HB 353 opponent testimony is being heard Tuesday April 26th at 3:30pm in Columbus. It hasn't gone away, and unless we oppose it with some force, many of us will likely have our names listed with the Sheriff's Department.
Just think of the irony of someone that no longer must register whose name and whereabouts is no longer tracked because completed the registration period, yet people who reside with a registrant will go on a list of sorts...
(To recap, HB 353 will require registered persons to turn over the names of ALL adults living in the household to the Sheriff's office to be added to a list, and they will in turn get mail notifying them they are living with a registered citizen.)
Some of you have provided a statement and we thank you very much. We need statements from those that haven't, and even more so, people who can travel to Columbus this coming Tuesday. At least a couple of us will be headed down from Mansfield and we can try to accommodate others who wish to ride along or car pool. If planning to testify, keep in mind that statements need to be emailed to the Chair Jim Butler's aide at: Jeff.Dillon@ohiohouse.gov or faxed directly to Jim Butler at 614-719-3591
We are available to help out those who wish to write a letter or statement. Your response is appreciated. (RSVP) Haven't heard from some of you in awhile, please let this be a time we do.
Thank you,
Ohio RSOL
Note, I have already covered previous testimony regarding HB 353 on this blog. CLICK HERE to see a summary of my argument against HB 353.
Friday, April 22, 2016
Monday, April 11, 2016
Take the Once Fallen Police Compliance Check Survey
https://eSurv.org?s=LCHKFH_2a407aff -- Take the Once Fallen Police/ Compliance Check Survey
Dear registrant or loved one of a registrant,
Perhaps one of the most stressful experiences we face as those forced to register as “sex offenders” is having a uniformed member of law enforcement coming to your house to perform a “compliance check” or “address verification” operation. This survey is designed to gauge the experiences of registered citizens or their loved ones while subjected to one of these “random” compliance/ address checks. (For purposes of this survey, I prefer to use the term “registered citizens” or “registrants” as opposed to the term “registered sex offender.”)
QUALIFICATIONS: You must be either a registered citizen OR someone living with a registered citizen AND experienced an at-home or at-work compliance check at least once since being forced to register or, if you are the loved one of a registrant, have personally witnessed the check of the registrant. If you have NOT experienced an in-home or at-work compliance check, then DO NOT complete this survey.
If you have questions about this survey, contact me at iamthefallen1@yahoo.com or call me at 513-238-2873.
Derek W. Logue of OnceFallen.com
Dear registrant or loved one of a registrant,
Perhaps one of the most stressful experiences we face as those forced to register as “sex offenders” is having a uniformed member of law enforcement coming to your house to perform a “compliance check” or “address verification” operation. This survey is designed to gauge the experiences of registered citizens or their loved ones while subjected to one of these “random” compliance/ address checks. (For purposes of this survey, I prefer to use the term “registered citizens” or “registrants” as opposed to the term “registered sex offender.”)
QUALIFICATIONS: You must be either a registered citizen OR someone living with a registered citizen AND experienced an at-home or at-work compliance check at least once since being forced to register or, if you are the loved one of a registrant, have personally witnessed the check of the registrant. If you have NOT experienced an in-home or at-work compliance check, then DO NOT complete this survey.
If you have questions about this survey, contact me at iamthefallen1@yahoo.com or call me at 513-238-2873.
Derek W. Logue of OnceFallen.com
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Megan Hickey used the L word in pimping the idea of internet bans...
...and I don't mean "love." I mean LOOPHOLE. It is that annoying news buzzword that makes people think every registered citizen sits in law libraries all day looking for ways to circumvent the law. I HATE when reporters use that word.
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/loophole-in-ohio-sex-offender-registry-law-aided-online-sexual-predators
Loophole in Ohio sex offender registry law aided online sexual predators
Lawmakers working to fix loophole
Megan Hickey
5:14 AM, Mar 1, 2016
A loophole in Ohio's sex offender registry law may have aided a Cleveland man and convicted sexual predator in soliciting a 14-year-old girl for sex on the internet.
Larun Miller, 47, was convicted of a sex offense involving two 15-year-old victims back in 2005. Newsnet5.com uncovered social media pages reportedly used by Miller that were not registered with the state.
While illegal, Miller's failure to provide complete internet information is not currently punishable by law.
Miller's continued internet use led to a second sex offense involving a minor in 2014.
Investigators posing as a 14-year-old girl online captured several conversations between Miller and the fake minor, in which he discussed, in graphic detail, meeting up with the young victim for sex.
In February, Miller was found guilty on four counts related to sexually explicit conduct with a minor and failing to register. He will be sentenced in May.
Current Ohio law requires registered sex offenders to provide change of registered address, registered address verification, notice of intent to reside, and change of registered vehicle, email, Internet, and telephone information.
“But we have found that there’s nothing in the law that requires it to be accurate,” Senator John Eklund, District 18, said of the internet information in particular.
Eklund, a co-sponsor of S.B. 184 , said the new legislation will help close that loophole. The bill passed through the Senate in December and is currently making its way through the House of Representatives.
Miller's case raises bigger questions about convicted sex offenders and internet use.
Some states, including Nevada and Illinois , have specific policies in place restricting internet use for offenders post-conviction.
New York makes the internet data provided by sex offenders available to social-networking sites and certain other online services, allowing them to purge users from their sites.
Ohio does not have a blanket policy. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections told newsnet5.com it has a policy that covers offender access to information technology while incarcerated . But specific restrictions for offenders upon their release are handled by probation officers.
Eklund acknowledged that dangers exist in not mandating internet restrictions for repeat offenders but said a large-scale policy would be difficult to draft in Ohio.
"Even convicted felons have first amendment rights," Eklund told newsnet5.com. "I'd be very concerned about the extent to which we would make blanket statements."
Criminal defense attorney and cyber crimes expert Ian Friedman agreed with Eklund, arguing that passing an internet use law could result in a "slippery slope."
"We really have a way to do all of this," Friedman said. "So what I would suggest is we don’t need more laws. We just have to make use of the system that we have in place."
Friedman argued that the system should do a better job at identifying offenders who are likely to repeat.
"There's a line in the sand," Friedman explained, separating the offenders who actively chat minors and arrange to meet with them versus the offenders who find child pornography on the internet.
Newsnet5.com reached out to the ACLU of Ohio about proposed internet restrictions for offenders. A spokesperson declined to comment.
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/loophole-in-ohio-sex-offender-registry-law-aided-online-sexual-predators
Loophole in Ohio sex offender registry law aided online sexual predators
Lawmakers working to fix loophole
Megan Hickey
5:14 AM, Mar 1, 2016
A loophole in Ohio's sex offender registry law may have aided a Cleveland man and convicted sexual predator in soliciting a 14-year-old girl for sex on the internet.
Larun Miller, 47, was convicted of a sex offense involving two 15-year-old victims back in 2005. Newsnet5.com uncovered social media pages reportedly used by Miller that were not registered with the state.
While illegal, Miller's failure to provide complete internet information is not currently punishable by law.
Miller's continued internet use led to a second sex offense involving a minor in 2014.
Investigators posing as a 14-year-old girl online captured several conversations between Miller and the fake minor, in which he discussed, in graphic detail, meeting up with the young victim for sex.
In February, Miller was found guilty on four counts related to sexually explicit conduct with a minor and failing to register. He will be sentenced in May.
Current Ohio law requires registered sex offenders to provide change of registered address, registered address verification, notice of intent to reside, and change of registered vehicle, email, Internet, and telephone information.
“But we have found that there’s nothing in the law that requires it to be accurate,” Senator John Eklund, District 18, said of the internet information in particular.
Eklund, a co-sponsor of S.B. 184 , said the new legislation will help close that loophole. The bill passed through the Senate in December and is currently making its way through the House of Representatives.
Miller's case raises bigger questions about convicted sex offenders and internet use.
Some states, including Nevada and Illinois , have specific policies in place restricting internet use for offenders post-conviction.
New York makes the internet data provided by sex offenders available to social-networking sites and certain other online services, allowing them to purge users from their sites.
Ohio does not have a blanket policy. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections told newsnet5.com it has a policy that covers offender access to information technology while incarcerated . But specific restrictions for offenders upon their release are handled by probation officers.
Eklund acknowledged that dangers exist in not mandating internet restrictions for repeat offenders but said a large-scale policy would be difficult to draft in Ohio.
"Even convicted felons have first amendment rights," Eklund told newsnet5.com. "I'd be very concerned about the extent to which we would make blanket statements."
Criminal defense attorney and cyber crimes expert Ian Friedman agreed with Eklund, arguing that passing an internet use law could result in a "slippery slope."
"We really have a way to do all of this," Friedman said. "So what I would suggest is we don’t need more laws. We just have to make use of the system that we have in place."
Friedman argued that the system should do a better job at identifying offenders who are likely to repeat.
"There's a line in the sand," Friedman explained, separating the offenders who actively chat minors and arrange to meet with them versus the offenders who find child pornography on the internet.
Newsnet5.com reached out to the ACLU of Ohio about proposed internet restrictions for offenders. A spokesperson declined to comment.
Friday, February 12, 2016
Ohio House Passes Legislation To Require Mandatory Prison Sentences For Sex Offenders
The rhetoric behind passing this worthless bill is the typical fearmongering nonsense used to pass all these kinds of laws. This is why we must pay attention even to the most mundane changes to existing laws. Usually the rhetoric comes from a Republican.
http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2016/02/10/columbus-ohio-ohio-house-passes-legislation-to-require-mandatory-prison-sentences-for-sex-offenders.html
Ohio House Passes Legislation To Require Mandatory Prison Sentences For Sex Offenders
By 10TV Web Staff
Wednesday February 10, 2016 10:16 PM
725 56 868
COLUMBUS, Ohio - The Ohio House of Representatives has pushed forward legislation that will require a mandatory prison sentence for sex offenders.
House Bill 405 establishes a mandatory prison sentence for soliciting a child under 13 years old to engage in sexual activity.
The bill also stipulates that if an offender is more than 10 years older than a victim, who is 13 to 16-years-old, the offender will receive a mandatory prison sentence.
State Representative Tim Schaffer (R-Lancaster), who joint sponsored the bill, said House Bill 405 will fix a major legal problem in Ohio.
“Unfortunately it is not always an officer on the other side of the computer screen, it is a child,” Schaffer said. “House Bill 405 will fix a loophole in Ohio law that is allowing dangerous sexual predators to get away with their crimes against children with a slap on the wrist and no disincentive to commit these crimes again.”
According to Rep. Schaffer, as few as 20 percent of people charged with soliciting sex from children are serving time in prison.
“It is time that we show these dangerous predators a serious deterrent, otherwise they will keep preying on our most vulnerable population—our children,” he said.
The legislation was brought forward after 10 Investigates studied cases of importuning in Franklin County.
In the case ranging from 2010 to 2014, 10 Investigates found that only 19 of 93 offenders charged served a prison sentence. Seventy of those only received probation.
House Bill 405 passed with unanimous support and will now go to the Senate for further consideration.
http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2016/02/10/columbus-ohio-ohio-house-passes-legislation-to-require-mandatory-prison-sentences-for-sex-offenders.html
Ohio House Passes Legislation To Require Mandatory Prison Sentences For Sex Offenders
By 10TV Web Staff
Wednesday February 10, 2016 10:16 PM
725 56 868
COLUMBUS, Ohio - The Ohio House of Representatives has pushed forward legislation that will require a mandatory prison sentence for sex offenders.
House Bill 405 establishes a mandatory prison sentence for soliciting a child under 13 years old to engage in sexual activity.
The bill also stipulates that if an offender is more than 10 years older than a victim, who is 13 to 16-years-old, the offender will receive a mandatory prison sentence.
State Representative Tim Schaffer (R-Lancaster), who joint sponsored the bill, said House Bill 405 will fix a major legal problem in Ohio.
“Unfortunately it is not always an officer on the other side of the computer screen, it is a child,” Schaffer said. “House Bill 405 will fix a loophole in Ohio law that is allowing dangerous sexual predators to get away with their crimes against children with a slap on the wrist and no disincentive to commit these crimes again.”
According to Rep. Schaffer, as few as 20 percent of people charged with soliciting sex from children are serving time in prison.
“It is time that we show these dangerous predators a serious deterrent, otherwise they will keep preying on our most vulnerable population—our children,” he said.
The legislation was brought forward after 10 Investigates studied cases of importuning in Franklin County.
In the case ranging from 2010 to 2014, 10 Investigates found that only 19 of 93 offenders charged served a prison sentence. Seventy of those only received probation.
House Bill 405 passed with unanimous support and will now go to the Senate for further consideration.
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
International Megan's Law passed House, now on to the president
http://www.oncefallen.com/internationalmeganslaw.html
Read my article on International Megan's Law to better understand it. Below is a summary o what IML means to you:
Specifically, Smith’s legislation will:
Authorize and expand the Angel Watch Center, an office within the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and authorize it to notify destination countries of intended travel by registered sex offenders;
Coordinate the work of the Angel Watch Center with the Sex Offender Targeting Center of the US Marshals Service so that the best information is getting to the right people in the shortest amount of time;
Make it a crime, for the first time, for a sex offender to travel abroad without giving 21 days advance notice so that law enforcement has adequate time to vet the traveler and warn the destination country, if needed;
Mandate that the State Department, in consultation with the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, establish, within 90 days, a program for placing a unique passport identifier on the passport of a traveling sex offender with an offense against a child and current duty to register, thereby preventing circumvention of the notification system by travelers who misreport which countries they will visit;
Collect notification response data to understand which countries are working with the U.S. on preventing re-offense by child predators;
Provide the authority for both the Angel Watch Center and the US Marshals Service to receive information from other countries about pedophiles intending to travel to the U.S.;
Clarify the receipt and sharing within U.S. law enforcement of incoming notifications on known sex offenders traveling to the U.S.; and
Direct the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security, to seek agreements and use technical assistance with other countries so that the United States is notified in advance of incoming foreign sex offenders.
Read my article on International Megan's Law to better understand it. Below is a summary o what IML means to you:
Specifically, Smith’s legislation will:
Authorize and expand the Angel Watch Center, an office within the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and authorize it to notify destination countries of intended travel by registered sex offenders;
Coordinate the work of the Angel Watch Center with the Sex Offender Targeting Center of the US Marshals Service so that the best information is getting to the right people in the shortest amount of time;
Make it a crime, for the first time, for a sex offender to travel abroad without giving 21 days advance notice so that law enforcement has adequate time to vet the traveler and warn the destination country, if needed;
Mandate that the State Department, in consultation with the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, establish, within 90 days, a program for placing a unique passport identifier on the passport of a traveling sex offender with an offense against a child and current duty to register, thereby preventing circumvention of the notification system by travelers who misreport which countries they will visit;
Collect notification response data to understand which countries are working with the U.S. on preventing re-offense by child predators;
Provide the authority for both the Angel Watch Center and the US Marshals Service to receive information from other countries about pedophiles intending to travel to the U.S.;
Clarify the receipt and sharing within U.S. law enforcement of incoming notifications on known sex offenders traveling to the U.S.; and
Direct the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security, to seek agreements and use technical assistance with other countries so that the United States is notified in advance of incoming foreign sex offenders.
Sunday, January 31, 2016
ACTION ALERT! International Megan's Law is due up for suspension of the rules 2/1/16 @ 6:30pm!
cACTION ALERT! If you have a passport, you have just one day to oppose International Megan's Law (HR 515). If passed, you WILL be required to turn in your passports and have a new one marked with a "unique identifier" marking you as a registered sex offender. I shouldn't even have to mention how heinous that provision will be for us. This is a FEDERAL law, NOT a state law.
Paul Rigney of the Registrant Travel Action Group (a subsidiary of Narional RSOL), urgently requests that everyone please help with the following:
1. Everyone, call and have others call The Speakers office THIS Monday morning. 202-225-600, 202-225-3031.
David: We need to tell them that they must not vote on H.R. 515 under RULES OF SUSPENSION because the bill received an amendment from the Senate that is SUBSTANTIVE and HISTORIC. (U.S. passports have never been branded with criminal convictions of citizens before)
I would like to see 500 phone calls. Please put this up on Affiliates websites. Lets leave hundreds of messages on 202-225-0600 for them to sort through Monday morning
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
2. Spread Josh Graven’s petition that should go directly to their representative.
https://actionnetwork.org/letters/hr-515-international-megans-law
(This site will look up your Congressman for you! How convenient, right?)
3. Sign the Change.org petition at:
https://www.change.org/p/u-s-house-of-representatives-vote-against-hr-515
For those with Twitter accounts, tweet this , “Are you familiar with International Megan’s #Law, or IML? http://ow.ly/WITZv” sends to David Post’s article. Also, please TWEET the following image and message which can be found here (simply right-click and save the image to your hard drive and then insert it, along with the text message, into new Tweets):
https://twitter.com/IndividLiberty/status/691870334220423168
Also, you could help further by re-tweeting Tweets already sent to House members which have been sent from that Twitter account.
5. Continue to call and email congressional members.
Use the banner at the top of the screen.
__________________________________________________________________
Below is my letter to Congress. You can use it as a template if you want.
On 2/1/16, the CONTROVERSIAL International Megan's Law is up for "suspension of the rules." This must not pass! IML as written will place a "unique identifier" on the passports of ALL registered citizens and will establish a new bureaucracy for expanded government control.
International Megan’s Law is an attempt at imposing the American way of thinking on the rest of the world, an act of arrogance that will lead to disastrous results if implemented. IML will attempt to force other nations to create a registry and raise the age of consent to conform to the American standards. This is a blatant violation of international law and a show of contempt for the governments of all nations who do not maintain close ties to the US.
Victim industry advocates have tried to justify International Megan’s Law using anecdotal examples, assumptions, unsourced statistics and non sequiturs to attempt to justify this bad piece of legislation. In reality, various government agencies have reported they have found very few examples of actual sex tourism, and even fewer examples of sex tourism from a registered citizen. It is estimated only about 10 convictions a year occur from Americans engaging in sex tourism annually. The GAO, the US Dept. of Justice, ICE, and the now defunct NDIC have all stated they have found few, if any, examples of Americans traveling abroad specifically to engage in sex tourism or sex trafficking. Key researchers studying sex crimes have repeatedly warned their own research or the research of others have been misinterpreted or distorted by those trying to promote human sex trafficking as America’s next social panic.
International Megan’s Law will be a costly and ineffective measure. It will cost millions just to establish a new bureaucratic agency and to revise the passports of registered citizens. It will cost millions more to enforce the various proposed changes to passports proposed by Congress. Passport limits run afoul of international law, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), by interfering with the free movement of citizens. The ICCPR was signed, ratified, and enforced by the US. In addition, 22 U.S. Code § 217a has been narrowly tailored to limit passports only to those registrants convicted in a court of law for sex tourism, thus nullifying the perceived need to pass IML passport provisions. As previously noted, very few cases of sex tourism/ trafficking are confirmed by government agencies, so the cost of investigating and prosecuting a mere handful of cases do not justify the need for a new bureaucracy, especially if the SMART office is passing IML notification provisions without the authorization of Congress.
The proposal to mark the passports of registered citizens is unprecedented in American history and is offensive enough that even mass media have made parallels between International Megan’s Law and Nazi law. In 1938, the Nazi government required all Jews to surrender their passports and have new passports issued with a scarlet “J” stamped on them. If IML passes, registered citizens will be forced to surrender their passports and have new passports issued with a “unique identifier” on them. In addition to the obvious parallel to Nazi law, this practice will obviously lead to travel impediments and denials of entry across the globe for all registrants regardless of offense. This mark of infamy could potentially lead to travel problems domestically as states struggle to fall into compliance with the so-called “REAL ID” system and thus requiring passports to fly within the boundaries of the US. Furthermore, IML could have an effect described as “humiliating” and “devastating” for individuals whose passports may be falsely marked as belonging to a registered citizen and would lead to costly litigation.
While certain provisions of IML imply that these provisions would be limited to “high risk/ interest” registrants, the harsh reality is this law will be applied to every registered citizen regardless of offense, even teens who engaged in consensual relations with other teens. The law is especially difficult for juveniles on the registry, who are assumed to be less likely to reoffend, more amenable to rehabilitation, and far less likely to become a “sex tourist.”
Finally, International Megan’s Law violates a number of constitutional safeguards, including the 1st (freedom of association) and 14th (Due process) Amendments, as well as the Ex Post Facto clause. In addition, protecting the reputation of American travels and their privacy is of great governmental interest, especially given the attitude of much of the world regarding American tourists. Unconsidered in this report was the potential chilling effect IML could have on ALL American tourists as the US gains a reputation for being a country full of “sex traffickers.” International Megan’s Law will ultimately do far more harm than good, not just in regard to registered citizens, but for the reputation of this nation as well.
For the full report and references for my assertions, go to http://www.oncefallen.com/internationalmeganslaw
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
Update: ReFORM-Ohio's visit to Columbus regarding HB 353
Some of you may not know this, but the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio is a significant place to the Anti-Registry Movement. It was the location of the first successful public demonstration against the Adam Walsh Act in December 2007, known as the "Silent No More" rally. However, I haven't been to Columbus since that time. Thankfully, Ohio hasn't been a hotbed for bad legislation, with only a few bad laws making it into legislation. But this year, Ohio wanted to remind us they are still willing to make asinine bills by introducing HB 353, a bill that will require registered citizens to turn over information on all adults living in their households to the registry office.
Yesterday's House Judiciary Committee meeting was the second hearing on this bill, and it was only for "proponent testimony" (i.e., testimony from those in favor of the bill). The good news is there was only one proponent testifying in person. Nancy Tapocsi is the mother of a woman dating a registered citizen who was convicted of "importuning" (trying to meet a 15-year-old online who was really an undercover agent). There isn't really much to say about her testimony-- she says the registrant lied to her about why he went to prison and he's a "child predator." At the end of her spiel, she ends adds, "I am praying that House Bill 353 passes. The safety of children should come before the privacy of registered sex offenders. Everyone who lives with a sexual predator deserves to know it. Criminals are notoriously good at lying. If this bill saves just one child from being molested, it will be worth it."
According to the House Judiciary page, there is also a written statement in favor of this bill from Melissa Litteral, President of the Ohio Chief Probation Officers Association. It is a brief, one page statement which claims registrants aren't telling people living with them or people they are dating they are on the registry.
I was more concerned with the statements in support of HB 405, which will increase penalties for "importuning." Here, the sex offender myth rhetoric was thick. After hearing this, I am convinced we need to establish our position on every bill that impacts "sex offender" issues, no matter how mundane, because the same tired myths (they all reoffend, can't be cured, etc) continue to be bandied about. Legislators must be exposed to the facts.
We need as many folks as possible to oppose HB 353, in person if possible. We don't have a time limit for speeches, though they encourage us to keep it brief. I have covered many basic facts in a one-page position paper (see statement below) but maybe some of you might think of things I haven't considered. We need emotional impact statements as well. You don't have to be a great orator (I never claim to be a great speaker), just make your voice heard. I will know who all sends opposition statements because they will be published on the Ohio legislative website, so if you are afraid to put your name out there, use an alias or your initials or maybe just your first name and last initial. Send your opposition statements or sign up to oppose in person to Jim Butler's aide Jeff.Dillon@ohiohouse.gov
Here is an opposition statement I took to Rep. Butler's office before yesterday's hearing:
ReFORM-OHIO STRONGLY OPPOSES OHIO
HB 353
Anti-Registry
Movement activists often use the expression, "When someone is forced to
register, the entire family registers," but it seems Ohio is taking this
expression too literally with the introduction of HB 353.
Why we oppose HB 353:
1. Invasion of privacy:
HB 353 requires registrants to give private information of people not required
to register as sex offenders to government agents. This includes a spouse or
live-in lover, adult children of the registrant, and even unrelated
individuals, (like a roommate). The right to privacy is a fundamental right,
protected by the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th,
9th, & 14th Amendments to the US Constitution. (See http://www.livescience.com/37398-right-to-privacy.html)
2. Personal info is at
risk: In November 2011, Watch Systems, the
private corporation Ohio pays to maintain the state’s registry at a cost of
half a million dollars a year, mistakenly added DOZENS of names to the state
sex offender registry. It was the result of “human error.” It took them two
weeks to identify and correct the problem. (See http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2011/11/02/columbus-sex-offender-registry-mistake.html)
If Watch Systems, a private for-profit corporation, cannot be trusted with
publishing the right information of registered citizens, it is only a matter of
time until “human error” publishes the personal information of non-registrants?
3. Personal lives are at
risk: In a 2005 study by University of
Louisville criminologist Richard Tewksbury in the Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice, 47 percent of 121 sex offenders reported they'd been harassed
as a result of being on a state registry, and 16 percent said that they'd been
assaulted; among nearly 600 immediate family members of offenders that
Tewksbury and Lynn University researcher Jill Levenson surveyed, 44 percent
said they'd been threatened or harassed by neighbors as a result of their
relative's sex-offender status, 27 percent that their property had been
damaged, and 7 percent that they'd been physically assaulted or injured. A 2005
study in the same journal by Levenson and Leo Cotter, who directs a Florida
sex-offender outpatient program, reported that 21 percent of 183 offenders had
their property damaged by a person who found out about their status. (see http://prospect.org/article/life-list).
4. Ohio WILL be sued:
When Florida mistakenly labeled a man a “sex offender,” he sued. (See http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-12-26/story/mistaken-id-sex-offender-brings-lawsuit).
This bill WILL cost the state millions in litigation alone, in addition to the
added costs of sending letters to folks who are likely to chunk the letter in
the trash.
5. Assumes non-registrants
are stupid: It is asinine to assume adults living
with a registered citizen are so stupid as to not know he or she is living with
a registered citizen. There are numerous disruptions in the lives of registered
citizens and their families as the result of the CONTROVERSIAL Adam Walsh Act,
a bill rejected by two-thirds of US states.
We strongly urge
the legislature to REJECT HB 353!
___________________________________
Derek
W. Logue
On
behalf of ReFORM-OHIO
Friday, January 22, 2016
ACTION ALERT: HB 353 is set for a hearing Tue, 1/26/16, 3:30 pm
It appears that HB 353, the bill that will ""amend sections 2950.04, 2950.041, and 2950.99 of the Revised Code to require a sheriff to mail a notice to every adult member of a household where a person who is required to register as a sex offender resides informing those household members that the person has committed a sexually oriented offense or a child-victim oriented offense," is set for a hearing on Tuesday, January 26, at 3:30pm.
What this means is the state will expect Registered Citizens to register the names of every adult living in the household with the Sheriff's Office.
It seems this meeting of the House Judiciary Committee is only for proponent testimony (i.e., those in favor of it), but even so, anyone who can attend should attend.
Apparently, they're taking testimony by electronic submission as well.
Please submit an electronic copy of oral and/or written testimony and all amendments to JudiciaryCommittee@ohiohouse.gov by no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, January 25th.
See ReFORM-Ohio's earlier analysis on HB 353 to see what this means for Ohio registrants.
See ReFORM-Ohio's earlier analysis on HB 353 to see what this means for Ohio registrants.
Friday, November 20, 2015
Cleveland.com - Sex-offender registry requires reboot in Ohio and the nation: editorial
This is a pretty good editorial from cleveland.com
http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/11/sex-offender_registry_requires_reboot_in_ohio_and_the_nation_editorial.html
Sex-offender registry requires reboot in Ohio and the nation: editorial
By Editorial Board
on November 19, 2015 at 11:33 AM
Title 1 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 created an all-inclusive state-by-state registry of convicted sex offenders.
Known as the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, Title 1 also attempted the impossible: to protect the public, particularly children, from convicted sexual predators who had done their time and were now back on the street.
It was well-intentioned, codifying rules that mandate states monitor and track sex offenders by having them publicly register their addresses.
Parents, guardians, caregivers, and anyone else can access those records online, or by contacting their local sheriff's department, to see where released sex offenders are living in their neighborhoods.
States were given three years to implement the registry. Noncompliance with the federal law would be punished by a 10 percent cut in millions of dollars of annual federal criminal justice funding.
Ohio, which had a less-rigid sex-registry law already, complied -- creating what critics now call a one-size-fits-all behemoth of a sex registry that wrongly limits judicial discretion, penalizes young people and costs sheriff's departments hundreds of thousands of unneeded dollars to monitor.
You might think that all advocates for rape victims would support the practice of forcing sex offenders to publicly register their addresses after their release from prison. But you would be mistaken.
In fact, SORNA – as the federal registry law is known colloquially -- is today under attack by the very people who advocate for the rights of survivors and victims of sexual assault as well as the judiciary that rules on the consequences of such predatory behavior.
"It's like using an Atom Bomb when a stick of dynamite would do the job," said Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Michael Donnelly.
"It creates this false sense of security," said Sondra Miller, head of the Cleveland Rape Crisis Center.
Even the Ohio Supreme Court has weighed in, declaring sections of the state's version of SORNA unconstitutional, according to assistant state public defender Brooke Burns. In 2012 the court ruled that imposing automatic lifetime registration requirements on juveniles was cruel and unusual punishment.
In a 5-2 opinion, the court said the punishment violates the Ohio and United States constitutions because it is cruel and unusual, and because it violates a defendant's right to due process.
"A 19-year-old and his 15-year-old girlfriend have consensual sex," Donnelly said. "He gets labeled as a sex offender for life. He should be punished for violating the law [the age of consent is 16 years old in Ohio], but he's not necessarily a predator."
The registry also misleads the public into believing that the majority of sexual assaults are committed by strangers, Miller said. "Most sexual assaults are committed by family members and acquaintances."
It's not that the registry serves no purpose, Miller said, but its Draconian approach to public safety blunts its effectiveness.
"There are serious sex offenders, predators that the public needs to be protected from, and they are diluted in a sea of individuals who don't pose a threat," Donnelly said.
There also is no "wiggle room," as Burns describes it, for judges to use discretion in determining who gets put on the registry. "The law has to be applied as written."
The time is ripe for a common-sense, evidence-based reboot of Ohio's version of SORNA, and a redo of the federal requirements, as well.
In Ohio, a recent bipartisan legislative criminal-reform initiative provides the vehicle to re-examine Ohio's sex-offender registry.
The Ohio Criminal Justice Recodification Committee has been tasked with reviewing state criminal statutes and making recommendations that enhance public safety and the just and equitable administration of justice.
Its 24 members include judges, public defenders, prosecutors, politicians and criminal justice advocates.
The committee has broken into working groups to study different sections of the criminal code, said Amy Borror, a spokeswoman for the Office of the Ohio Public Defender. One group is focused on sex-offender registration and notification reform.
There are some 19,400 sex offenders registered in Ohio, according to the state Attorney General's office. In Cuyahoga County, the sheriff's department tracks about 3,300 sex offenders.
The criminal-justice-reform committee is scheduled to deliver its report to the General Assembly by August 2016.
"I've offered to provide testimony and statistics to the legislature to return discretion to the courts," Donnelly said. "And I'll get 15 other judges to join me."
He argues that courts have access to psychiatrists who are experts on assessing sex offenders and their proclivity for recidivism.
New legislation that did not restrict judicial discretion could allow those risk assessments to be argued in open court, Donnelly said. "Then the process is transparent and evidence-based."
Judicial discretion returns accountability and justice to the process without compromising public safety.
The committee should recommend that such legislation be enacted.
And the federal government -- and Congress, if needed -- should make sure Ohio's federal criminal justice funding is not docked because of such a common-sense improvement to the state's sex-offender registry.
http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/11/sex-offender_registry_requires_reboot_in_ohio_and_the_nation_editorial.html
Sex-offender registry requires reboot in Ohio and the nation: editorial
By Editorial Board
on November 19, 2015 at 11:33 AM
Title 1 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 created an all-inclusive state-by-state registry of convicted sex offenders.
Known as the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, Title 1 also attempted the impossible: to protect the public, particularly children, from convicted sexual predators who had done their time and were now back on the street.
It was well-intentioned, codifying rules that mandate states monitor and track sex offenders by having them publicly register their addresses.
Parents, guardians, caregivers, and anyone else can access those records online, or by contacting their local sheriff's department, to see where released sex offenders are living in their neighborhoods.
States were given three years to implement the registry. Noncompliance with the federal law would be punished by a 10 percent cut in millions of dollars of annual federal criminal justice funding.
Ohio, which had a less-rigid sex-registry law already, complied -- creating what critics now call a one-size-fits-all behemoth of a sex registry that wrongly limits judicial discretion, penalizes young people and costs sheriff's departments hundreds of thousands of unneeded dollars to monitor.
You might think that all advocates for rape victims would support the practice of forcing sex offenders to publicly register their addresses after their release from prison. But you would be mistaken.
In fact, SORNA – as the federal registry law is known colloquially -- is today under attack by the very people who advocate for the rights of survivors and victims of sexual assault as well as the judiciary that rules on the consequences of such predatory behavior.
"It's like using an Atom Bomb when a stick of dynamite would do the job," said Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Michael Donnelly.
"It creates this false sense of security," said Sondra Miller, head of the Cleveland Rape Crisis Center.
Even the Ohio Supreme Court has weighed in, declaring sections of the state's version of SORNA unconstitutional, according to assistant state public defender Brooke Burns. In 2012 the court ruled that imposing automatic lifetime registration requirements on juveniles was cruel and unusual punishment.
In a 5-2 opinion, the court said the punishment violates the Ohio and United States constitutions because it is cruel and unusual, and because it violates a defendant's right to due process.
"A 19-year-old and his 15-year-old girlfriend have consensual sex," Donnelly said. "He gets labeled as a sex offender for life. He should be punished for violating the law [the age of consent is 16 years old in Ohio], but he's not necessarily a predator."
The registry also misleads the public into believing that the majority of sexual assaults are committed by strangers, Miller said. "Most sexual assaults are committed by family members and acquaintances."
It's not that the registry serves no purpose, Miller said, but its Draconian approach to public safety blunts its effectiveness.
"There are serious sex offenders, predators that the public needs to be protected from, and they are diluted in a sea of individuals who don't pose a threat," Donnelly said.
There also is no "wiggle room," as Burns describes it, for judges to use discretion in determining who gets put on the registry. "The law has to be applied as written."
The time is ripe for a common-sense, evidence-based reboot of Ohio's version of SORNA, and a redo of the federal requirements, as well.
In Ohio, a recent bipartisan legislative criminal-reform initiative provides the vehicle to re-examine Ohio's sex-offender registry.
The Ohio Criminal Justice Recodification Committee has been tasked with reviewing state criminal statutes and making recommendations that enhance public safety and the just and equitable administration of justice.
Its 24 members include judges, public defenders, prosecutors, politicians and criminal justice advocates.
The committee has broken into working groups to study different sections of the criminal code, said Amy Borror, a spokeswoman for the Office of the Ohio Public Defender. One group is focused on sex-offender registration and notification reform.
There are some 19,400 sex offenders registered in Ohio, according to the state Attorney General's office. In Cuyahoga County, the sheriff's department tracks about 3,300 sex offenders.
The criminal-justice-reform committee is scheduled to deliver its report to the General Assembly by August 2016.
"I've offered to provide testimony and statistics to the legislature to return discretion to the courts," Donnelly said. "And I'll get 15 other judges to join me."
He argues that courts have access to psychiatrists who are experts on assessing sex offenders and their proclivity for recidivism.
New legislation that did not restrict judicial discretion could allow those risk assessments to be argued in open court, Donnelly said. "Then the process is transparent and evidence-based."
Judicial discretion returns accountability and justice to the process without compromising public safety.
The committee should recommend that such legislation be enacted.
And the federal government -- and Congress, if needed -- should make sure Ohio's federal criminal justice funding is not docked because of such a common-sense improvement to the state's sex-offender registry.
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Justices uphold sex-offender label for Ohio man who had sex with teen
I say lets put Injustice Lanzinger on the registry. Better yet, lets do all those things to her than the Internet trolls are always saying we should do to s*x offenders, and lets see if we find THAT shocking!
The D'OH-io Supreme Court doesn't even remember their own recent decisions. Take this case for example:
State v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374
{¶ 16} Following the enactment of S.B. 10, all doubt has been removed:
R.C. Chapter 2950 is punitive.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/11/12/supreme-court-sex-offender.html
Justices uphold sex-offender label for Ohio man who had sex with teen
By Alan Johnson
The Columbus Dispatch • Thursday November 12, 2015 11:02 AM
The Ohio Supreme Court upheld state sex-offender registration requirements in a case in which a convicted offender challenged them as “cruel and unusual punishment.”
The 5-2 decision issued on Thursday involved Travis Blankenship, of Clark County, who was convicted for having unlawful sexual conduct with a 15-year-old girl when he was 21. He met the girl through a social-media site.
Blankenship pleaded guilty and served 12 days of a six-month sentence, which also included five years of community control. He was classified as a Tier II sex offender under state law, requiring him to register in person with the sheriff’s office in the county where he lives every 180 days for 25 years.
Blankenship appealed the registration requirement, arguing it was too severe given the nature of the crime, a fourth-degree felony. The Second District Court of Appeals rejected his appeal.
Justice Judith Ann Lanzinger, writing for the majority, said that the registration requirements are “not so extreme as to be grossly disproportionate to the crime or shocking to a reasonable person and to the community’s sense of justice.” She said the sex-offender law does not violate the U.S or Ohio constitutions.
Justice Paul Pfeifer dissented, saying the rules breached Blankenship’s rights under the specific circumstances.
“I do not believe that the registration and address-verification requirements at issue in this case are cruel and unusual with respect to all Tier II sex offenders. But as applied to Blankenship, who was deemed to warrant a prison sentence of only 12 days, who has a low risk of reoffending, and who possesses none of the characteristics of a sex offender, the requirement to register and verify his address every six months for the next 25 years ‘would be considered shocking to any reasonable person.'"
The D'OH-io Supreme Court doesn't even remember their own recent decisions. Take this case for example:
State v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374
{¶ 16} Following the enactment of S.B. 10, all doubt has been removed:
R.C. Chapter 2950 is punitive.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/11/12/supreme-court-sex-offender.html
Justices uphold sex-offender label for Ohio man who had sex with teen
By Alan Johnson
The Columbus Dispatch • Thursday November 12, 2015 11:02 AM
The Ohio Supreme Court upheld state sex-offender registration requirements in a case in which a convicted offender challenged them as “cruel and unusual punishment.”
The 5-2 decision issued on Thursday involved Travis Blankenship, of Clark County, who was convicted for having unlawful sexual conduct with a 15-year-old girl when he was 21. He met the girl through a social-media site.
Blankenship pleaded guilty and served 12 days of a six-month sentence, which also included five years of community control. He was classified as a Tier II sex offender under state law, requiring him to register in person with the sheriff’s office in the county where he lives every 180 days for 25 years.
Blankenship appealed the registration requirement, arguing it was too severe given the nature of the crime, a fourth-degree felony. The Second District Court of Appeals rejected his appeal.
Justice Judith Ann Lanzinger, writing for the majority, said that the registration requirements are “not so extreme as to be grossly disproportionate to the crime or shocking to a reasonable person and to the community’s sense of justice.” She said the sex-offender law does not violate the U.S or Ohio constitutions.
Justice Paul Pfeifer dissented, saying the rules breached Blankenship’s rights under the specific circumstances.
“I do not believe that the registration and address-verification requirements at issue in this case are cruel and unusual with respect to all Tier II sex offenders. But as applied to Blankenship, who was deemed to warrant a prison sentence of only 12 days, who has a low risk of reoffending, and who possesses none of the characteristics of a sex offender, the requirement to register and verify his address every six months for the next 25 years ‘would be considered shocking to any reasonable person.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)