Archive for category Mission

Sex Offender Sues Ohio For Right to Go Door To Door

courthousenews.com: Jehovah’s Witness Sex Offender Sues Ohio For Right to Go Door To Door.

Lawrence Bullard, a Jehovah’s Witness and a sex offender, is suing his parole officer and the Ohio Department of Corrections for his right to go door to door, stating that “the state is forcing him to choose between his faith and his freedom.”

Good for him. We hope he wins this lawsuit. More citizens should be suing the state over these laws and restrictions. We should be flooding the courts in every state and costing states millions of dollars in costs and restitution judgments.

Cincinnati - A Jehovah’s Witness who was convicted of felony attempted sexual abuse has sued the State of Ohio, claiming it unconstitutionally prohibits him from practicing his religion by proselytizing door-to-door more than once a month.

Lawrence Bullard says he should be allowed to proselytize door-to-door twice a week with other Witnesses, as their religion requires. He says he’s an exceedingly low risk to re-offend, and the circumstances prove it.

“On or about Dec. 16, 2001, after another break up, Lawrence went over to [his former fiancée's] house. He was angry at her, upset and confused. He let himself in when she was not home and hid in her closet waiting for her to come home.” When she arrived, he says, he “confronted her. And they argued. At some point, he forcibly kissed her and fell to the floor on top of her. He then put his hands down her pants, touching her pubic area.”

He says he “immediately realized that he made a serious mistake, in violation of both his faith and the law.” He says he called the police from the lobby of his ex’s apartment building, and waited there until they arrested him. After pleading guilty to the class E felony, Bullard says he was classified as a low risk, and sentenced to 10 years of probation and ordered to register as a sex offender.

In 2008, “because of his trouble-free adjustment to probation, he says, he “was placed on non-reporting status.”

Bullard, 37, says he has been married for 4 years. He says his religious practice of going door-to-door twice a week with Witnesses made him well-suited for a job in sales, which he eventually found with a roofing company. But when his parole officer in Ohio found out about his religious practices and his job as a door-to-door salesman, Bullard says, she forbade it. She asked him to sign a document agreeing not to go door to door, but he refused, citing his religion. Ohio then “requested a warrant for his arrest from New York.”

He says the request was ultimately withdrawn, and the Ohio Department of Parole allowed him to proselytize once a month. Bullard says his religion requires him to do it twice a week, and that he’s no risk because he will be accompanied by other Witnesses. He seeks a restraining order and injunction. He is represented by David Singleton with the Ohio Justice & Policy Center.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Utah House Leader Naked in Hot Tub With Minor

Google/AP: Utah’s House majority leader’s skinny-dip confession stuns Utah.

Salt Lake City — A late-night confession by Utah’s House majority leader about sitting nude in a hot tub with a minor 25 years ago has shocked this conservative state’s political establishment but has not prompted calls from party leaders for him to resign.

Rep. Kevin Garn, 55, acknowledged the indiscretion late Thursday immediately after the Legislature adjourned for the session. He said he paid the woman $150,000 to keep quiet about the episode when he unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 2002.

“Although we did not have any sexual contact, it was still clearly inappropriate — and it was my fault,” said Garn, of Layton.

“This is something I should have done back in 2002. But I was scared. I did not want to be publicly judged by one of my life’s worst decisions,” said Garn, who was married at the time.

I wonder how this man voted on sex offender laws in the Utah House. Does he believe that others should not be “publicly judged by one of their life’s worst decisions” ?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

NFL Combine Player Admits to Being Registered Sex Offender


reporternews.com: Former ACU football player: I am registered sex offender.

Former Abilene Christian University football player Tony Washington disclosed during the NFL Combine in Indianapolis that he is a registered sex offender.

Washington, an All-American offensive tackle for the Wildcats the past two seasons, was convicted of having sex with his 15-year-old biological sister in May 2003 while a student at Alcee Fortier High School in New Orleans. Washington was 16 at the time and received five years probation. He didn’t serve jail time but he had to register as sex offender wherever he lived. He told scouts and college coaches the sex was consensual.

Washington, 24, told SportsFanLive.com: “I made a mistake at the age of 16 and for that, I am deeply sorry. I will not try and excuse or justify anything. I have worked extremely hard to do everything right so that I might have an opportunity to give back. I only hope that someone in the NFL will give me the same opportunity that Abilene Christian and Trinity Valley gave me.”

After his performance at the combine, Washington, who is 6-foot-7, 305 pounds, is considered to be a high-round draft choice.

With every-increasing numbers of Americans being labeled on the sex offender registries across the nation (estimated at 700,000 and growing each day) , these high profile cases should highlight the need for reform of the sex offender laws. The more people we put on sex offender registries, the more we dilute the stated purpose of the registries. We need to limit sex offender registration to only the most high-risk and repeat offenders. We must give first time offenders a chance to prove themselves and “work” their way off the registry. And we must allow judicial review of individual cases to establish risk levels (all of which the Adam Walsh Act does not allow).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Another Employment Avenue Closed to Sex Offenders

Google/AP: Sex offender with letter carrier job reassigned.

Los Angeles — A Southern California letter carrier who is a registered sex offender has been reassigned after concerns were raised that he was delivering mail in an area with many children.

Postal Service spokeswoman Eva Jackson said Wednesday that Dana Kennette is now in a job that does not deal with the public. Kennette had been delivering mail in the Rancho Bernardo area of San Diego, where he lives.

To all the Justices and Courts who refuse to acknowledge the “punitive” nature of these sex offender laws :
Exactly what employment IS a registered sex offender allowed to obtain?

In California, they have already taken measures to ban sex offenders from working at fast food restaurants or anywhere else children may patronize.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

WI Statewide Sex Offender Residency Bill Public Hearing

whbl.com: Statewide Sex Offender Residency Bill Gets Public Hearing

See prior post : WI Bill to Override Local Sex Offender Restrictions

Madison, WI- A public hearing will be held Thursday (March 11, 2010) on a bill to create statewide limits on where sex offenders can live. It would wipe out tough local ordinances with restrictions so tight, offenders are driven elsewhere. The bill would let the Corrections Department come up with statewide limits on keeping sex offenders away from schools and other places where kids congregate. But corrections’ officials have opposed some of the tougher local ordinances that exist now. They say it encourages sex offenders to go underground, and not register with the state as the law requires. The current restrictions have varied effects.

Readers in Madison Wisconsin should attend this meeting and come prepared with information to oppose these residency restriction laws.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Men Accused of Killing Sex Offender to Stand Trial

mydesert.com: Men accused of killing convicted sex offender to stand trial.

A self-avowed white supremacist and a reputed drug dealer accused of using California’s Megan’s Law registry to hunt down and kill a convicted sex offender must stand trial on felony charges, a judge ruled Monday.

Steven Banister, 28, and Travis Martin Cody, 27, face first-degree murder charges in the Aug. 10 death of Edward Vaughn Keeley, whose body was found in his backyard in the 64000 block of 16th Avenue in North Palm Springs.

The suspects also face two special circumstance allegations of committing a murder during a robbery and a burglary, which makes them eligible for the death penalty if convicted. Prosecutors have not decided whether to seek capital punishment for the men.

Following a preliminary hearing that started Friday and continued through part of Monday morning, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Stephen Gallon ruled there was enough evidence to proceed to trial.

Keeley’s address was listed as the home of a convicted sex offender on a publicly available database created by Megan’s Law.

Banister had allegedly bragged in prison that he planned to assault homosexuals, rapists and pedophiles. He used Megan’s Law to target pedophiles and sex offenders for his burglaries, Button alleged in the declaration.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sex Offenders, Supporters Lobby Georgia Lawmakers for Reform

free-press-release.com: Sex Offenders and their Supporters Lobby Georgia Lawmakers for Reform.

March 8, 2010 — Last weekend, sex offenders in Georgia took a step towards replacing the failed policy of registration and residency restrictions with a policy based on reason and with the goal of making their communities safer, actually protecting children, and restoring the nation’s international image for fairness and basic respect of human rights.

On Saturday, March 6, 2010, Georgians for Reform held a twelve hour conference in the Georgia State Capital. In attendance were more than 180 friends and supporters. Speakers included a District Attorney who participated in writing the original legislation creating the sex offender registry in Georgia, a Defense Attorney who addressed the ex post facto aspects of the registry, a lobbyist, a lawyer, and a sociologist who spoke about the wrong directions taken by the registry and its detrimental effects on both registrants and society as a whole. Several religious leaders also spoke about the challenges sex offender registrations pose to the faith community. Prison counselors and chaplains spoke on the reality of the registry for those incarcerated and released. Also in attendance was Paul Shannon, who helped establish Reform Sex Offender Laws (RSOL), a national advocacy organization for sex offenders and their families.

Every speaker, including the attorney who participated in the original legislation, told those gathered that the registry is a failed policy and serves as an extension of criminal punishment–a violation of Due Process protections guaranteed to every American citizen by the Fourteenth Amendment.

To gather close to 190 people in conference, the majority of whom are not on the registry, in the state of Georgia, leaves little room for anyone to claim it can’t be done. Who now can claim that society has written off persons convicted of a sex offense, that these people have no support, that these people do not deserve the basic human dignity spoken of so eloquently in our own Declaration of Independence? Who can continue to support the hyperbole, ignoring the statistical facts presented by the United States Department of Justice, or the reality of systemic failure on the part of registry schemes from state to state?

The guiding principle of the Georgians for Reform conference was that no speaker would be asked to address their topic from the organization’s stated perspective. Each speaker was asked to address the conference from his own perspective about the registry and was not vetted in advance about that perspective as a contingency for invitation. Speakers were invited because they satisfied one of the criteria of conference presenters: professional status in law enforcement, the clergy, the legal field, the study of sociology, psychology, or in the practice of therapy.

That each of the speakers in attendance came to the same conclusion about the registry as a failed policy speaks very loudly.

Georgians For Reform is deeply disturbed by the failure of sex offender registries to prevent incidents of human suffering at the hands of people such as Phillip Garrido and Anthony Sowell (both cases of sexual predation and abuse by registered sex offenders). We mourn the loss of Chelsea King, and we believe that the failed registration policies are partially responsible for her loss and the terrible pain felt by her family and friends.

Georgians For Reform demands that these failed policies be eliminated and replaced with policies based on the best available and empirical evidence. Such action–and the development of reasonable policies–will make our nation’s communities safer, protect children, and protect the right of people to heal and move forward. More importantly, law enforcement agencies will be able to focus on the truly dangerous offenders in their local communities.

Georgians For Reform will continue to speak out against these failed policies and demand a reform that works towards making our communities safer, protecting our children, and respecting the dignity of human beings. We will no longer accept ‘feel good’ policies that protect no one, lend a false sense of security, and help foster an environment that makes our children and communities less safe.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

State of Ohio vs Nixon - Contract Clause Challenge

NIXON v. STATE ; Bradley Nixon, Petitioner-Appellee,v. State of Ohio
2010-Ohio-767 - Appeal No. C-090219.
Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County.
Date of Judgment Entry on Appeal: March 5, 2010.

Ohio Justice & Policy Center, Margie Slagle, and David A. Singleton, for Petitioner-Appellee.
Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Paula E. Adams, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Respondent-Appellant.

Download Decision (PDF)

DINKELACKER, Judge.

{¶1} On July 27, 2001, petitioner-appellee Bradley Nixon pleaded guilty in a plea bargain to one count of gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05(A)(1). The court accepted Nixon’s plea, found him guilty of gross sexual imposition, and imposed five years’ community control. The sentencing entry stated that Nixon was “found to be a sexually oriented offender.” Under former R.C. Chapter 2950, Nixon was required to annually register as a sexual offender for ten years.

{¶2} In 2007, the General Assembly enacted Am.Sub.S.B. No. 10 (”Senate Bill 10″) to implement the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. Senate Bill 10 amended various sections of R.C. Chapter 2950. Nixon was notified that he had been reclassified under Senate Bill 10 as a Tier I sex offender and that he was required to annually register with the local sheriff for 15 years.

{¶3} Nixon filed an R.C. 2950.031(E) petition to contest his reclassification, challenging the constitutionality of Senate Bill 10. After a hearing, the trial court granted Nixon’s R.C. 2950.031(E) petition. The court found that reclassifying Nixon as a Tier I sex offender under Senate Bill 10 constituted a breach of his plea agreement and an impairment of an obligation of contract, in violation of Section 28, Article II of the Ohio Constitution and Clause I, Section 10, Article I of the United States Constitution, because his plea agreement was a contract with the state of Ohio that he would be obligated to register as a sex offender for only ten years.

{¶4} The state’s sole assignment of error alleges that the trial court erred in granting Nixon’s R.C. 2950.031(E) petition on the basis that his plea agreement constituted a contract that he would have to register as a sex offender for only ten years.

{¶5} Section 28, Article II of the Ohio Constitution and Clause I, Section 10, Article I of the United States Constitution provide that no laws shall be passed that impair the obligation of contracts. “[A]ny change in the law which impairs the rights of either party, or amounts to a denial or obstruction of the rights accruing by contract, is repugnant to the Constitution.”[ 1 ] Because plea agreements are contracts between the state and criminal defendants, principles of contract law are applicable to their interpretation and enforcement.[ 2 ]

{¶6} We held in Burbrink v. State[ 3 ] that the retroactive application of Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements to a sex offender who had pleaded guilty to a sexually-oriented offense pursuant to a plea bargain under former R.C. Chapter 2950 did not violate the Contract Clause of the Ohio and United States Constitutions, because when the offender entered his plea he had no reasonable expectation that his sex offense would never be made the subject of future legislation and no vested right concerning his registration duties. Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements are remedial, collateral consequences of the underlying criminal sex offense, and they do not affect a plea agreement previously entered between the state and the offender.[ 4 ]

(Once again, ignorant and uninformed judges refuse to find these restrictions and requirements as being the punishment that they clearly are.)

{¶7} We pointed out in Burbrink that, under former R.C. Chapter 2950, an offender who pleaded guilty to a sexually-oriented offense was by operation of law a sexually-oriented offender who had to register annually for ten years. By not requesting a higher sexual-offender classification, the state had fulfilled its part of the plea agreement.[ 5 ] Once the offender had pleaded guilty and had been sentenced, both he and the state had fulfilled their respective parts of the plea agreement, and no action taken after that time could have breached the plea agreement.[ 6 ]

{¶8} In White v. State,[ 7 ] we held, relying on Burbrink, that the retroactive application of Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements did not constitute a breach of White’s plea agreement or an impairment of his right to contract where the April 19, 1999, entry withdrawing White’s not-guilty plea and entering his plea of guilty to sexual battery stated that he would be classified as a sexually-oriented offender rather that a sexual predator.

{¶9} We hold in this case that pursuant to Burbrink and White the retroactive application of Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements did not violate the Contract Clause of the Ohio and United States Constitutions because it did not impair Nixon’s rights under any contract with the state of Ohio that, under his plea agreement, he would be obligated to register as a sex offender for only ten years. The application of Senate Bill 10’s registration requirements did not constitute a breach of Nixon’s plea agreement or an impairment of his right to contract. Therefore, the trial court erred in granting Nixon’s R.C. 2950.031(E) petition. The assignment of error is sustained.

{¶10} The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and this cause is remanded for the trial court to enter an order reflecting that Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements are applicable to Nixon as a Tier I sex offender.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
Cunningham, P.J., concurs.
MALLORY, JUDGE, concurring in judgment only:

{¶11} I agree that the judgment of the trial court must be reversed in this case, but not for the reasons expressed by the majority. I would reverse the trial court’s judgment on the basis that the record does not contain sufficient evidence that Nixon’s ten-year registration requirement was a term of his plea agreement. The record simply does not support the trial court’s determination that there was an agreement between the state and Nixon as to his sexual-offender classification and registration requirements. Therefore, the retroactive application of Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements does not impair any contract between Nixon and the state or violate his constitutional right to contract.

{¶12} There may be a case in which the record demonstrates that the terms of a plea agreement between the state and a sexual offender constituted a valid contract as to the offender’s classification and registration requirements. I do not foreclose the possibility that in such a case the retroactive application of Senate Bill 10’s tier-classification and registration requirements may be an unconstitutional impairment of contractual obligations and a violation of the offender’s right to contract.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Message from One of the Converted

From a reader of our blogs:

“There was a time when I did think the streets must be filled with sex predators hiding and waiting to pounce on their next victim. Then I decided to study the FACTS ! I was totally wrong.

It turns out that these lying, gutless, sycophant fops we elect have no respect for the constitution and allow illegal laws to be put on the books for money and public hype. [These are] senseless laws by the uninformed. Their inability to work out all the difficult problems of the laws they create will do to harm the accused and not give them a chance to a new start in life free of crime. They brand these people immediately . They can’t get a job, find a place to live or survive. They have a right to live. “

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CA: Bar Sex Offenders From Social Networking Sites

ktvu.com: Bar Sex Offenders From Social Networking Sites.

Oakland, Calif. — Calling social networking sites the “schoolyard of the digital age,” San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris Tuesday proposed a new state law banning convicted sex offenders in California from accessing Facebook, MySpace and other sites. Harris joined forces with Pomona Assemblywoman Norma Torres to announce the law that would make it a crime if any of the state’s 63,000 registered sex offenders were found to be using a social networking site.

The law is similar to ones already on the books in New York and Illinois. But enforcement may be an issue.
The proposed California law does not goes as far as New York’s which requires sex offenders to register their e-mail addresses and online aliases with state authorities.

Harris said she hoped the threat of a return to jail would be a strong enough deterrent to make California’s sex offenders to think twice about logging on. She also hoped that the social networking sites themselves would take some action.

The New York state law is credited with making MySpace and Facebook in particular end the access of 3,500 known sex offenders.

Harris said she did not see the new law as an infringement of the rights of an individual.

“We are talking about prohibiting people have been proven in a court of law of being a sex offender,” she said. “We are just saying let’s update our laws to reflect where we are in terms of a society. Most people communicate through this technology…These kids, in particular, use Facebook and MySpace as a way to create friendships and relationships and talk about themselves and share personal details.”

Harris’s logic is dumbfounding. If it is acceptable to take away access to Internet technology from anyone who has committed a sex-related crime, let’s do the same for anyone who has committed a crime against another human (any form of assault, murder, physical abuse, ect.). The facts are these:

1. Enforcing such laws is impossible. Anyone with half a brain can figure out how to create a false user name or secondary email address to register with any social network.

2. Social networking sites who claim to remove sex offenders are simply practicing public relations. Sure, they may find and remove a few of the really stupid ones who register their real names, but most people do not register on these sites with their real full name.

3. As we have written many times in these blogs, it is very rare for any sex offense to occur as a result of meeting a stranger on a social networking site. This is an urban myth. When rare contact is made between teens and strangers, it is sought out by the teenagers. The study “found that children and teenagers were unlikely to be propositioned by adults online. In the cases that do exist, the report said, teenagers are typically willing participants and are already at risk because of poor home environments, substance abuse or other problems”.

4. Research shows that the median age for facebook /myspace is 27/26 years of age respectively. In other words, social networking sites are not the Internet equivalent to children’s playgrounds, as the media would have us believe.

5. Hysteria about these social netoworking sites has long ago been proven to be overblown.
See our postings “Report Calls Online Threats to Children Overblown”, and “Sex Offender on Social Site = Felony”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,