Wednesday, April 28, 2021

Crappy local news rag Crawford County Now (Ohio news site) bashes Registered Citizen working as a paralegal in upcoming trial

These reporters didn't even have the guts to add their names to the article, but it isn't like they have that many reporters, so chances are, Randy Bigley (News Director) and/or Kim Gasurus (News Reporter) wrote this hit piece. Since I can't narrow down who actually deserves this nomination, so I'm just giving it to the whole paper for now. 

I hope they get sued for trying to disrupt the trial. 

Update -- The scumbags from the Crawford County Now are threatening to sue the Shiitake Awards because they are butthurt over the nomination. They apparently don't understand fair use. So maybe they will end up getting sued after all. 

(As an aside, I would not be shocked if it turned out a scumsucker from the Persecutor's office was the "anonymous tip.")

Below are the offensive statements from the articles. Maybe the Crawford County Crapper and their attorney, Mr. Derriere, can take the time to look up what constitutes fair use. 

https://crawfordcountynow.com/local/tier-1-sex-offender-assists-in-benedict-jury-selection/

Tier 1 sex offender assists in Benedict jury selection

By Crawford County Now Staff April 26, 2021 11:32 pm

Crawford County Now

BUCYRUS—A jury was seated in Crawford County Common Pleas Court on Monday to hear the case against Joshua B**...

An anonymous tip was verified revealing that a Tier I Sex Offender was assisting defense attorney Adam Stone during jury selection....

T**** was designated a tier one sex offender (the lowest level offender) and must report annually to the Sheriff’s Department of the county where he resides for the next 15 years...

T*** is currently a paralegal at Stone’s law firm.

During the course of discovery, trial preparation, and today’s jury selection, T*** was present with Stone and actively participating in proceedings.

When reached for comment, Crawford County Prosecutor Matt Crall noted that his office policy is to not publicly comment on issues regarding an ongoing trial. No comment was given by Adam Stone or representatives of his office in response to inquiries made by Crawford County Now...

https://crawfordcountynow.com/local/benedict-frustrated-and-sickened-by-story/

Benedict ‘frustrated and sickened’ by story

By Crawford County Now Staff April 27, 2021 3:50 pm

Crawford County NowCCN staff

...Yesterday, Crawford County Now received an anonymous tip that a Tier I sex offender was assisting in the jury selection process.

Howard noted that Ryan T***, a paralegal for defense counsel Adam Stone was indeed an active registrant on the offender registry in Crawford County. Howard noted that T** had spent time incarcerated and had done everything required of him. Hall also confirmed that T** was assisting at the defense table during jury selection.

Stone (who had represented T*** in his case) told the court he did not want B** to suffer for a choice he made. He said that B** knew T***’s record and agreed to his assistance in the case. Stone said he has employed T*** for a year and a half. He told the court that T*** has amazing resolve and can communicate effectively with B**. He also noted that since losing his teaching license, T*** had advanced his education to paralegal studies.

Hall then asked B** how he felt about Stone’s ability to effectively represent him.

“I am frustrated and sickened by what happened last night (CCN article). It was formed to hinder our argument, but I don’t feel it hinders Adam’s defense.” B** said.

Assistant Prosecutor Ryan Hoovler told the court that he disagreed with B**’s accusation regarding the intent of the article.

“There was no involvement of the state that led to this article. The author of the article contacted the state for a comment, and we offered no comment,” Hoovler said.

It was concluded that the article was not seen by any of the jurors or alternate jurors....

Tuesday, April 27, 2021

In case you didn't already see this: Missouri is adding conservation areas to the list of places Registrants can't go near

I'm still trying to catch up on events from the end of last month until now due to my work on the new website, but this silly law will add conservation centers or certain athletic fields to the growing list of places Registrants cannot even be near. 

https://www.senate.mo.gov/21info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=54105512

SB 91Prohibits certain offenders of sex crimes from being near certain propertiesSponsor:

Riddle

LR Number:0456S.02PCommittee:General LawsLast Action:4/26/2021 - HCS Voted Do Pass H Judiciary

Journal Page:Title:SCS SB 91Calendar Position:Effective Date:August 28, 2021

Current Bill Summary

SCS/SB 91 - This act provides that persons guilty of certain sex crimes cannot be present or loiter within five hundred feet of athletic complexes or athletic fields that exist primarily for use and recreation of children or within five hundred feet of Missouri Department of Conservation Nature or Education Center properties, unless the registered sex offender is the parent of a child participating in an educational program of the Department of Conservation and has permission to be on the property.

This act is identical to provisions in SB 250 (2021) and similar to SB 638 (2020) and SB 35 (2019).

Thursday, April 22, 2021

The village of Hartland WI has a "saturation" law. Now they're justly getting sued for it

 "Village" is a bit of a misnomer. Hartland, population 9268, is a suburb of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, so it is a bit big for a village. Regardless, in all my years of covering various laws against Registered Persons, I've never seen a law that could be described a "saturation" law. Essentially, the village has placed limits on the number of Registered Persons who can live within the limits of the community. And now they're getting sued for their efforts. Good.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/wisconsin/2021/04/21/lawsuit-challenges-hartlands-limit-sex-offenders/7322327002/

Would-be resident sues Hartland, calls ban on more sex offenders unconstitutional

Bruce Vielmetti

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Karsten Koch, 34, has been living with his parents in Nashotah, but he would like to move out to his own place in Hartland to be closer to his job but not too far from family.

Hartland's police chief has warned Koch he's not welcome, citing the village's moratorium on any more sex offenders living there.

In a federal lawsuit, Koch contends that the village's 2018 ordinance, applied retroactively, amounts to an illegal ex post facto law, in violation of the U.S. Constitution. 

The "designated offenders" banned by the ordinance include anyone on the state's sex offender registry. Koch is listed there because of a 2007 conviction for sexual assault of a child.

According to the suit, Hartland officials decided a few years ago that too many sex offenders — 32 — already lived there, a "saturation level" 6.75 times higher than other Waukesha County communities.

The ordinance thus declared a moratorium on any more offenders moving to Hartland until the saturation level more closely matches that of Waukesha County overall.

Koch's lawsuit seeks to represent the class of any registered sex offenders who want to move to Hartland. It says the ordinance violated the ex post facto clause "because it makes more burdensome the punishment imposed for offenses committed before enactment of the ordinance," because it applies retroactively to people, like Koch, who are designated offenders because of crimes committed before Hartland passed its ordinance.

The suit asks the court to declare the ordinance unconstitutional, stop village officials from enforcing it, and grant unspecified damages to Koch.

Koch's attorneys, Chicago civil rights lawyers Mark Weinberg and Adele Nicholas, have challenged similar restrictions on sex offenders inother Wisconsin municipalities, like Oak Creek and Muskego, and other states.

"So many of these restrictions are so harsh, arbitrary and capricious that they're constitutionally infirm," Weinberg said. 

For years, local communities have struggled with the presence of sex offenders on supervised release. As some areas passed laws prohibiting them from within a certain distance of schools and other places children might gather, state officials had to find homes for them in other towns, which then passed their own limits, and on and on until there are few possibilities left.

Eventually, the state imposed a new rule that put the onus on counties to find suitable residences for the offenders on supervised release.

But that applied only to so-called violent sex offenders, those being released from civil commitment under Wisconsin's Chapter 980. That law allows indefinite confinement and treatment for certain sex offenders after they complete criminal sentences. 

The local restrictions still make it difficult for ordinary sex offenders to live while on supervised release.

Koch served seven years in prison for his conviction but is slated to remain on community supervision until 2034. In December, he found a room for rent in a ranch house on Merton Avenue in Hartland, and a landlord who agreed to rent to someone on the sex offender registry.

But earlier this month, according to his suit, Koch got an email from Hartland's police chief informing him the moratorium was still in effect.

Chief Torin Misko did not immediately return a message seeking the current sex offender count in the village.

Village AttorneyHector de la Mora noted that Koch never approached the village about appealing or being granted an exception, as the ordinance provides.

He also said the very fact Hartland had the highest per-capital population of sex offenders among Waukesha County communities indicated that village officials believed that people have a right to live where they choose, and it was only when the concentration became so great that it adopted the ordinance.

Weinberg said the chance to seek an exception from the village, at officials' discretion, doesn't change the validity of Koch's constitutional challenge.

Saturday, April 17, 2021

Republican California State Senator Brian Jones is trying to prevent Registrants from being placed in his community

Pete Wilson was one of the worst governors in CA history, so I'm not sure following his bad example is a good look for the state. 

https://www.kusi.com/state-senator-jones-calls-to-halt-proposed-placements-of-svps-in-east-county/

State Senator Jones calls to halt proposed placements of SVPs in East County

Posted: April 16, 2021  KUSI Newsroom

SAN DIEGO (KUSI) – Sen. Brian Jones said Friday he has asked Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration to halt the potential placements of two convicted sex offenders in an East County home.

The placements in question are the proposed conditional releases of Douglas Badger and Merle Wakefield, both of whom the Department of State Hospitals has recommended be housed in a supervised home on Horizon Hills Drive in the Mt. Helix neighborhood.

Badger, 78, was convicted of sexual assaults dating back to the 1970s, mostly victimizing male hitchhikers, while Wakefield, 64, was convicted of sexual assaults dating back to the 1980s, according to the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office.

Both men are classified as sexually violent predators, a designation for those convicted of sexually violent offenses and diagnosed with a mental disorder that makes them likely to re-offend.

After serving their prison sentences, sexually violent predators may undergo treatment at state hospitals, but may also petition courts to continue treatment in supervised outpatient locations. Both men’s requests for conditional release have been granted by judges.

Badger has a hearing scheduled for Tuesday regarding his potential placement, while Wakefield’s hearing is scheduled for next month. Both hearings are public and will be conducted virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Jones said he sent two letters this month to Department of State Hospitals Director Stephanie Clendenin after constituents expressed concerns regarding the proposed placements.

In a statement, Jones cited two instances in which former Govs. Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian overruled state authorities to order convicted rapists to serve the remainders of their parole in trailers on the grounds of state prisons.

“Neither Douglas Badger or Merle Wakefield are suitable to be released from secure state facilities, let alone dumping them in a residential neighborhood in Mt. Helix,” said Jones, R-Santee.

“Both are dangerous sexually violent predators who have repeatedly targeted and attacked children. Rather than renting a spacious home to serve as a boarding house for these people, Governor Newsom ought to follow the lead of former Govs. Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian. Both of these governors got creative and ordered that dangerous parolees be housed in trailers at state correctional facilities.”

Tuesday, April 13, 2021

C'mon man! President Joe Biden erroneously claims "the average rapist rapes about six times"

It is not secret that I'm not a conservative snowflake. I revel in featuring many conservatives here. Unlike many people, I also realize that there is a difference between political alignment and party affiliation. A person runs on the Democrat ticket is not automatically a liberal. Job Biden is a Democrat but politically as conservative as any Republican save an extremist like Trump. 

Joe Biden may not have invented the registry, but he was instrumental in making it federal law. It certainly does not help when he makes idiotic statements like this one. As usual, we find politicians willing to use junk "science" to promote an agenda. I thought we were through with that trick when Trump was ousted, but apparently not. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/12/bidens-claim-that-average-rapist-rapes-about-six-times/

Biden’s claim that the ‘average rapist rapes about six times’

Glenn Kessler

April 12, 2021 at 7:00 a.m. UTC

“The average rapist rapes about six times.”

— President Biden, in remarks during the weekly economic briefing, April 9

During an economic briefing, the president touted his budget proposal, highlighting additional funding for programs funded by the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 — a bill Biden had shepherded to passage as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In particular, he highlighted a push to provide additional funds to end a backlog in rape kits.

Then he mentioned this statistic — and stepped into a hornet’s nest of fierce debate among specialists on sexual assault.

This is one of those easy-to-remember statistics that emerge out of academic research. But whether it is accurate is another question.

The Facts

The White House did not respond to a request for a source for Biden’s comment. But Biden most probably was referring to a 2002 study, “Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists,” principally by David Lisak, then at the University of Massachusetts at Boston. (Lisak is vice chairman of 1in6, a group that helps men who have had abusive sexual experiences.)

The report said it drew on four samples of a total of 1,882 men between the ages of 18 and 71, who answered questionnaires, in exchange for a small payment, after they encountered researchers while walking across a college campus between 1991 and 1998. The researchers found 120 men “whose self-reported acts met legal definitions of rape or attempted rape, but who were never prosecuted by criminal justice authorities.” Of these men, 76 were identified as “repeat rapists” based on their survey responses. “These repeat rapists each committed an average of six rapes and/or attempted rapes and an average of 14 interpersonally violent acts,” the report said.

While Biden spoke generally about all rapists, the report purported to be about college rapists (though it is not known if all of the men surveyed were actually college students, and the average age of the respondents was 26.5 years old). Note also that the statistic is for both rapes and attempted rapes, not just rapes.

The statistic is still in circulation, even though it is based on data as much as 30 years old, but it has been controversial. Lisak and his research methods have been under attack for many years.

Linda LeFauve, associate vice president for planning and institutional research at Davidson College in North Carolina, has written at length about what she views as the flaws in Lisak’s paper. She has charged he pooled data from surveys of uncertain provenance, the participants were not necessarily college students and it’s unclear how many people were subject to follow-up interviews.

“There is no research to confirm the Lisak statistic, studies that dispute it, and more than sufficient evidence that Lisak has been perpetrating a fraud,” LeFauve said. Nevertheless, she said, his research was embraced during the Obama administration when the White House organized a task force on campus sexual assault. And she said — even though she voted for both Barack Obama and Biden — she was dismayed to see it resurrected under Biden.

Mary P. Koss, a regents’ professor in the College of Public Health at the University of Arizona, noted that she testified before Biden’s committee when the Violence Against Women Act was under consideration. “I am very saddened that advisers to the president have misinformed him,” she said. “The figure he uses is actually not able to be fact-checked because it provides an ‘average,’ which would most appropriately come from a national sample that doesn’t exist in the scientific literature.”

As for college students, she said she published the only national study of rape perpetration by college students — a survey of more than 6,000 students published in 1988 — and “the average number of rapes by men who self-disclosed acts that met a legal definition of rape was 2.6.”

In 2015, Koss contributed to a report published in the journal JAMA Pediatrics that was a direct assault on Lisak’s research. “Though a small group of men perpetrated rape across multiple college years, they constituted a significant minority of those who committed college rape and did not compose the group at highest risk of perpetrating rape when entering college,” the study said.

The study, whose lead author was Kevin Swartout of Georgia State University, “was highly contested, re-peer-reviewed three times by JAMA at Lisak’s complaints, was deemed sound and never withdrawn,” Koss said. “Lisak’s critique of the study was also peer-reviewed and rejected for publication. This paper is scientifically complex but at highest levels of peer review discredits Lisak’s empirical work and the claims he extrapolates from it.”

Lisak, in an exchange of emails with The Fact Checker, dismissed the 2015 JAMA study: “Those researchers brought the number of serial offenders in their study down by redefining serial offending so that many subjects who had multiple victims were no longer counted as serial offenders.”

Lisak denied he submitted a critique of the JAMA study. (Koss says she saw his comments but conceded that perhaps he did not formally submit them because it was “a losing battle.”) Lisak provided a 2017 report, written by Jim Hopper, one of his former students, and posted on Hopper’s website. Hopper said he adjusted the JAMA data set to the definitions used in Lisak’s 2002 report, coming up with similar results. “Research suggests that about two‐thirds of college rapists are repeat offenders, who account for the great majority of rapes (over 90%), and about one‐fourth of college rapists admit to committing rapes over multiple years of college,” Hopper wrote.

“The Internet is not a valid source of peer-reviewed information,” Koss said. “He has his self-serving opinion, but JAMA did not support it.”

Lisak also pointed to two subsequent studies that he said reported numbers close to his, one from 2009 (6.5 rapes per serial rapist among Navy recruits) and one from 2019 (five rapes per serial rapist among college students).

“Reports of Rape Reperpetration by Newly Enlisted Male Navy Personnel.” (2009). This study surveyed 1,146 enlisted male Navy personnel and found that 13 percent (144) engaged in actions that met the definition of attempted or completed rape. Of them, 71 percent engaged in more than one attempt, with an average rate of almost 6.5 incidents. This is clearly a study of serial rapists, not necessarily “average” rapists.

“Is Campus Rape Primarily a Serial or One-Time Problem? Evidence From a Multicampus Study.” (2019). This study relied on data from the Core Alcohol and Other Drug Survey of 12,624 college men at 49 community and four-year colleges and concluded that serial rapists were the cause of most campus rapes. The lead author, John D. Foubert of Union University, acknowledged that the survey (in question 21) does not actually ask about rape but offers a vaguer question — whether the person had “taken advantage of another sexually” because of alcohol or drug use. “You are right to question the item we used, though. It is the major limitation of our study,” he told The Fact Checker. “In my view, it would be better called ‘sexual assault’ than rape.”

“As a researcher, I see many limitations to these studies,” Lisak said. “However, given the research we have, it is clear that 1) serial sex offending is an extremely important issue; 2) the available data tells us that serial offenders account for the majority of sex offenses being committed (which is also true of drug dealers, burglars, bank robbers, etc.).”

Lisak summed up: “Six is as good a number to cite as any, and probably better than most.”

“At present, I don’t know of other research that would confirm the finding,” said Foubert, who is dean of the College of Education at Union. “I will say that in my experience as a college administrator, anecdotally, it did seem to me that offenders were often multiple offenders.” He added: “I’m thankful that President Biden is at least citing a study that is peer-reviewed. Many politicians don’t understand the difference between a peer-reviewed study and a Cosmo article.”

New research may further undermine this statistic. Swartout said he had recently completed a national survey of 697 male four-year college graduates based on their sexually violent behavior while in college. “I found that the average college man who commits rape assaults 1.48 victims. To help contextualize this a little more, 81.7 percent of the men in the study who reported committing rape reported assaulting one victim,” he said. “Overall, 10.2 percent of the overall sample reported perpetrating rape while they were an undergraduate student.” He said the study was being finalized for peer review and would be submitted to JAMA Pediatrics.

Koss said Biden should withdraw his statement. “The president’s statement, sadly, should be corrected to advise policymakers on the basis of sound scientific evidence,” she said.

LeFauve said these sorts of statistics are appealing because they fit neatly in existing narratives. “No one wants to be on the side of the bad guys,” she said. “And the minute you question rape statistics — the misleading claims about false reports is its own rabbit hole — you’re on the wrong side.”

The Pinocchio Test

Sexual assault of women is an important issue, and Biden has long been a leader in pressing for laws to combat it. But now that Biden has the presidential megaphone, he has a responsibility to use statistics that are widely accepted and not controversial.

Perhaps he remembered this statistic from the Obama administration’s work on campus sexual assault, but that was some time ago. Even then, Lisak’s findings were under fire from other academicians.

The Lisak paper was published almost two decades ago and primarily focused on campus sexual assault, not the “average rapist,” as Biden put it. Moreover, the statistics come from a relatively small sample of men who were randomly self-selected as they walked across a college campus. It was not based on a nationwide sample.

Obviously, The Fact Checker cannot litigate the debate between Lisak and his critics. But the White House should be aware of the dispute and be more cautious about validating a statistic that may or may not be correct. Otherwise, Biden may be perpetuating misinformation.

Ordinarily, given the academic dispute, we’d consider this a Two-Pinocchio claim. But because the president turned a study about campus rape into a statistic about the average rapist, he earns Three Pinocchios.

Friday, April 9, 2021

The arrest of Offendex extortionist Charles "Chuck" Rodrick is an event over a half-decade in the making

For nearly a decade, Charles "Chuck" Rodrick lived high off the hog by using the registry to extort victims out of millions. But his time is finally up. 

Look at those soulless eyes and that unkempt appearance. This isn't Rodrick's first rodeo. In fact, Rodrick and his cohort Oesterblad were busted for fraud back in the 1990s.

This arrest should have happened as far back as 2011. I'm not sure what finally prompted the FBI to finally lock this loser up. He has spent years avoiding the law while continuing his campaign of online terror, and soon he'll be more permanently in a familiar location.  Courtkey.com, formerly owned by Sucky Chucky, now owned by one of his victims, has full coverage of the Rodrick arrest. 

https://apnews.com/article/us-news-arizona-phoenix-ebb4b491d744316e6faa403b9d3697ac

Arizona man charged in scheme targeting sex offenders

By JACQUES BILLEAUD

4/8/21

PHOENIX (AP) — Three people have been charged with fraud in Arizona in what prosecutors say was a harassment scheme to get payments from sex offenders in exchange for removing their names from a website.

In an indictment released Thursday, Charles Rodrick of Scottsdale and Brent Oesterblad are accused of obtaining information from the National Predator Database’s site and posting it on a site created by Rodrick.

Prosecutors say Rodrick, Oesterblad and Sarah Shea then received money for removing the names from Rodrick’s site but failed to do so or republished the victims’ profiles on other sites owned by Rodrick. They also said the trio harassed others whose names weren’t listed in the National Predator Database by posting fraudulent sex offender profiles on Rodrick’s websites.

Rodrick, 60, was taken into custody Tuesday at Sky Harbor International Airport as he was returning from Costa Rica.

At Rodrick’s first court hearing, prosecutor Nicole Shaker said Rodrick has a separate $3 million civil judgment against him in Maricopa County for the victims in the criminal case, yet he hasn’t paid them anything. Shaker said Rodrick uses limited liability corporations and girlfriends to hide his assets.

At the hearing, Rodrick said the FBI had tried to build a federal case against him several years ago, but the case was turned down by a federal grand jury. “For this to surface now in 2021 is a shock to me,” Rodrick said.

Shaker disputed that the current case went before a federal grand jury.

Bond was set at $30,000 for Rodrick, who also was ordered to wear an ankle monitor when outside of jail.

Messages left Thursday for Rodrick’s attorney, Kristopher Califano, weren’t immediately returned.

It’s unclear whether Oesterblad and Shea have attorneys who can comment on their clients’ behalf.

Although Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s office released the indictment, the court file itself wasn’t publicly available at midday Thursday. Oesterblad and Shea didn’t have listed phone numbers.