Giles Co TN Sheriff Kyle Helton and his monkey-see-monkey-do law

Why does Sheriff Kyle Helton look like Darryl's racist brother in The Walking Dead?

Tennessee recently passed a law preventing many registrants from living with their own kids. While that law might be Shiitake-worthy in itself, how it came to pass was more noteworthy.

Below is not the full article. It is long. I just wanted to focus on Sheriff Kyle Helton's role in destroying many families. He got the idea from the next state over, Alabama. In other words, monkey see, monkey do.

Hopefully THIS LAWSUIT will prevent that from happening.

https://theappeal.org/new-law-forces-dozens-on-tennessees-sex-offender-registry-from-their-homes/

NEW LAW FORCES DOZENS ON TENNESSEE’S SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY FROM THEIR HOMES
The legislation also makes it illegal for many ex-offenders to be alone with their own children.

Steven Yoder Jun 28, 2019

Last Sunday, Jason broke the news to his 7-year-old daughter: He’d be moving out. When a new Tennessee law goes into effect Monday, he will be barred from living with her. The law, Senate Bill 425, also forbids him from being alone with his daughter, meaning he can’t handle doctor’s appointments or pick her up from school, and he and his wife will need to hire childcare since she works full-time. His daughter cried when she heard but understood, Jason said, and told him she didn’t want her father to go to jail.

Seven years ago, a stepdaughter accused Jason of sexual touching, a charge he denies and attributes to discipline that he and his wife imposed. With the prosecutor threatening up to 18 years in prison, Jason says his lawyer advised him to take a plea deal that included probation, rather than risk a trial. Jason, whose name has been changed to protect his wife’s job, says the judge imposed no restrictions on him being around his daughter, and the Tennessee sex offense registry shows that he has no other criminal history.

Their predicament is likely to be felt more widely in coming months, as Tennessee implements the new law. It was spurred by Kyle Helton, sheriff of Giles County, which borders Alabama.

Alabama legislators pride themselves on making the state inhospitable to people with a sex crime in their past. Among other provisions, the state just enacted a chemical castration law and forbids adults whose offenses involved a victim younger than 12 from living with their own minor children. Helton has said that Alabama’s strict laws against former sex offenders were driving them over the border, and he wanted to put a stop to it. So he talked to his state senator, Joey Hensley, about introducing a bill that would match Alabama’s ban on living with children, according to Hensley. (The Giles County Sheriff’s Department said that Helton was not available to talk before deadline.)

Research shows relatively low reoffense rates for people convicted of sexual crimes—12 percent on average, according to a definitive 2014 study. But Helton’s lobbying paid off. Hensley introduced SB 425, which banishes people convicted of an offense involving someone under 12 from their homes if they have a child living there who’s a minor. On May 10, Governor Bill Lee signed it into law. On May 29, the Tennessee Department of Correction sent a letter to 78 people on the state sex offender registry advising them that they would need to pack up by July 1 or face arrest and prosecution...

Ben Briscoe of WFMY News seems shocked registered persons have mailboxes within 1000 feet of a school

Just wait until this dumbass reporter discover registrants shop at grocery stores and order pizzas just like non-registrants.

https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/2-wants-to-know/2-wants-to-know-measured-the-sex-offenders-mailbox-near-a-greensboro-school-is-legal/83-70aa185d-d9cc-4397-aad5-379e7a85fc1a

2 Wants To Know Measured. The Sex Offender's Mailbox Near a Greensboro School Is Legal
Legal experts say it's allowed under North Carolina's "open to multiple interpretations" law.
Author: Benjamin Briscoe
Published: 1:03 PM EDT June 28, 2019
Updated: 6:09 PM EDT June 28, 2019

GREENSBORO, N.C. — Registered sex offenders are not allowed to live with 1,000 feet of a school in North Carolina, but what about if their mailbox is right next to a school? It is happening in Guilford County. A few steps away from the mailbox of a registered sex offender is a sign marking the end of a school zone for Northern Guilford High.

By the numbers: 2 Wants To Know mesaured. The mailbox is 81 feet away from a bus parking lot, it's 492 feet away from the school sign and grass where sports teams practice. It's close enough that some neighbors are posting their concern on the Nextdoor app.

One writing: "The kids that live on our street are at risk. Somehow our justice system has let this man into this beautiful community so close to the kids at our schools."

And another added: "I know, it's a nightmare!"

While it may be a nightmare, the person is following the laws of North Carolina, according to the Guilford County Sheriff's Office.

The Sex Offender Registration department said they were too busy for an on-camera interview. But added that there is no law in North Carolina requiring deputies to come out and check the 1,000 feet in person.

Instead Guilford County law enforcement uses the Geographic Information System mapping system to check compliance.

They measure from the property line of a school to the property line of where the sex offender lives. In this case it happens to be more than 1,600 feet away. The house is down a country road, with a lake in-between and a hike from the mailbox. 

No standardized state measuring method.

Each county can also measure in different ways. Some like Guilford use a straight line, others measure by the path of the roads because they think it takes into account natural barriers like a lake.

And some measure from the offender's property line. Others from the walls of the house. It's so confusing, the UNC school of government posted a blog talking about how the law was open to "multiple interpretations."

That's because North Carolina law just says the sex offender may not reside "within 1,000 feet of the property on which any public or nonpublic school or child care center is located."

Compare that to a state like Kentucky which clearly spells out the measurement "shall be taken in a straight line from the nearest wall of the school to the nearest wall of the registrant's place of residence."

Australian yobbo Tania Roy to create her own registry ahead of the gov't

We cover Australia on occasion here at the Shiitakes but no one from Down Under has won an award. Could this change?

https://www.9news.com.au/national/sex-offender-register-why-queensland-woman-wants-to-build-her-own-public-database-a-current-affair/6b5d477d-f89d-442f-8080-a1ec3e6fe27b

Queensland woman’s plan to ‘beat Dutton’ to building controversial sex offender registry

By A Current Affair Staff
7:43pm Jun 27, 2019

A single mother has vowed to launch her own register of child abusers and violent offenders, claiming she will beat the government to the punch.

Queensland woman Tania Roy started her Facebook page Australian Sex, DV Offenders and Child Abusers Exposed five years ago, after she became aware of a sex offender living in her community.
The page has grown to have nearly 50,000 followers, with posts scheduled for nearly every hour of the day.

"I get up every morning about 2.30am, and I start doing online searches ... and I look for offenders in the community and I structure a post," she said.

"I go through police media sites, I go through my inbox, and I do media searches."...

In the five years Ms Roy has been running the page, she's named and shamed thousands of offenders.

But she claimed she had never once named an innocent person, or faced any legal repercussions.
"I look after it like it's one of my children," she said.

"I make sure it's run properly, I make sure I don't break the law in anything that I do, and I make sure nobody else does."

Now, she is working with a web developer to launch her own online register of child abusers and violent offenders.

Prior to this year's federal election, the government committed to producing a public register of child sex offenders at a cost of $7.8 million.

At the time, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton claimed there were "very good" examples of how such a registry could work.

It is still in the planning stages, needing new legislation to be passed, and the participation of state and territory governments.

"We're now relying on the politicians to pass a bill," Ms Roy said.

"I don't have any faith in them passing this bill whatsoever."

She told A Current Affair her register was designed to list the name and the details of offenders in the community, and their location - down to a suburb.

"Not a street, not a house, no phone numbers, nothing like that will happen," she said.

But criminologist and former police detective Terry Goldsworthy said there was no evidence public registers worked.

"The studies are clear, very clear I think, that these kind of things don't necessarily aid in community protection, reduction of offences, et cetera," he said.

"What they are good for though, is allowing politicians to beat their chest to say, 'look how hard we are on crime'."

But Ms Roy is determined, and claims hers will be up and running in a couple of months.
"I'll do it, and I'll beat Dutton to it," she said.

She said the thanks she got for her work told her people were "relieved somebody's out there fighting for them".

In a statement, Queensland Police said they had managed Queensland’s Child Protection Offender Register since 2005, and that public safety and the protection of Queenslanders remained the top priority.

Stacie Rumenap and her Astroturf group Stop Child Predators is exactly what I've warned about the Victim Industry for YEARS

I have been saying this for years but no one listens. Most of these victim advocate groups aren't grassroots activist groups, they are multi-million-dollar industries with hidden agendas. By the way, are you aware that Mark Lunsford, the epitome of people exploiting their personal tragedy for profit, works with Stop Child Predators?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/airbnb-debate-stranger-danger_n_5d115831e4b0a39418678e48

POLITICS 06/26/2019 05:00 am ET
A New Argument In The Debate Over Airbnb: Stranger Danger

A nonprofit with possible ties to industry lobbyists says short-term rentals are an invitation for child predators.
By Michael Hobbes

The hotel industry has never liked Airbnb. Since the launch of the short-term rental company in 2008, the American Hotel & Lodging Association, the sector’s trade group and lobbying arm, has urged cities to tax, restrict and prohibit Airbnb’s activities.

But now the industry may be encouraging a new tactic: inciting fear of child predators.

“With a revolving door of strangers coming and going from short-term rental properties, tools like sex offender lists are becoming obsolete,” wrote Stacie Rumenap, president of the nonprofit Stop Child Predators, in a guest column last March in the Knox News in Knoxville, Tennessee. “There is no safeguard in place to stop a child predator from renting an Airbnb property next door.”

At the time, Tennessee lawmakers were considering whether to forbid cities across the state from regulating short-term rentals. Rumenap wrote that if the legislation passed, “the term ‘Stranger Danger’ will take on a whole new meaning for parents in Tennessee as the community fabric of neighborhoods across the state will be fractured and local schools, parents and children will have to contend with more complete strangers in their neighborhoods.”

Tennessee was not the only battle in Stop Child Predators’ war against short-term rentals. Throughout 2018 and into 2019, the group has published nearly identical op-eds and letters to the editor in Miami and Washington, D.C., and participated in anti-Airbnb campaigns in Los Angeles, Boston and San Diego. Starting in June 2018, the group’s Facebook page dedicated itself almost exclusively to supporting local efforts to restrict short-term rentals. In May 2019 alone, Stop Child Predators posted more than two dozen advertisements related to legislation in Hawaii that would loosen the state’s existing regulations and allow more Airbnb units to come onto the market.

“How would you feel,” the group writes on its page about the Hawaii bill, “if you are a parent of young children, about your kids playing outside in the cul-de-sac, riding bikes or playing ball when you have no idea who is renting out the place next door and have no real way of finding out?”

Grassroots Or Astroturf?

Many of the advertisements and other written materials produced by Stop Child Predators have a striking resemblance to the messaging that the hotel industry uses in its own efforts to restrict the operations of Airbnb.

“Commercial landlords are using Airbnb to rent out multiple residential properties year-round, just like a hotel, while avoiding regulation and taxes,” writes the AHLA on the “Illegal Hotels” page of its website.

“Commercial landlords are increasingly using short-term rental sites like Airbnb to rent out multiple residential properties year-round, just like a hotel, while avoiding safeguards designed to protect patrons and the surrounding community,” writes Stop Child Predators on its “Special Projects” page.

The AHLA, whose members include Marriott, Hyatt, the Four Seasons and Red Roof Inn, has a history of carrying out lobbying efforts using nonprofit organizations. In 2017, The New York Times published an internal document laying out the AHLA’s strategy for fending off Airbnb. In the document, the AHLA admitted that it had “stood up” a group called AirbnbWATCH to gather negative stories about short-term rentals.

Similarly, the Center for Public Integrity reported in 2015 that a group called Neighbors for Overnight Oversight was also an AHLA-funded “astroturf” group. Though the group is now defunct, its website redirects to AirbnbWATCH.

“When businesses face major threats that could potentially harm their whole industry, these kinds of ‘grassroots’ campaigns start to happen in a pretty serious way,” Edward Walker, a University of California, Los Angeles, sociology professor told the Center for Public Integrity in 2015. Stop Child Predators and AirbnbWATCH both tweet using a number of phrases featured in AHLA press releases, including “commercial landlords” and  “revolving door of strangers.”

The AHLA did not respond to multiple requests to comment for this article.

Stop Child Predators has also been linked to corporate lobbying efforts in the past. According to a 2011 Mother Jones investigation, one of the group’s earliest lobbying efforts was in support of “Jessica’s Law,” legislation that requires sex offenders to be monitored by GPS. At the time, Rumenap was on the advisory board of Omnilink Systems, a major vendor of the “offender monitoring” devices. Mother Jones reported that Omnilink would have earned up to $20 per person per day for every sex offender subject to the law if monitored using Omnilink’s equipment. Omnilink was also listed as a corporate partner of Stop Child Predators at the time.

Though the group’s website features a “donate” button, its most recent tax filing noted that it received just 9.6% of its revenue from the public. The source of its remaining income is not specified.

Stop Child Predators did not respond to multiple requests to comment for this article.

Regulating Airbnb Is Unlikely To Make Children Safer

Regardless of Stop Child Predators’ links to the AHLA, it’s worth considering the group’s argument on the merits: Would restricting Airbnb really make children safer?

Even a cursory look at the evidence indicates that it would not.

While child sexual abuse remains alarmingly common — up to 5% of boys and 12% of girls experience abuse before turning 18 — only 7% is committed by strangers or acquaintances. The vast majority is perpetrated by friends (often minors themselves), family members or authority figures such as teachers or coaches.

And when it comes to kidnappings, “stranger danger” is even rarer: In 2011, just 105 children were abducted by adults they didn’t know in the entire United States. Considering that more than 200,000 children are reported missing each year, strangers represent a tiny portion of the danger posed to children in the United States.

“Research on child sexual abuse does not support these concerns,” said Sandy Rozek, the communications director for the National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws. “Extensive research has documented that child sexual abuse risk overwhelmingly comes from individuals that children know, not strangers.”

While it is true that people accused of abusing children have done so in houses rented on Airbnb, they have also used hotel rooms and, of course, their own homes. Airbnb says it performs limited background checks on its users, but the AHLA does not appear to recommend or require that its members perform any background checks on their customers.

Perhaps the oddest argument Stop Child Predators has made is that it opposes only “commercial landlords” but has no interest in preventing individuals from renting out their own homes or spare bedrooms using Airbnb. This stance is identical to that of the AHLA but inconsistent with the organization’s own messaging about neighborhoods becoming a “revolving door of strangers.” If, as the group argues, Airbnb cannot prevent sexual predators from renting rooms through its platform, this concern would apply regardless of whether homeowners or commercial landlords controlled the property.

While Airbnb is just as profit-maximizing as the hotel industry and has carried out its own lobbying efforts to protect its business model, the predator argument may represent a new low in the debate over short-term rental regulations. There may be legitimate reasons to regulate Airbnb, but “stranger danger” is a dubious one.

Joe Khalil of Fox 40 Sacramento doesn't like being corrected on the fact people cannot be "arrested for pedophilia"

One of my pet peeves is reporters using terms like "arrested/ convicted for pedophilia."

So a fellow activist contacted this reporter after he posted the following in a news article:

https://fox40.com/2019/06/17/police-departments-doctored-photo-of-alleged-sex-offender-leads-to-new-policy/

"In the original photograph, 36-year-old **** happened to be wearing a T-shirt with a campaign logo of a man running for Congress. At the time, **** was being arrested for pedophilia."

At least Joe Khalil eventually updated the page to remove the offensive term, and I would have left it at that, but then the reporter insisted on defending his use of the term and was offended by the notion that the term is offensive and improperly used. Thus, he gets recognition on this blog.

https://twitter.com/JoeKhalilTV/status/1140776359351816192

Alabama Republican Representative Steve Hurst says he wants registered persons to DIE

If there was ever any doubt Steve Hurst passed Alabama's chemical castration bill as an act of vengeance, then keep this Dumbest Quote nominee in mind.

https://www.al.com/news/2019/06/chemical-castration-authorized-by-new-alabama-law-rarely-used-in-other-states.html

Hurst said he's open to improvements in the law, and would like to see a university involved in a future study on effectiveness. But for him, it comes down to simple justice.

"If they are going to mark those children for life, they need to be marked for life. ... My real feelings are that they need to die," Hurst said.

This EGAD-sden Times OpEd is the the worst OpEd I've ever seen

Whoever wrote this couldn't even stand by their statements. Thus, the entire editorial board deserves this award.

https://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/20190613/our-view-message-to-naysayers---alabama-got-this-one-right

OUR VIEW: Message to naysayers — Alabama got this one right

Posted Jun 13, 2019 at 2:20 PM

Updated Jun 13, 2019 at 2:20 PM

   

We’ve never hesitated to chide Alabama’s lawmakers for actions that have been fruitless upraised middle fingers to the federal government, or have produced ridicule outside the state.

So to be fair, we’re going to offer them support for the latest thing that has landed them in the headlines, in cable news discussions and on partisan political websites or blogs.

Gov. Kay Ivey this week signed into law a bill requiring anyone convicted of a sex offense against a victim under age 13 to undergo “chemical castration” before he can be paroled from prison.

For every man who just winced at “that word,” no actual surgery is involved. The bill, by Rep. Steve Hurst, R-Munford, requires inmates to begin taking, a month before their scheduled release date, a drug that inhibits their production of testosterone, the hormone that powers the male sex drive.

They must continue taking the drug (and paying for it out of pocket) until a judge tells them they can stop. Otherwise, they go back behind bars to complete their sentences and could be charged with an additional Class C felony.

The idea is that reducing testosterone will make an offender less likely to repeat his crime. There is evidence — the director of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma Alabama shared some with the Washington Post — that the practice can lower recidivism rates.

Alabama is not out in the ether with this. Six U.S. states — California, Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana and Wisconsin — and the territory of Guam also can impose the requirement as a condition of release, sentencing or supervision for a convicted sex offender.

However, it’s Alabama that’s being lambasted for “a return to the dark ages” in a headline on Salon, referencing a quote from a state ACLU official who opposes the law, saying it “presents serious issues about involuntary medical treatment, informed consent, the right to privacy and cruel and unusual punishment.”

Well, an inmate who doesn’t want to undergo the procedure absolutely can say “No.” He just doesn’t get parole.

The testosterone-reducing drug does carry side effects (anemia, bone loss, breast growth, depression, diabetes, hair loss, heart and kidney issues, and weight gain). We trust that will be stated up front — if not, it should be, and medical screening should be done before the drug regimen starts — so an inmate can balance those downsides against the upside of getting out of a cage when choosing what to do.

Anyone sentenced to prison for a sex crime against children generally goes on a permanent sex offender list even if he (or she, although this law is useless with that gender) serves every second of his term. Because society has judged that offense to be especially heinous and recidivism rates are so high, those folks basically forfeit, until death, any real right to privacy.

And again, nobody’s using a scalpel here, so we fail to see the cruelty and unusualness, unless someone’s going to stretch that definition to include inconvenience or not giving someone a break (who hasn’t exactly earned one — we’re talking about the convicted here, not the accused or suspects).

This isn’t a “give ’em the meds and be done with it” fix. The treatment only works on people who have a true sexual attraction to children — and that’s not everyone in prison. There are people with sick minds, filled with sick fetishes and fantasies that they turn into reality for assorted reasons, sometimes just out of sheer evil. This law won’t stop those types of predators.

The likelihood is that it will be applied judiciously if not rarely, given that the most vile sex offenders aren’t likely to have much success with the parole board.

Still, this could cut into some truly unacceptable numbers — the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network reports that more than 57,000 U.S. children were sexually abused in 2016, and we’ve reported the increased number of local cases requiring the James M. Barrie Center for Children’s services.

That’s why we think this effort is justified, even if the gains are small, and should be vigorously defended against the inevitable constitutional challenges. Alabama got this one right.

Unex-SPECHT-edly, reporter discovers registered persons have something called "rights"

Well, to be fair, it is a shock to registered persons anyone recognizes we aren't in Nazi Germany so we have something called "rights."

https://www.wkbw.com/news/i-team/loophole-in-state-law-allows-nursing-home-sex-offenders-to-go-undetected

Loophole in state law allows nursing home sex offenders to go undetected

Convicted rapist lives at Newfane Rehab & Health

Posted: 3:24 PM, Jun 06, 2019  Updated: 5:17 PM, Jun 06, 2019
By: Charlie Specht

BUFFALO, N.Y. (WKBW) — **** -- who was convicted of raping someone at knifepoint 30 years ago -- moved to Newfane Rehabilitation and Health Care center in January.

But it wasn't until 10:45 a.m. Thursday that the state alerted the Newfane community that the Level 3 sex offender lived there.

7 Eyewitness News tried to ask Newfane Rehab administrator Craig Shaffer why residents weren't notified until Thursday, but he did not return a message left for comment.

According to state law, the nursing home doesn't have to tell residents, their families -- anyone -- about Mitchell's criminal past.

Even the State Health Department acknowledges nursing homes in New York are not required by law to notify residents that the man or woman in the next room is a sex offender.

A similar issue with a sex offender happened two years ago at the Waterfront Center nursing home in downtown Buffalo, when Thomas Moore -- a sex offender -- allegedly sexually assaulted a woman at the nursing home.

So why are these men allowed to live at nursing homes in the first place?

Because, according to experts, even sex offenders have rights.

“We as a society cannot impose a heavier burden upon this person and say, ‘Well, even though the court system released them into the community, we don't want them in our community,’” said Florina Altshiler, a Buffalo attorney.

Residents -- even those who are elderly or without access to computers -- must take the initiative to look up that information on their own. Altshiler said nursing home officials could face civil lawsuits for not doing more to protect residents.

“The question will hinge on what notice - if any - did that nursing home have, and what action - if any - did they take upon receiving that notice?” she said.

That doesn't sit well with State Assemblyman Patrick Burke of South Buffalo.

“People have a difficult decision to make when they're placing a loved one in a nursing home, and they should have that information available, too,” Burke said. “So not just the residents who may have to live with the sex offender, but also those who are a part of making that decision for their loved one.”

Illinois just wasted $2 million dollars on prosecuting masturbating inmates

I don't think a picture is necessary today...

https://thecrimereport.org/2019/06/05/2m-legal-fees-in-cases-of-masturbating-il-inmates/

$2M Legal Fees In Cases of Masturbating IL Inmates
By Crime and Justice News | June 5, 2019

Legal fees for cases relating to masturbating detainees at Cook County Jail could reach more than $2 million, reports the Chicago Sun-Times. The county board’s Finance Committee on Wednesday will consider the latest $486,216 in fees and expenses for five cases brought by public defenders, sheriff’s officers and other female county employees exposed to harassment. That is on top of nearly $1.7 million the board already paid out. It’s been dubbed an “extreme brand of workplace sexual harassment” by one state senator, who sought increased penalties for the lewd behavior.

The problem got so bad a federal judge in 2017 ordered all Cook County jail detainees with a history of indecent exposure, masturbation or sexual misconduct to remain handcuffed “at all times” during courthouse visits. Six employees of the Cook County Public Defender’s office filed a sexual harassment suit, saying the problem dated back to 2015. They described frequent encounters with detainees who would masturbate, sexually harass or expose themselves to lawyers during meetings. Dozens of female sheriff’s officers filed suit against Sheriff Tom Dart in 2017 and last year, alleging that he hadn’t done enough to protect them from near daily encounters with detainees who would sexually harass and assault them. The fees before the committee on Wednesday relate to five cases brought by public defenders, jail guards, a court interpreter and a nurse. Cara Smith, Dart’s chief of policy, said the cases have not been settled.

New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli has ELECTILE Dysfunction

Here's the thing-- according to this clown's OWN REPORT, there is NO FEDERAL LAW that specifically bans registered persons from obtaining any medicines that could be used to treat ED, though Medicaid doesn't pay for drugs specifically for ED in general. (There is a state law that could easily be challenged in court for denial of services provided by the federal government as states cannot deny rights granted by the gov't.) However, some ED drugs are used for other purposes, as this idiot admits:

"Two common brand name drugs to treat ED, Viagra and Cialis, have Sildenafil citrate (Sildenafil) and Tadalafil, respectively, as their active ingredient. However, these two active ingredients were also FDA approved for other (non-ED) indicated uses: pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH, which is a condition characterized by abnormally high blood pressure in the pulmonary artery, the blood vessel that carries blood from the heart to the lungs) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, which is a condition in men in which the prostate gland is enlarged)."

Of course, this guy focused  a very small number of registered persons because he wants to shock people. 

Some pols will do anything to get reelected. 

https://www.lockportjournal.com/news/local_news/audit-finds-state-covered-ed-help-for-sex-offenders/article_b190d9cf-cb2a-548e-83e1-ad67da88504a.html

Audit finds state covered ED help for sex offenders
DINAPOLI: Sex offenders received help for erectile dysfunction despite rules barring practice.
Staff reports 6/5/19

New York's Medicaid program paid more than $60,000 for sexual and erectile dysfunction drugs and treatments for 47 sex offenders, according to an audit released Wednesday by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.

In total, Medicaid made more than $930,000 in payments for ED drugs and treatments for recipients, including sex offenders, that are barred under Medicaid.

“There are clear rules about what conditions Medicaid will cover when it comes to erectile dysfunction drugs. And paying for sex offenders who’ve committed terrible crimes to get these drugs should never be lost in the bureaucratic administration of this program,” DiNapoli said. “Nearly two decades ago this office identified this problem, which led to national and state changes. While the state Department of Health immediately followed up to make corrections during the course of our audit, our auditors found that the problem persisted and needed to be fixed.”

In 2005, a review by the Office of the State Comptroller determined that Medicaid paid for the erectile dysfunction drug Viagra on behalf of 198 recipients who were registered sex offenders classified as level-3 (most likely to reoffend). Given the risk to public safety, the review sparked an overhaul of legislation at the federal and state levels to ensure such drugs are not paid for by Medicaid.

Current federal and state laws prohibit Medicaid from paying for drugs to treat sexual or erectile dysfunction for Medicaid recipients, including registered sex offenders. State law additionally prohibits payment for procedures or supplies to treat ED for registered sex offenders.

In 2011, Medicaid pharmacy benefit management for managed care recipients was transferred from DOH to managed care organizations (MCOs). DOH directed MCOs on how to handle ED drug exclusions and indicated uses. Under managed care, MCOs are expected to police the drugs Medicaid recipients enrolled in their plans can get and to determine their medical necessity.

Auditors found that did not always happen. Since the transition of pharmacy benefit management to MCOs, Medicaid continued, primarily under managed care, to fund drugs, procedures, and supplies that enhance sexual and erectile function for recipients, including registered sex offenders.

DiNapoli’s auditors found that from April 1, 2012 to July 1, 2018, Medicaid made $2.8 million in payments for ED drugs approved to also treat Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) or Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH) on behalf of patients who did not have such diagnoses listed on their medical claims submitted up to six months before receiving the prescriptions. These claims indicate an elevated risk that the drugs may have been abused or sold to others. Among those payments, 411 recipients had a diagnosis of ED (but no BPH or PAH diagnosis) on their claims, totaling $207,256 in Medicaid payments.

Similarly, Medicaid paid $285,641 for ED drugs approved to also treat BPH or PAH for 14 sex offenders (see table 3 in audit), 11 of whom were classified as a level-2 or a level-3 sex offender. Auditors reviewed the medical records of 13 of the 14 sex offenders to determine if the records supported a diagnosis of BPH or PAH and found 31 percent, or four of 13 cases, supported only a diagnosis of ED. One case was indeterminate.

DOH did not monitor the use of ED drugs, procedures, and supplies, including payments by MCOs. The audit and the department’s analyses both indicate a large portion of MCO claims for ED drugs approved to treat other medical conditions lack assurance of medical necessity. MCOs made most of the payments the auditors reported on.

DiNapoli’s auditors found some MCO controls are not designed to effectively prevent sex offenders from obtaining treatment for ED. Specifically, after a recipient obtains ED treatment, if an MCO finds out the recipient is a registered sex offender, the MCO merely does not pay for the services when other steps could be taken to prevent sex offenders from obtaining them.

Auditors further found DOH’s eMedNY computer payment system also incompletely incorporated controls to prevent covering ED procedures and supplies for convicted sex offenders. Consequently, Medicaid fee-for-service inappropriately paid $27,288 for 21 excluded ED procedures and supplies provided to 15 sex offenders (at least 6 of the 15 were classified as level-2 or level-3 sex offenders).

DiNapoli has recommended DOH take the following steps:

• review the payments identified by auditors and ensure recoveries are made from providers, as appropriate;

• regularly provide MCOs with detailed lists of all ED drugs, procedures, and supplies that are excluded or have limited Medicaid coverage;

• periodically monitor coverage, utilization, and payment of ED drugs, procedures, and supplies; and take corrective actions to ensure compliance with laws, policies, and procedures and

• improve DOH’s eMedNY computer system controls to apply sex offender status in the processing of certain claims and prevent the processing of incomplete electronic Division of Criminal Justice Services sex offender registry files.

In its response to the audit, DOH indicated the actions it would take to correct the issues found.

Because the state loves getting sued, Alabama passes mandatory chemical castration bill

Well, it only took Steve Hurst a dozen years but he finally got some kind of nonsensical castration bill on the books.

There's already a lawsuit in the works.

https://www.cbs42.com/top-stories/alabama-considers-chemical-castration/2050636492

Alabama considers chemical castration for child molesters
By:  Cory McGinnis
Posted: Jun 03, 2019 11:21 PM CDT

Updated: Jun 04, 2019 01:54 PM CDT

4.4K

An Alabama lawmaker has a plan to permanently and physically punish someone convicted of certain sex offenses against children.

The bill, known as HB 379, would make those sex offenders have to undergo chemical castration before they leave prison.

HB 379 was introduced by State Representative Steve Hurst, R-Calhoun County.

He said the bill will be for sex offenders over the age of 21 that committed sex offenses against children. "They have marked this child for life and the punishment should fit the crime," said Hurst.

This is not Hurst's first time introducing the bill.

"I had people call me in the past when I introduced it and said don't you think this is inhumane? I asked them what's more inhumane than when you take a little infant child, and you sexually molest that infant child when the child cannot defend themselves or get away, and they have to go through all the things they have to go through. If you want to talk about inhumane--that's inhumane," said Hurst.

Hurst is hoping this would make sex offenders think twice.

"If we do something of this nature it would deter something like this happening again in Alabama and maybe reduce the numbers," said Hurst.

Attorney Raymond Johnson says, "There going to challenge it under the 8th Amendment Constitution. There going to claim that it is cruel and unusual punishment  for someone who has served there time and for the rest of there life have to be castrated."

Johnson says child molestation is a serious offense and already has serious consequences such as time served in prison followed with probation or parole.

The bill is now on Governor Kay Ivey's desk for signature.

https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB379/id/1987931

SYNOPSIS: Under existing law, certain criminal
9 offenses are classified as sex offenses. A
10 conviction for a sex offense against a person under
11 the age of 12 years is a sex offense involving a
12 child.

13 Under existing law, a person convicted of a
14 sex offense involving a child which constitutes a
15 Class A or B felony is not eligible for parole.
16 This bill would provide that a person
17 convicted of a sex offense involving a person under
18 the age of 13 years who is eligible for parole, as
19 a condition of parole, shall be required to undergo
20 chemical castration treatment in addition to any
21 other penalty or condition prescribed by law.
22 This bill would require the Department of
23 Public Health to administer any treatment given.
24 This bill would require the parolee to pay
25 for the cost of the treatment; provided, the bill
26 would prohibit a person from being denied parole
27 because of indigency.

1 This bill would also provide that if a
2 person is ordered to undergo chemical castration
3 treatment as a condition of parole and the person
4 refuses to undergo the treatment, his or her
5 refusal would constitute a violation of parole and
6 would result in the person being remanded to the
7 custody of the Department of Corrections.

Andrea Goldblum gets fired for condemning a registrant who rurned his life around

She deserved to be fired. Case dismissed.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/05/29/lawsuit-university-cincinnati-honored-sex-offender-forced-out-official-who-investigated/1259798001/

Lawsuit: UC honored sex offender, then forced out official who investigated him

---

Kevin Grasha ,  Katherine Murphy  | Cincinnati Enquirer Updated 22 hours ago

The University of Cincinnati's former Title IX coordinator was forced to resign after she raised concerns about honoring a student who was a registered sex offender, a lawsuit says.

Andrea Goldblum had been UC's Title IX coordinator for nine months when the lawsuit says she was forced to resign in March 2019. Goldblum had started an informal investigation into what officials knew about the student before he was admitted to the university and before he was honored as part of graduation in December 2018, according to the lawsuit filed this week in federal court in Cincinnati.

The action taken against her was directly related to her investigation and reporting of possible Title IX violations by the university, the lawsuit says, "and was designed to punish and intimidate Goldblum from publicly disclosing potential misconduct by UC officials."

Lori Ross, UC's vice president for legal affairs and general counsel, said in a statement that the lawsuit "is without merit."

"We will present the relevant facts and evidence through the established legal proceedings," Ross said.

The case surrounds an article published online by the College of Arts and Sciences, which said the student, 24-year-old William Houston, was honored at graduation for "overcoming major challenges."

Houston was one of several students selected to receive "triumph cords" at graduation, signifying they had overcome adversity. He had been nominated by faculty.

The article did not mention Houston's 2015 conviction in Wood County for sexually assaulting a female student the previous year when he was a sophomore at Bowling Green State University.

Houston pleaded no contest to gross sexual imposition and was sentenced to three years of probation, court records show. He is a registered sex offender in Ohio.

The student who wrote the article and university staff who reviewed it were not aware of Houston's criminal background, university spokeswoman M.B. Reilly told The Enquirer in February.

Reilly said Houston answered questions honestly on his application about his criminal conviction. There was a review by admissions and student affairs officials, she said.

Houston was monitored and mentored throughout his time at UC, Reilly said, which spanned the fall of 2016 to December 2018. UC police were notified of his history and kept tabs on him during his time as a student, she said.

According to the lawsuit, Goldblum was concerned that promoting Houston "fostered the creation of a sexually hostile environment and made female…students vulnerable to sexual assault."

As Title IX coordinator, Goldblum was responsible for overseeing an office that investigates complaints and assists students impacted by sexual violence and harassment.

She wanted to submit a letter to the school newspaper offering resources to students "who may have negative responses to UC giving an award to a convicted sex offender," the lawsuit says.

But Bleuzette Marshall, the university’s vice president for equity, inclusion and community impact, deemed the letter "unsatisfactory," the lawsuit says, and told Goldblum not to send it.

On Feb. 12, a day after the student newspaper published an article about the backlash surrounding the article featuring Houston, Goldblum emailed her letter to the newspaper. The lawsuit says she did that to fulfill her role as Title IX coordinator and to provide resources to anyone affected by the article. It says she notified Marshall in advance.

The letter was never published, and the lawsuit says Marshall was "angry" Goldblum had sent it.

According to the lawsuit, although university officials initially didn't alter the Arts and Sciences profile featuring Houston, the section on him ultimately was removed.

The lawsuit says Goldblum started an informal investigation into what university officials knew about Houston’s background before he was admitted as a student and before he was given the award.

On March 15, the lawsuit says Goldblum was called into a meeting in Marshall's office. Also at the meeting were a human resources representative and a police officer. Goldblum was told to resign or be fired, the lawsuit says.

She resigned, although the lawsuit says she wasn't given a reasonable time to decide what to do.

Goldblum's attorney, Josh Engel, said in an interview that the investigation could have found university officials did nothing wrong, that it was appropriate to admit Houston and give him the award. Under the law, he said, Goldblum can't be punished for looking into it.

"She was terminated because she was asking too many questions, in our view, about this matter," Engel said.

Originally Published 3:47 p.m. CDT May 29, 2019

Updated 22 hours ago

Addendum: Goldblum responded to me on LinkedIn, and I find her to be dishonest:

Actually, Derek, this was not about denying students any rights or assuming someone is a danger. It was not about automatically accepting or not accepting convicted felons or registered sex offenders.  Instead it was about processes that Cincinnati did not have in place for asking the right questions and doing a fair and complete risk assessment and basing decisions on those.

It was also about ensuring people who have been harmed being offered the resources they need and that we were required to provide under federal law. Finally, it is about not trying to sweep things under the rug, due to short-term thinking.

I am no longer at UC because I suffered retaliation for complying with a federal civil rights law, which was my job description, after all. University of Cincinnati is the disgrace for engaging in retaliation and for ignoring federal law and the needs of its faculty, staff and students.

Making assumptions based on brief media articles or social media is always a chancy thing. There is always more to the story.  I am glad I have the opportunity to clarify this for you.

Rachel Cardin from Virginia's News 3 seems shocked registered persons might enjoy a day at the beach

Just wait until this reporter finds out that unlike Kim Jong Un in "The Interview," we pee and poop like non-RSOs. I can see the headline now:

"Can we can SOs from the can? Live on-the-scene exclusive interview with John on the john."

https://wtkr.com/2019/05/22/sexual-predators-living-among-us-could-be-sharing-the-beach-with-your-child/

Sexual predators living among us could be sharing the beach with your child
POSTED 12:00 AM, MAY 22, 2019, BY RACHAEL CARDIN, UPDATED AT 10:24AM, MAY 22, 2019

HAMPTON ROADS, Va. – The Virginia State Police monitors the state’s sex offender registry, which currently has 32,000 violent and non-violent offenders.

Of that number 10,674 are living among us — 3,011 of whom are in Hampton Roads.

The misconception, troopers say, is that every sex offender is a child molester. That is not the case, but of the more than 3,000 registered sex offenders in our area, 75 percent of them are violent offenders: convicted of crimes like rape, molestation or a sexual crime involving a child.

Violent offenders do have stipulations upon their release or end of parole. Many are banned from schools, school buses and day-care centers, or anywhere children might be.

Sex offenders are, however, allowed in public places. That means a sex offender, convicted of a violent or non-violent crime, could be walking next to you at the mall, playing with your dog at the park or laying in the sand next to your family at the beach.

Troopers have 47 officers and 36 civilians assigned to the sex offender unit in the state. These people make sure sex offenders register with the state and they check in to be sure the information in the registry is correct and up to date.

A registered sex offender has to let the state know within three days of any address, name or mailing address changes. They have to be constantly notifying troopers of their whereabouts; where they work, where they go to school and so on. An email or social media change has to be registered with the state within 30 minutes of a change.

Troopers say many sex offenders have served their time and they stay in compliance with all their requirements because they do not want to catch another charge, and possibly go back to jail. There are some, however, who do not like to follow these rules, which is why troopers routinely check in on these offenders.

Parents must be vigilant and aware of their surroundings when it comes to being in a public place with your children. Troopers encourage parents to look up the address of their home, work and their child’s school or day-care so you know where the sex offenders are.

Someone should tell Tim Whyte that repealing Santa Clarita's unconstitutional residency restriction law was a "Black and Whyte" issue

Yes Tim, when you are playing football and it is 4th and 99 and the game is lost anyways, you still punt. Residency restriction laws are unconstitutional. Even you had to admit it. That is why the decision to repeal a blatantly unconstitutional ordinance was made.

Remember when USC was talking all that trash before they played Alabama a couple years back then lost 52-6? Well, your article is a lot like that, Tim.

https://signalscv.com/2019/05/our-view-sex-offender-law-fight-or-punt-city-choices-limited/

Our View | Sex Offender Law: Fight or Punt? City Choices Limited
May 19, 2019
Tim Whyte

By The Signal Editorial Board

Rock. Santa Clarita. Hard Place.

That about sums up the situation the Santa Clarita City Council was in this past week, when council members faced a staff recommendation to repeal a city ordinance restricting the residency of registered sex offenders.

Regrettably, the council members had only two choices: repeal the ordinance, or face a very long, costly and most likely losing legal battle.

What does this mean for you and your family? In a nutshell, it means registered sex offenders can pretty much live wherever they want. There are a few exceptions. For example, the state Department of Corrections can still prohibit a sex offender from living within a half-mile of a school, but only if their victim was a child.

But otherwise, rapists, child molesters and serial flashers in trench coats are free to live wherever they want.

Across the street from a public park, where small children play? Yep. Green light.

Next door to an elementary school? You got it — with, of course, the aforementioned exception. Just make sure you pay the rent on time.

Church? Library? Day care center? Check, check, and check.

Yet, the city didn’t have much choice.

At issue was the city’s ordinance, enacted after the 2006 passage of California’s Proposition 83 — approved by a whopping 70 percent of the voters — that facilitated restrictions on where registered sex offenders could live.

The Santa Clarita ordinance, in short, stipulated that no sex offender could live within 2,000 feet of local parks, schools, libraries or day care centers.

Sounds reasonable, right? However, Prop. 83, known as Jessica’s Law, almost immediately faced legal challenges from attorneys who stood up for the rights of sex offenders versus the safety and security of families like yours.

By 2015, the California Supreme Court had ruled such restrictions unconstitutional. (It bears noting that the Jessica’s Law cases did not impact Megan’s Law, which requires the addresses of registered sex offenders to be made available to the public.)

While we understand that sometimes the courts must apply constitutional principles to protect the rights of the few from the whims of the many, in the case of Prop. 83 the court has protected the few — the sex offenders — while putting the many at risk.

In the aftermath of the 2015 ruling, attorneys like Janice M. Belluci started targeting cities that had imposed residency restrictions on sex offenders. Belluci, who has filed at least 34 such lawsuits, sued Santa Clarita on behalf of an unnamed “John Doe” client.

Belluci told the city she would drop the case, if the city would drop its residency restrictions.

That brought us to Tuesday night. First, we thank the council for pulling the item from the consent calendar. This is the sort of item that should at least get the benefit of a discussion before the council vote. In that discussion, there were two major topics of note:

First, the Sheriff’s Department hasn’t been enforcing Santa Clarita’s sex offender residency restrictions for the past eight years. So, if you thought you were living in a city where sex offenders can’t live within 2,000 feet of your kids’ schools, guess again. They’ve been free to do so since 2011, regardless of what the city ordinance said.

We understand the rationale for non-enforcement. The legal environment clearly pushed in that direction. But boy, if our memory serves correctly, that little bit of non-enforcement sure happened quietly.

And second, as Councilman Cameron Smyth noted in the discussion, the city faced quite a dilemma: You could repeal the ordinance, and avert the lawsuit. Or, you could fight the good fight, perhaps taking appeals as far as possible, spending who knows how many tax dollars on legal fees, and still, most likely, lose.

Sometimes a “good fight” is worth fighting. And sometimes, you punt. Weighing the factors on both sides, we don’t blame the council for punting. We share in their frustration, because this feels like a decision that was not in the best interests of local families.

That’s the California we live in: Sacrificing the will of the voters, local control and the safety of our children, while protecting the rights of sex offenders.

Does it have to be that way? While we understand that the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station is taking additional measures to keep local sex offenders honest — like routine residency checks — we also implore our city leaders to explore other potential options.

Here in Santa Clarita, we must devise new measures that can be taken to protect our community’s children — where California won’t. 

Mass. State Rep Shaunna O'Connell wants to ban registrants from getting name changes

She's no stranger to this blog. Maybe if she wins a Shiitake Award, she'l change her name to Lady Mullet.

https://www.boston25news.com/news/state-rep-taking-action-after-25-investigatesreport-on-sex-offender-name-changes/945876488

State Rep. taking action after 25 Investigates report on sex offender name changes
By: Ted Daniel

Updated: May 2, 2019 - 9:50 PM

A State Representative is taking action after a Boston 25 Investigates story shed light on registered sex offenders legally changing their names to hide in plain sight.

Nineteen states limit or restrict registered sex offenders from changing their names, but there are no laws like that in Massachusetts. With a $150 filing fee and a judge's signature, a sex offender can become - on paper at least - a new person.

Brighton inventor Michael Plusch became Michael Stanley in 2013. He was legally able to change his name, despite being a registered level three sex offender who served time for molesting young girls.

It's unclear how many other sex offenders have legally changed their names.

The Sex Offender Registry Board told 25 Investigates that it doesn't specifically track that data.

"It's hard enough to keep track of these guys as it is and they change their names and it makes it that much more difficult," said Bob Curley.

Somerville's Bob Curley is very familiar with this issue. Charles Jaynes, one of the men who raped and murdered his 10-year-old son Jeffrey tried to change his name several years ago. The case went all the way to the state appeals court.

"We had to fight that every step of the way and fortunately he wasn't able to do it... Somebody should step and do something about it," Curley said.

State Representative Shaunna O'Connell of Taunton saw our report and is stepping up. She says she plans to file legislation at the State House.

"I think that's important to have in statute that you may not change your name if you're a sex offender. If you don't want to be on the sex offender registry then you should not commit heinous sex crimes against women and children," said O'Connell.

If the state sex offender registry board learns of a name change or a new alias, it will update its database with the new information and people at home can access that, but ultimately, it's up to the offender to report those changes to the registry.

FlorIDIOTS, rejoice! You're now safe from inflatable dolls thanks to the Florida Legislature's own inflatable doll, Lauren Book

FL State Sen Lauren Book

Okay, so FloriDUH isn't the only state pushing this knee-jerk legislation. It IS, however, the only state with a real life inflatable doll named State Senator Lauren Book to promote this idiotic law.

Surely there are lots of questions as to what constitutes a "child-like doll".

What if a person converts one of those large Barbie dolls or Disney Princess dolls sold in stores into a sex doll? Barbie's 60, and the ages of most of the Disney Princesses are 18 (a few are 16, Jasmine is 15, Snow White is only 14-- who knew?). At any rate, would that count? (Interesting side note, Barbie's original age was 17 but has grown since then and Ken was 2 years younger than her (making him 15), so if they met (and presumably had sex) at their original ages, could Barbie be a sex offender?

What about guys who just like their women, or in this case, their dolls, short? Or with small breasts?  Some guys like midgets. Remember the case of the man accused of possessing CP for having images of porn star Lupe Fuentes?

I've written at length about how vague CP laws currently are, and the CP laws are being used as the basis of these sex doll bans. How do you even determine age of the doll, anyways? You can't very well do a Tanner age test on a blowup doll. Do you go by manufacturing date? Do you go by the fictional date of the doll's back story?

I would suggest reading the comment sections at the following link:

https://floridaactioncommittee.org/be-sure-to-check-your-sex-dolls-id-florida-legislature-passes-new-law/

Here is the actual law:

https://legiscan.com/FL/text/S0160/id/1904753

                   A bill to be entitled                     
    2         An act relating to prohibited acts in connection with
    3         obscene or lewd materials; amending s. 847.011, F.S.;
    4         prohibiting a person from knowingly selling, lending,
    5         giving away, distributing, transmitting, showing, or
    6         transmuting; offering to commit such actions; having
    7         in his or her possession, custody, or control with the
    8         intent to commit such actions; or advertising in any
    9         manner an obscene, child-like sex doll; providing
   10         criminal penalties; prohibiting a person from
   11         knowingly having in his or her possession, custody, or
   12         control an obscene, child-like sex doll without the
   13         intent to commit certain actions; providing criminal
   14         penalties; reenacting ss. 772.102(1)(a), 847.02,
   15         847.03, 847.09(2), 895.02(8)(a), 921.0022(3)(f),
   16         933.02, 933.03, and 943.325(2)(g), F.S., relating to
   17         the definition of the term “criminal activity,” the
   18         confiscation of obscene material, an officer seizing
   19         obscene material, legislative intent, the definition
   20         of the term “racketeering activity,” level 6 of the
   21         offense severity ranking chart, grounds for the
   22         issuance of a search warrant, destruction of obscene
   23         prints and literature, and the definition of the term
   24         “qualifying offender,” respectively, to incorporate
   25         the amendment made to s. 847.011, F.S., in references
   26         thereto; providing an effective date.
   27         
   28  Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
   29 
   30         Section 1. Present subsections (5) through (10) of section
   31  847.011, Florida Statutes, are redesignated as subsections (6)
   32  through (11), respectively, and a new subsection (5) is added to
   33  that section, to read:
   34         847.011 Prohibition of certain acts in connection with
   35  obscene, lewd, etc., materials; penalty.—
   36         (5)(a) A person may not knowingly sell, lend, give away,
   37  distribute, transmit, show, or transmute; offer to sell, lend,
   38  give away, distribute, transmit, show, or transmute; have in his
   39  or her possession, custody, or control with the intent to sell,
   40  lend, give away, distribute, transmit, show, or transmute; or
   41  advertise in any manner an obscene, child-like sex doll. A
   42  person who violates this paragraph commits a misdemeanor of the
   43  first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s.
   44  775.083.
   45         (b) A person who is convicted of violating paragraph (a) a
   46  second or subsequent time commits a felony of the third degree,
   47  punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
   48         (c) A person who knowingly has in his or her possession,
   49  custody, or control an obscene, child-like sex doll without
   50  intent to sell, lend, give away, distribute, transmit, show,
   51  transmute, or advertise the same, commits a misdemeanor of the
   52  second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s.
   53  775.083. A person who, after having been convicted of violating
   54  this subsection, thereafter violates any of its provisions
   55  commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as
   56  provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. In any prosecution for
   57  such possession, it is not necessary to allege or prove the
   58  absence of such intent.

Ted Daniel of Boston 25 derails career of registrant featured in a previous positive story because it is sweeps week

Ted Daniel of Boston 25 decided to join into the sweeps week fearmongering by destroying one man's career. His brown journalism is the reason why people on the public registry would want to legally change their names to be able to have jobs.

https://www.boston25news.com/news/25-investigates-no-one-is-tracking-how-often-sex-offenders-change-names/945403357

25 Investigates: No one is tracking how often sex offenders change names
By: Ted Daniel

Updated: May 3, 2019 - 5:35 AM

Registered sex offenders are legally allowed to change their names in Massachusetts and 25 Investigates found the State Sex Offender Registry Board does not track how often this happens. It turns out, neither do probate courts or law enforcement.

In January, Boston 25 News reported on Michael D. Stanley, a Brighton man who has gained national attention for his futuristic idea called Transit X. Transit X used solar-powered pods that travel on a network of thin, elevated tracks 15 feet above the ground. Stanley believes his company could revolutionize public transportation all over the world.

Days after the story aired, an anonymous tipster emailed 25 Investigates with information about Stanley’s past.  It turns out Stanley was born Michael D. Plusch. He legally changed his last name in Essex County back in 2013.

Stanley pleaded guilty, in 2010, to four counts of indecent assault and battery on a child under the age of 14 and served time in prison. When he got out of jail the sex offender registry board classified him as a Level 3 sex offender, considered most likely to re-offend.

In a follow-up interview, Stanley told 25 Investigates he changed his name after he was released from prison because his sex offender status made it difficult for him to find a job. He said it wasn’t to conceal his status, but to avoid search engines like Google.

"Even somebody with my background, education, and self-confidence had enormous difficulty in just doing basic life functions, housing, getting a job. The registry is one of the cruelest forms of shame and punishment that we can possibly have as a society.” Stanley said.

Nineteen states either prohibit or place limitations on sex offender name changes, but not in Massachusetts. In the Commonwealth, anyone can go to probate court and request a legal name change from a judge.

Attorney and victim advocate Wendy Murphy is not surprised a sex offender would want to distance themselves from their crimes. 

"This is a special category of crime we're talking about with high recidivism rates, offenders who are notorious for trying to evade compliance with the registry.  It's just hard to believe that neither law enforcement nor the sex offender registry board is tracking these name change situations,” Murphy said.

When you search the registry for Michael Stanley both his last names are on the website. His former name Plusch is listed as an alias. 

Andy Harris, a professor at UMass Lowell, has been studying sex offender registries across the country. He said the point of the registry is to keep track of where offenders are living and working.   Harris says a legal name shouldn’t be a factor if the offender reports it. 

"Anybody who is searching for that individual should be able to find that individual regardless of whether or not they changed their name in the system if that old name is appropriately reflected,” Harris said.

But what about offenders who aren't following the rules?

There are nearly 200 Level 3 sex offenders in Massachusetts currently in violation. We found that almost a third of them have multiple aliases. 

In a statement from a spokesperson for the Sex Offender Registry Board writes,

"A legal name change won’t allow a registered sex offender to evade detection because the Sex offender Registry Board maintains all offenders’ legal name changes and aliases in the database. This information is available to both law enforcement and the public, regardless of whether they search by a current or former name."

Stanley says he's stepped down as CEO of Transit X and is still hopeful that his vision to change the transportation world will succeed."You can't change what happened. I am so sorry for what had happened. I'm making the best of a second chance" said Stanley  "If you're trying to use a second chance to save the world which will help millions of people, I think that's a good use of a second chance."

Murphy disagrees. 

"When a sex offender changes their name, it defeats the purpose of the sex offender registry,” she said.