate for ALL SOs is stat manipulation.

2. Multinational studies don't take into account that the legal definitions of sex crimes vary greatly among nations. At the time of the writing of the Harris and Hanson study, the AoC for Canada was 14 but is 16-18 in the USA, so having agreed upon relations with a woman between 15-17 is illegal in the US depending on the state.

3. Whether you intend this or not, your article implies every sex crime must be the result of recidivists. At the least, you failed to mention anywhere in your report otherwise.

4. Ahlmeyer's reports relying on polygraphs is laughable. We all know that any reports relying on such pseudoscience is skewed. We all know polys don't work, and those studied by them were given ample incentives to "cooperate" with the study. That's why the Butner study was debunked, because they got BUSTED for that. It is a well known fact that polygraphs don't detect lies but polygraphers/ witch doctors use them to make assumptions, or worse yet, to scare people into making them say what the polygrapher wants to hear. A person who knows he's not getting out of lockup will certainly put on a show to get a favorable outcome such as a better living arrangement for complying with a program he knows is BS.

5. Abel's study is flawed, and it seems to me you don't understand the difference between paraphilic acts and pedophilic acts. Abel's study considered all manners of what was considered deviant acts, including homosexual acts between consenting parties. And, you are seeming assuming each act means one different victim every time. Even Abel concluded that most offenders who committed the same acts repeatedly had those same acts with the same one or two people. You obviously cherry-picked the highest, scariest sounding stat from that flawed study for a reason.

6. You fail to consider the fact that these studies of underreporting OVERESTIMATE something as being a crime. First, the NCVS allows for the checkmarking of incidents where a person merely "feels" or assumes that a sexual assault is imminent, even if nothing happened but this mere assumption. Actions once considered merely annoyances like looking too long at a woman or whistling at a woman's beauty can be considered sexual harassment in today's MeToo era, and many feminists consider that a form of "rape." Obviously due to no police investigation, there's NO WAY to know if a person reporting an incident is reporting an actual crime or just an annoying or an assumption. The 2004 Hanson and Harris study discussed the difficulty in addressing underreporting long before the explosion of sexual misconduct  claims in the latter half of the 2010s: “The Besserer and Trainor (2000) study showed that sexual assault had the highest percentage of incidents that were not reported to police (78%).  When respondents were asked why they did not report sexual victimization to the police, 59% of the respondents stated that the “incident was not important enough” to report.  Consequently, readers may wonder what counts as a sexual assault. The Besserer and Trainor (2000) victimization study used a very broad definition of sexual assault.  They counted all attempts at forced sexual activity, all unwanted sexual touching, grabbing, kissing, and fondling, as well as threats of sexual assault (Jennifer Tuffs, personal communication, January 15, 2003). Their broad definition undoubtedly included some behaviours that do not conform to the popular image of a sexual offence. All unwanted sexual advances are wrong, possibly criminal, and have the potential to do psychological harm to the victim.  As a society, however, we need to decide whether we wish to count an unwanted touch on the buttocks as an unreported sexual crime.  Coming to an agreement on what constitutes a sexual crime will be a difficult task.”

7. You don't seem to realize there's something called a false report. That's a pretty damned good explanation for the discrepancy between rearrest rates and reconviction rates and one that should be given greater consideration.

You cannot ASS-U-ME that the "majority" of recidivism goes unreported. It is arrogant to make that claim no matter what kind of stat manipulation you used.

You article is the shittiest excuse of research I've seen in a long time, and I'd love to know which victim advocate group funded this tripe.

ADDENDUM: A very thorough critique of this paper can be found at http://sosen.org/blog/2019/02/19/the-dark-figure-of-sex-offense-recidivism-overestimation-an-exercise-in-myth-busting.html

Monday, February 11, 2019

Go on a panty raid in Missouri, land on the registry for 15 years (If this bill passes)

Look at these potential Missouri sex offenders,
hidin their faces in shame
I'm shocked in this age of named laws we haven't named this bill the Dildo's Law or something, but whoever came up with this law is a real dildo.

https://www.senate.mo.gov/19info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=1435526

SB 244 Modifies the registration as a sex offender for certain offenses

Sponsor: Walsh

LR Number: 0844S.01I Committee: Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Last Action: 2/7/2019 - Second Read and Referred S Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee
Journal Page: S220 Title: Calendar Position: Effective Date: August 28, 2019
Current Bill Summary

SB 244 - This act requires anyone who has been found guilty of, or pled guilty to, certain offenses to register as a tier I sex offender if the property stolen was sexual in nature. These offenses are burglary in the first degree, burglary in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and stealing.

Section A. Section 589.414, RSMo, is repealed and one new section enacted in lieu thereof, to be known as section 589.414, to read as follows:

5. Tier I sexual offenders, in addition to the requirements of subsections 1 to 4 of this section, shall report in person to the chief law enforcement official annually in the month of their birth to verify the information contained in their statement made pursuant to section 589.407. Tier I sexual offenders include:

(1) Any offender who has been adjudicated for the offense of:

(p) Burglary in the first degree under section 569.160, burglary in the second degree under section 569.170, robbery in the first degree under section 570.023, robbery in the second degree under section 570.025, and stealing under section 570.030 if the property stolen was sexual in nature. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "sexual in nature" shall include any article of personal property that elicits a feeling of sexual arousal, sexual excitement, or sexual fulfillment from the person that stole the property;

Thursday, February 7, 2019

If you see something, say something, so when you see Cindy McCain, tell her she's Shiitake-Worthy


I wrote a Haiku for today's Shiitake Award nominee, Cindy McNo-brain:

Cindy McCain's brain,
Spots a "trafficking victim"
But she was wrong. Derp!

https://www.azfamily.com/news/cindy-mccain-claims-she-thwarted-human-trafficking-at-sky-harbor/article_c75a62c8-2a61-11e9-8073-f7fc698f277f.html

Cindy McCain claimed she thwarted human trafficking at Sky Harbor, police say she didn't
azfamily.com News Staff

PHOENIX, AZ (3TV/CBS 5)-- Cindy McCain was heard in a radio interview on KTAR Mac & Gaydos claiming she stopped a human trafficking incident at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, but Arizona’s Family has debunked that claim.

“I came in from a trip I’d been on and I spotted—it looked odd—it was a woman of a different ethnicity than the child, this little toddler she had, and something didn’t click with me,” McCain said in the radio interview. “I went over to the police and told them what I saw, and they went over and questioned her, and, by God, she was trafficking that kid.”

McCain went on to say that she discovered the woman was waiting for the man who bought the child to arrive from his flight.

Phoenix police said Wednesday that while officers did respond to the Jan. 30 call, at McCain’s request, they were able to determine “there was no evidence of criminal conduct or child endangerment.”

Arizona’s Family reached out to McCain for a statement Wednesday afternoon, but has not received a response.

McCain has since tweeted about the incident:


Cindy McCain

@cindymccain
 At Phoenix Sky Harbor, I reported an incident that I thought was trafficking. I commend the police officers for their diligence. I apologize if anything else I have said on this matter distracts from “if you see something, say something”

2,739
7:00 PM - Feb 6, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
2,453 people are talking about this


Monday, February 4, 2019

Amy Stillahn of Colorado wants all registered citizens to register for life no matter how petty the offense

Just what the world doesn't need, yet another skinny blonde professional victim who thinks she's a model advocating for more registry laws.

She says she wants it to "be over" and to have her "life" back yet she obsesses over this issue and wants to harm others in the process. That's not how moving on works.

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/contact7/hundreds-of-sex-offenders-get-their-names-taken-off-the-sex-offender-registry-every-year-in-colorado

Hundreds of sex offenders get their names taken off the sex offender registry every year in Colorado
Sex offender gets off registry, despite victim's plea
Posted: 3:13 PM, Feb 04, 2019  Updated: 5:20 PM, Feb 04, 2019

By: Jaclyn Allen

A Contact7 investigation found that in the state of Colorado, hundreds of sex offenders are getting off the sex offender registry every year. In one case, a felony sex offender's motion was granted even after his victim pleaded against it.

While Denver7 generally doesn't identify victims of sex crimes, Amy Stillahn wants her story told and wants people to know what she has been through.

"He stole something from me, absolutely," she said, speaking for the first time publicly about the then-21-year-old lacrosse coach at Arapahoe High School, Matthew Buck, who she first met in an AOL chat room in 2000 when she was only 14 years old.

"It was on the playground," she said. "That pea gravel, I remember it sticking to my skin on my bottom, and I was just like, 'I don't want to do this.' It's destroyed and shattered my life."

That year, Buck pleaded guilty to attempted sex assault on a child by a person in a position of trust for the crime.

After the charges became public, Stillahn said she went from popular cheerleader at Arapahoe High School to social outcast — overnight.

"Kids put together the crying girl in the counseling office was the one on the news, and I was being called a slut," she said, the emotions still raw almost two decades later. "I had no friends; it was so hurtful."

In the fallout, she tried to end her life for the first time, and a lifelong battle with anorexia and depression began. She dropped out of the high school and was home schooled, never going to college.

"I think about dying every day," she said. "So often, I just want it to be over."

In stark contrast, Buck's story also takes a dramatic turn after the criminal charge.

After he went to prison in 2005 on a probation violation, the son of an attorney went to law school, passed the Colorado bar and now practices law in Denver, focusing on marijuana and criminal defense, according to his firm's web site.

"It is not common [for felons to practice law in Colorado], but it does occasionally happen," said Jessica Yates, Colorado's attorney regulation counsel, who said attorneys must meet character and fitness standards.

Records obtained by Denver7 from a recent court transcript show prosecutors said Buck downplayed his conviction to the bar, stating he "was involved in a romantic relationship with a high school student."

"I met him twice and he raped me. No. We did not have a romantic relationship," Stillahn said. Stillahn added that at 14, no sexual relationship with an adult in a position of trust could be considered consensual.

John Gleason was the attorney regulation counsel for Colorado in 2011 and said the bar admission system then was dramatically different. His office took over shortly afterwards, he said, implementing a more thorough investigative process.

"To say that Mr. Buck would not be admitted under the current character and fitness evaluation process is pure speculation," Gleason said. "What I would say is that based on my experience, his application would receive a much different evaluation, a much more thorough evaluation...I’m not aware of any other case that is as significant a crime as this."

Buck became an attorney, but he was still a registered sex offender, until he filed a motion to de-register last year.

"This was the last thing I was expecting, and didn't know it was possible," Stillahn said.

Under Colorado law, certain sex offenses must stay on the sex offender registry for life, but Buck pleaded down to attempted child sex assault by a person in a position of trust, which is eligible for de-registration after ten years.

"I just think it was probably a loophole that was inadvertently created by the legislature," said former Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey. Morrissey said he believed attempted sex crimes should be included on the list of crimes not allowed to be de-registered. "I think somebody could take this up and should take this up because again, I think it’s a loophole that they did not intend to have. "

Denver7 found hundreds of sex offenders de-register every year in Colorado, and while Morrissey speculated that many are deferred sentences or misdemeanor sex crimes, he said some may be "attempted" crime felony offenders who should be monitored.

"Also, I don’t think people should use the registry as gospel on whether someone is a sex offender or not because an awful lot of of sex offenders get off the registry," he said.

Buck said he did not wish to comment, stating that he had two daughters, and court transcripts show he stated they were the reason he filed to de-register.

Christopher Decker, a criminal defense attorney in Denver, said many sex offenders have been targeted because of registries.

"They have been assaulted. Their houses have been burned down. Their children have been ostracized in schools," said Decker, who has worked with the Colorado Criminal Defense Institute Project offering free legal services around the state for those who qualify to de-register. "I think what's going here is society is beginning to look more carefully at how and why and when we should require someone to register and what are we really getting from this registration."

Decker said the constitutionality of registries is now being challenged in federal court, and many states are looking a modifying them.

"When you have a system that treats everybody the same, bad things happen and some good people get caught up and some bad people don’t get caught up enough," Decker said.

Under Colorado's Victim's Rights Act, a petition to discontinue registration is defined as a critical stage, so victims have a right to be informed of and present for the criminal justice process. Also, to find out if a sex offender has filed a motion, the criminal case number associated with the defendant's conviction is the same case number for the petition to de-register.

So, Stillahn faced Buck for the first time to fight his motion to de-register, speaking out in court and telling her story.

However, Judge Phillip Douglass eventually granted the request , citing Buck's law license as a factor in his decision. Denver7 tried to reach Douglass by phone several times, with no response. He was voted off the bench last year, but he granted the request last month before his term ended.

We checked, and in the 18th Judicial District, where this happened, the majority of de-registration motions were granted last year. In 2018, of the 23 motions to de-register that were filed, 14 were granted, seven were denied and two are still waiting for hearings.

Stillahn wants the law allowing felony sex offenders to de-register changed and wants to warn others about sex offenders no longer on the registry. Really, though, she just wants her life back.

"Everything that has happened all stems back to Matthew Buck," Stillahn said. "What if that had never happened?"