The United States Senate Quietly Passes Another Unconstitutional Sex Offender Law
Politco: Legislation passed without fanfare in the Senate Tuesday night would require convicted sex offenders to register their email addresses and IM screen names with a government-controlled database. The Senate version of the bill, known as the KIDS Act, is intended to make it difficult for sex offenders to join social networking Web sites like Facebook and MySpace. The act is just one of many Congress is considering as it takes aim at sex offenders. Beyond the KIDS Act, there’s the Deleting Online Predators Act, the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, the Children's Listbroker Privacy Act, the Combating Child Exploitation Act and the Effective Child Pornography Prosecution Act. The KIDS Act (Keeping the Internet Devoid of Sexual Predators Act) is joined by the SAFE Act (Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act) and the mother of them all, the PROTECT Our Children Act (Providing Resources, Officers, and Technology to Eradicate Cyber Threats to Our Children Act).
Is there anyone else out there who thinks this all has become ridiculous?
But civil libertarians say that the bill is too broad, that it could reach convicted offenders with little chance of recidivism. “Everybody wants to keep kids safe,” says Michael Macleod-Ball, the ACLU’s chief legislative and policy counsel. But Macleod-Ball said that the bill’s policy goals have to be balanced against the rights of individuals, and that each offender’s situation should be evaluated on its own merits.
“If you’re going to affect somebody’s rights, there’s got to be a connection to some sort of legitimate public policy purpose, and there are some people that are within the realm of the Senate regimen who would fall outside of that,” he said, arguing that it “makes a little more sense if there is a specific determination that’s made by the court or by some probationary or parole process that finds an actual nexus between the restriction you trying to impose and the nature of the conviction.”
The fact is: that it is illegal for Congress to devoid any citizen of their Constitutional Rights. The application of this law is another example of unconstitutional retro-active application of "post-facto" punishment and is clearly another violation of the United States Constitution. Contact the US Senate and Congress to tell them forcefully that we will not allow them to trample the US Constitution !
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Friday, May 23, 2008
US Court says Adam Walsh Act Unconstitutional
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (Florida): 23 May 2008
Decision: US vs Madera
"Because Madera’s indictment concerns his failure to register during the gap period between SORNA’s enactment and the Attorney General’s retroactivity determination, he cannot be prosecuted for violating SORNA during that time. Thus, his indictment is due to be dismissed, and the judgment of the district court is reversed.
Having decided the case on this basis, we need not reach the important constitutional questions raised in Madera’s appeal."
Note: Remember as these court rulings begin to be decided, we must still continue to fight very hard to get the courts throughout the United States to rule constitutionally regarding the illegal Adam Walsh Act laws, particularly in the view of this blog, within the state of Ohio. This decision is a positive sign. However, its application is limited to a citizen's failure to register in Florida alone , at this point.
Decision: US vs Madera
"Because Madera’s indictment concerns his failure to register during the gap period between SORNA’s enactment and the Attorney General’s retroactivity determination, he cannot be prosecuted for violating SORNA during that time. Thus, his indictment is due to be dismissed, and the judgment of the district court is reversed.
Having decided the case on this basis, we need not reach the important constitutional questions raised in Madera’s appeal."
Note: Remember as these court rulings begin to be decided, we must still continue to fight very hard to get the courts throughout the United States to rule constitutionally regarding the illegal Adam Walsh Act laws, particularly in the view of this blog, within the state of Ohio. This decision is a positive sign. However, its application is limited to a citizen's failure to register in Florida alone , at this point.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Lawsuits Test Crackdown on Sex Crimes
Kansas City InfoZine and Stateline.org ( 19 April 2008) - From California to North Carolina, a flood of litigation has accompanied an expansion in the scope and severity of penalties imposed by local, state and federal lawmakers on those who commit sex crimes.
Penalties for molesters and other sex criminals have toughened considerably in recent years and now include execution in at least five states, chemical castration in eight states and the use of technology to monitor offenders' every move in more than half the states.
In some instances, punitive measures are limited only by lawmakers' imaginations. In Louisiana, for example, a proposal being debated this legislative session would forbid offenders from wearing masks on Halloween or Mardi Gras. In New Jersey, a new state law prevents molesters and others from surfing the Internet unless it is for work-related purposes; Florida and Nevada have similar laws.
The recent legal challenges take aim at laws that sex criminals say violate constitutional guarantees, including privacy, due process and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
In Georgia and Ohio, sex criminals have successfully challenged residency restrictions that forbid them from living within 1,000 feet of schools or other common gathering places for children. California's highest court also is considering whether to strike down zoning laws that could make huge swaths of the state off-limits to offenders.
In Missouri's Supreme Court, a convicted sex offender is challenging aspects of the state's practice of "civil confinement," which has allowed him to be held indefinitely in a treatment program for a crime he committed in 1983 and for which he finished serving time years ago. More than 20 states allow civil confinement after it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in separate decisions in 1997 and 2002.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, meanwhile, is preparing to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, a wide-reaching federal law that requires all states to dramatically toughen penalties for sex criminals by July of next year, or risk losing funding from a congressional grant program. A trial judge ruled against parts of the law last year.
A broad spectrum of critics - including civil-rights organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch, law enforcers, prosecuting attorneys and even some victims' assistance groups - has criticized some of the recent local, state and federal laws aimed at sex criminals.
Many say the laws are more about political opportunism than public safety. Elected officials recognize that they can appeal to voters by piling up penalties on a widely detested criminal population that has few advocates willing to stand up for its rights, critics say.
"It's still an easy, no-lose-politically situation," said Corey Rayburn Yung, a professor at John Marshall Law School in Chicago and author of a blog, Sex Crimes, that reports on trends in sex-offender legislation.
Meanwhile, the federal Adam Walsh Act is likely to face more litigation than any other statute because of its breadth. The law requires some juvenile offenders as young as 14 to be included in online registries and retroactively applies new registration requirements to offenders who have been out of prison for years.
Penalties for molesters and other sex criminals have toughened considerably in recent years and now include execution in at least five states, chemical castration in eight states and the use of technology to monitor offenders' every move in more than half the states.
In some instances, punitive measures are limited only by lawmakers' imaginations. In Louisiana, for example, a proposal being debated this legislative session would forbid offenders from wearing masks on Halloween or Mardi Gras. In New Jersey, a new state law prevents molesters and others from surfing the Internet unless it is for work-related purposes; Florida and Nevada have similar laws.
The recent legal challenges take aim at laws that sex criminals say violate constitutional guarantees, including privacy, due process and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
In Georgia and Ohio, sex criminals have successfully challenged residency restrictions that forbid them from living within 1,000 feet of schools or other common gathering places for children. California's highest court also is considering whether to strike down zoning laws that could make huge swaths of the state off-limits to offenders.
In Missouri's Supreme Court, a convicted sex offender is challenging aspects of the state's practice of "civil confinement," which has allowed him to be held indefinitely in a treatment program for a crime he committed in 1983 and for which he finished serving time years ago. More than 20 states allow civil confinement after it was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in separate decisions in 1997 and 2002.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, meanwhile, is preparing to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, a wide-reaching federal law that requires all states to dramatically toughen penalties for sex criminals by July of next year, or risk losing funding from a congressional grant program. A trial judge ruled against parts of the law last year.
A broad spectrum of critics - including civil-rights organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch, law enforcers, prosecuting attorneys and even some victims' assistance groups - has criticized some of the recent local, state and federal laws aimed at sex criminals.
Many say the laws are more about political opportunism than public safety. Elected officials recognize that they can appeal to voters by piling up penalties on a widely detested criminal population that has few advocates willing to stand up for its rights, critics say.
"It's still an easy, no-lose-politically situation," said Corey Rayburn Yung, a professor at John Marshall Law School in Chicago and author of a blog, Sex Crimes, that reports on trends in sex-offender legislation.
Meanwhile, the federal Adam Walsh Act is likely to face more litigation than any other statute because of its breadth. The law requires some juvenile offenders as young as 14 to be included in online registries and retroactively applies new registration requirements to offenders who have been out of prison for years.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Ohio Court Rules AWA Unconstitutional
sexcrimes.blogspot.com: Ohio Court Rules AWA Unconstitutional.
BREAKING NEWS!
May 12, 2008
Court Rules Ohio's AWA Compliance Statute Unconstitutional
In Evans v. Ohio, a court in Cuyahoga County ruled that the state's AWA compliance statute is unconstitutional because it violates the Ohio Constitution's prohibition against retroactive punishments and violates the ex post facto clause of the U.S. Constitution. While there has been some recent pushback against the AWA at the federal level, this is a notable successful challenge at the state level. Here is a key portion of the opinion (which thanks to a couple helpful readers you can download here):
http://sexcrimes.typepad.com/sex_crimes/files/evans_v_ohio.pdf
The Act is punitive because it is not tailored to a non-punitive purpose. The Adam Walsh Act fails to consider an offender's likelihood to re-offend. The expanded notification provisions ostracize offenders. The residency restrictions are arbitrary. The Act is not tailored because it imposes new restrictions and obligations without any regard for the offender's potential for future harm.
Cleveland.com: Cuyahoga County Judge Ronald Suster rules new Ohio sex offender law unconstitutional:
A new state law toughening registration requirements for convicted sex offenders is unconstitutional, a Cuyahoga County Common Pleas judge ruled last week.
Judge Ronald Suster blocked the state from enforcing the law on one sex offender convicted of sexual battery in 2003.
In his court order, Suster ruled that the new requirements are unlawful because they increase punishment without a court hearing and are retroactively applied to sex offenders whose crimes were committed before the law passed in 2007. Suster's decision reinforces the arguments presented in a federal class-action lawsuit filed in January by the Cuyahoga County Public Defender's Office on behalf of sex offender registrants statewide convicted before the new law was enacted.
Suster was unavailable for comment Friday. But in his ruling, the judge contended that the law's intention is "to punish and ostracize this unpopular group," rather than enhance public safety. The law "goes beyond mere 'official archives of criminal records' into a system that effectively ostracizes offenders and subjects the offenders to harassment and ridicule as well as potential abuse," Suster wrote.
The law took effect in January to comply with the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, a set of federal laws mandating that all states uniformly register sex offenders and place them into a national registry by 2009. It was billed as a way to prevent sex offenders from slipping through the cracks and committing other sex crimes.
In Ohio, the law reclassified sex offenders into three tiers - increasing the number of offenders who must register every 90 days for life by nearly 60 percent.
Suster issued an injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the law on Tramaine Evans, 30, who was convicted of sexual battery in 2003 and served a year in prison for his crime.
Evans was instructed to register as a sexually oriented offender annually for 10 years. But in November, he received notice that under the new state law, he had been reclassified as a Tier III sex offender and must register every 90 days, as well as notify neighbors of his criminal record and abide by residency restrictions for the rest of his life.
His challenge to the state law was one of nearly 1,000 filed this year in Cuyahoga County, said John Martin, appellate supervisor for the Cuyahoga County Public Defender's Office.
The state has 30 days to appeal Suster's decision in the 8th Ohio District Court of Appeals.
BREAKING NEWS!
May 12, 2008
Court Rules Ohio's AWA Compliance Statute Unconstitutional
In Evans v. Ohio, a court in Cuyahoga County ruled that the state's AWA compliance statute is unconstitutional because it violates the Ohio Constitution's prohibition against retroactive punishments and violates the ex post facto clause of the U.S. Constitution. While there has been some recent pushback against the AWA at the federal level, this is a notable successful challenge at the state level. Here is a key portion of the opinion (which thanks to a couple helpful readers you can download here):
http://sexcrimes.typepad.com/sex_crimes/files/evans_v_ohio.pdf
The Act is punitive because it is not tailored to a non-punitive purpose. The Adam Walsh Act fails to consider an offender's likelihood to re-offend. The expanded notification provisions ostracize offenders. The residency restrictions are arbitrary. The Act is not tailored because it imposes new restrictions and obligations without any regard for the offender's potential for future harm.
Cleveland.com: Cuyahoga County Judge Ronald Suster rules new Ohio sex offender law unconstitutional:
A new state law toughening registration requirements for convicted sex offenders is unconstitutional, a Cuyahoga County Common Pleas judge ruled last week.
Judge Ronald Suster blocked the state from enforcing the law on one sex offender convicted of sexual battery in 2003.
In his court order, Suster ruled that the new requirements are unlawful because they increase punishment without a court hearing and are retroactively applied to sex offenders whose crimes were committed before the law passed in 2007. Suster's decision reinforces the arguments presented in a federal class-action lawsuit filed in January by the Cuyahoga County Public Defender's Office on behalf of sex offender registrants statewide convicted before the new law was enacted.
Suster was unavailable for comment Friday. But in his ruling, the judge contended that the law's intention is "to punish and ostracize this unpopular group," rather than enhance public safety. The law "goes beyond mere 'official archives of criminal records' into a system that effectively ostracizes offenders and subjects the offenders to harassment and ridicule as well as potential abuse," Suster wrote.
The law took effect in January to comply with the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, a set of federal laws mandating that all states uniformly register sex offenders and place them into a national registry by 2009. It was billed as a way to prevent sex offenders from slipping through the cracks and committing other sex crimes.
In Ohio, the law reclassified sex offenders into three tiers - increasing the number of offenders who must register every 90 days for life by nearly 60 percent.
Suster issued an injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the law on Tramaine Evans, 30, who was convicted of sexual battery in 2003 and served a year in prison for his crime.
Evans was instructed to register as a sexually oriented offender annually for 10 years. But in November, he received notice that under the new state law, he had been reclassified as a Tier III sex offender and must register every 90 days, as well as notify neighbors of his criminal record and abide by residency restrictions for the rest of his life.
His challenge to the state law was one of nearly 1,000 filed this year in Cuyahoga County, said John Martin, appellate supervisor for the Cuyahoga County Public Defender's Office.
The state has 30 days to appeal Suster's decision in the 8th Ohio District Court of Appeals.
Monday, May 12, 2008
MO lawmakers Ignore Supreme Court
The Missouri News-leader.com : Missouri sex offenders with decades-old records might soon be told to stand and be counted, a practice that's already common in other states and seems to be gaining momentum as state legislatures seek to comply with the federal Adam Walsh Act law.
Last week, the Missouri House Rules Committee approved a Senate Joint Resolution that would require almost all sex offenders to register, regardless of conviction date.
The resolution seeks to upend a 2006 Missouri Supreme Court opinion that ruled retroactive registration --then common in the state -- illegal under the Missouri constitution. The decision led to the removal of more than 4,300 names from the Missouri sex offender registry.
Last year, Tennessee toughened its sex offender registry laws to apply to anyone in the state who has ever been convicted of certain sex crimes. Prior to the change, only those who committed crimes after Jan. 1, 1995 -- when the state's registry law took effect -- were required to sign up.
Michigan lawmakers are mulling over a bill that would force adults convicted of criminal sexual conduct with a child to register, regardless of conviction date. Michigan enacted its registry law -- known as a Megan's Law in most states -- in October 1995, and has typically only required those convicted after that date to register.
The U.S. Constitution specifically bars states from passing ex post facto laws --those that punish someone for activity committed before the law was enacted. But retroactive enforcement of Megan's Laws is not a new concept.
Iowa, New York, New Jersey and a host of other states require offenders to sign up if they were on parole or probation for a sex crime when the registries took effect.
Such provisions have come under fire by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, which say they go too far in regulating the lives of offenders.
"It's a fiction to say that this is a civil matter when this is, in fact, an extension of the criminal punishment," said Mike Kopie, a Chicago defense attorney and co-chair of NACDL's Sex Offender Policy Task Force. "There has to be a balance between protecting the community and the rights of people to go on with their lives."
The increased strictures mandated by the Walsh Act may prompt new challenges to the retroactive application of Megan's laws, said Michael Iacopino, also a member of the NACDL's task force.
"They're requiring sex offenders to report more often, they're requiring sex offenders to report more information," he said. "It's becoming more like a probation and parole as opposed to a regulatory system."
States are expected to comply with the Walsh Act by July 2009. Failure to do so could result in the loss of federal grant money.
The National Conference of State Legislatures reported in March that 19 states have taken steps to comply with the act. Among them: Ohio, which has faced outcry over a provision that retroactively increased the period of time sex offenders in the state must register.
More than 3,000 offenders have filed suit to challenge the change, said Erin Rosen, an Ohio assistant attorney general.
Prior to the new law, the majority of Ohio's 27,000 sex offenders were required to register for 10 years, Rosen said. Now, most must register for life.
The sticky issue of ex post facto registration requirement is unlikely to go away anytime soon.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Impeach Marc Dann
Marc Dann: I bet your 11-year old daughter, Jesse , is proud of you now.
UPDATE: 16 May 2008: Just because we finally got rid of Marc Dann, the corrupt Ohio Attorney General, we will not rest yet. We have many other Ohio elected officials to focus our efforts on now in order to remove them from public office. For information on the other corrupt Ohio politicians and elected officials who are responsible for enacting, implementing and enforcing the unconstitutional Adam Walsh Act laws which violate the Ohio and US Constitutional Rights of 30,000 Ohio sex offenders ( i.e. citizens who yes...can vote) :
http://constitutionalfights.blogspot.com/2008/01/elected-and-public-officials-who-are.html
Ohiogop.org: The Ohio Republican Party has initiated efforts to impeach Ohio Attorney General, Marc Dann. He has shamed the state of Ohio with corruption and scandal and now must be removed. He refuses to resign, despite the support of no Ohio political figures. Both Ohio State politcal parties are planning for impeachment of Marc Dann, as early as next week.
“The attorney general's office has been rocked by scandal involving sexual harassment, the hiring of poorly qualified pals, contributing to a culture lacking in professionalism. That was the conclusion of an internal report unveiled on Friday. The report included many disturbing details. The communications director attempted to impede the investigation. Two top aides (and longtime friends of Dann) have been fired. The chief of staff (another Dann friend) resigned. Dann admitted to an affair with a co-worker — and a colossal failure of management.” (Editorial, Akron Beacon Journal, 5/6/08)
Sign the petition to force resignation or impeachment of Marc Dann, Attorney General of the State of Ohio here: http://www.ohiogop.org/DumpDann/Dump_Dann/Home.html
The phone number to Marc Dann’s office is (614) 466-4320.
Or you can email Marc Dann directly at marcdann@yahoo.com.
Contact Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern and tell him
you disagree with his comments that “no one has accused Marc Dann of being a bad AG”
and ask him to more aggressively seek Marc Dann’s resignation.
The phone number to Chris Redfern’s office is 1-877-OHIO-DEM.
Or you can email Chris Redfern at chrisredfern@ohiodems.org
Watch news reports from Ohio network news channels:
The Ohio Democrat Party has officially made Marc Dann persona non grata (Latin, plural: personae non gratae, also abbreviated PNG), literally meaning "an unwelcome person,":
UPDATE 14 May 2008: WBNS 10TV: Marc Dann Resigns As Attorney General.
Finally this corrupt man has resigned from his office and spared the State of Ohio more shame and embarrassment. One down, many more to go.....
With our efforts to oust Marc Dann from office for his corruption, we now turn to the other corrupt Ohio politicians and elected officials who are responsible for enacting, implementing and enforcing the unconstitutional Adam Walsh Act laws which violate the Ohio and US Constitutional Rights of 30,000 Ohio sex offenders ( i.e. citizens who yes...can vote). See here for information about these officials:
http://constitutionalfights.blogspot.com/2008/01/elected-and-public-officials-who-are.html
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
State by State Compliance
This is very interesting information from gimeweb.com
(which reportedly comes from a document was prepared by Alisa Klein, Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, last updated: April 3, 2008).
This document gives the up to date information on states compliance to the Adam Walsh Act and SORNA. Of all the states in this compliance list Kansas has gone the way of requiring nearly everyone called and/or labeled a sex offender to register for life. It is more than obvious that some states care more about not losing 10% of Byrne Funds than they do about the injustice of the Adam Walsh Act.
You will see that only about 10 states have yet enacted legislation in reaction to the Federal Adam Walsh Act guidelines. Some of these laws do not satisfactorily fall into compliance with the federal guidelines. And they vary greatly in their restrictiveness, and therefore in their degree of constitutional violation.
It is up to everyone who is targeted by the Adam Walsh Act to fight these laws. If you don’t fight, the lawmakers will continue to be emboldened in their efforts to trample your constitutional rights.
USAToday: 6 May 2008 - States mull retroactive sex-offender registries
A federal law that requires states to establish a new system for registering sex offenders by 2009 is prompting some states to mandate retroactive registration — forcing offenders to register even if their crimes were committed before registry laws went into effect. Under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, states have until next year to establish a tier system for offenders to register for 15 years, 25 years or life, based on the nature of their offenses.
Though the law does not mandate retroactive registration, Tennessee passed a law last July requiring it. The law applies to anyone who has ever been convicted of a sex offense that requires registration, said Kristin Helm of the Tennessee Bureau for Investigation.
At least two other states are moving in that direction:
• Michigan. The House Judiciary Committee is considering a bill that would force adults convicted of criminal sexual conduct with a child to register, regardless of conviction date.
•Missouri. A Senate committee is considering a resolution that would require almost all sex offenders to register, regardless of conviction date. If passed, the measure could appear on November ballots.
A USA TODAY search of state registry laws shows that at least 15 other states required retroactive registration prior to the Walsh Act becoming law.
U.S. Constitution bars states from passing ex post facto laws — those that punish someone for activity committed before the law was enacted. However, retroactive enforcement of Megan's laws — the informal name for sex offender-registration laws named for New Jersey abuse victim Megan Kanka — was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003. The court found that Alaska's retroactive Megan's law was a regulatory measure, not punitive.
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) has been critical of the retro-registration laws.
"It's a fiction to say that this is a civil matter when this is, in fact, an extension of the criminal punishment," said Mike Kopie, co-chair of the NACDL's Sex Offender Policy Task Force.
(which reportedly comes from a document was prepared by Alisa Klein, Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, last updated: April 3, 2008).
This document gives the up to date information on states compliance to the Adam Walsh Act and SORNA. Of all the states in this compliance list Kansas has gone the way of requiring nearly everyone called and/or labeled a sex offender to register for life. It is more than obvious that some states care more about not losing 10% of Byrne Funds than they do about the injustice of the Adam Walsh Act.
You will see that only about 10 states have yet enacted legislation in reaction to the Federal Adam Walsh Act guidelines. Some of these laws do not satisfactorily fall into compliance with the federal guidelines. And they vary greatly in their restrictiveness, and therefore in their degree of constitutional violation.
It is up to everyone who is targeted by the Adam Walsh Act to fight these laws. If you don’t fight, the lawmakers will continue to be emboldened in their efforts to trample your constitutional rights.
USAToday: 6 May 2008 - States mull retroactive sex-offender registries
A federal law that requires states to establish a new system for registering sex offenders by 2009 is prompting some states to mandate retroactive registration — forcing offenders to register even if their crimes were committed before registry laws went into effect. Under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, states have until next year to establish a tier system for offenders to register for 15 years, 25 years or life, based on the nature of their offenses.
Though the law does not mandate retroactive registration, Tennessee passed a law last July requiring it. The law applies to anyone who has ever been convicted of a sex offense that requires registration, said Kristin Helm of the Tennessee Bureau for Investigation.
At least two other states are moving in that direction:
• Michigan. The House Judiciary Committee is considering a bill that would force adults convicted of criminal sexual conduct with a child to register, regardless of conviction date.
•Missouri. A Senate committee is considering a resolution that would require almost all sex offenders to register, regardless of conviction date. If passed, the measure could appear on November ballots.
A USA TODAY search of state registry laws shows that at least 15 other states required retroactive registration prior to the Walsh Act becoming law.
U.S. Constitution bars states from passing ex post facto laws — those that punish someone for activity committed before the law was enacted. However, retroactive enforcement of Megan's laws — the informal name for sex offender-registration laws named for New Jersey abuse victim Megan Kanka — was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003. The court found that Alaska's retroactive Megan's law was a regulatory measure, not punitive.
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) has been critical of the retro-registration laws.
"It's a fiction to say that this is a civil matter when this is, in fact, an extension of the criminal punishment," said Mike Kopie, co-chair of the NACDL's Sex Offender Policy Task Force.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann; Resign or Impeachment
WLW700.com: Many Democratic leaders in Ohio are calling for the Attorney General to resign. Ohio Governor Ted Strickland is leading the call for Marc Dann to leave his job, after being caught in a sex scandal. Dann has continued to insist he will stay on the job.
On Friday, Dann admitted to an extramarital affair with a subordinate after findings in an unrelated sexual harassment investigation threatened to reveal the relationship. Strickland, Sen. Sherrod Brown, other Democratic state officeholders and all Democratic state legislators sent Dann a letter Sunday saying his actions hurt his ability to do his job. Dann says in a written response that his office will continue to provide legal services and work with law enforcement partners.
See the full text of the letter to Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, and view the names of everyone who signed it by clicking the link: http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/mlib/1209/05/1209_1210006767.pdf
The letter also states that if Dann refuses to resign, legislation will be introduced to impeach him.
Marc Dann , who campaigned and fought for the illegal implementation of Senate Bill10 ( Adam Walsh Act law in Ohio) is also responsible for taking away legal Constitutional Rights of nearly 30,000 Ohio citizens. This law, which he proudly thumps his chest about, takes away due process rights (disallowing a court hearing to establish classification) , imposes double jeopardy punishments, and violates separation of powers provisions of the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions.
Marc Dann Must Resign..... or we, the people, will force him from office.
On Friday, Dann admitted to an extramarital affair with a subordinate after findings in an unrelated sexual harassment investigation threatened to reveal the relationship. Strickland, Sen. Sherrod Brown, other Democratic state officeholders and all Democratic state legislators sent Dann a letter Sunday saying his actions hurt his ability to do his job. Dann says in a written response that his office will continue to provide legal services and work with law enforcement partners.
See the full text of the letter to Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, and view the names of everyone who signed it by clicking the link: http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/mlib/1209/05/1209_1210006767.pdf
The letter also states that if Dann refuses to resign, legislation will be introduced to impeach him.
Marc Dann , who campaigned and fought for the illegal implementation of Senate Bill10 ( Adam Walsh Act law in Ohio) is also responsible for taking away legal Constitutional Rights of nearly 30,000 Ohio citizens. This law, which he proudly thumps his chest about, takes away due process rights (disallowing a court hearing to establish classification) , imposes double jeopardy punishments, and violates separation of powers provisions of the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions.
Marc Dann Must Resign..... or we, the people, will force him from office.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Maine, NH loosen sex offender laws
Nashuatelegraph.com : Concord: A state Senate panel voted to weaken proposals to crack down on convicted sex offenders. The changes would do away with current laws that compel out-of-state sex offenders who register with the state to identify their place of work. It would also lower some Sex Offender Registry requirements from life to 10 years for an adult. Foster said, "When you are talking about taking away people's liberties and rights as a citizen, you've got to make darn sure it's done properly." ( THINK about that quote ! - unbelievable)
Fosters.com : A sex offender bill that would incorporate a tiered system into the state law is currently under going some major changes in the Senate. The bill, HB1640, was drafted so the state would come into compliance with federal legislation known as the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act. The bill would create a state tier system, provide more information to the public and help prevent sex offenders from moving to the state.
Other possible changes include reducing the time a Tier I offender must register on the public list from 15 years to 10 years, repealing the current law that requires out-of-state offenders working in New Hampshire to register the address where they are employed, and removing all aspects of the bill that would require DNA samples from every registered sex offender.
Sexcrimedefender.com : Veto of Sex Offender Registration Reform. AUGUSTA, Maine — Gov. John Baldacci on Wednesday vetoed a bill aimed regarding the state’s sex offender registry. Baldacci said his biggest concern is that the bill didn’t do enough to differentiate between sexually violent predators and those who are not a high risk to reoffend. "I have no doubt that there are people on the registry who shouldn’t be required to register because they no longer pose a risk to public safety," Baldacci said in the statement. "But until we have a better system to judge who those people are, we should continue with our current law."
Meanwhile, last fall the Maine Supreme Judicial Court said the state’s sex offender law could be unconstitutional because it increases criminal punishments retroactively for people who already have completed sentences. "We have not made any changes [since last fall], which means we’re still very vulnerable to having our registry being unconstitutional," he said.
Fosters.com : A sex offender bill that would incorporate a tiered system into the state law is currently under going some major changes in the Senate. The bill, HB1640, was drafted so the state would come into compliance with federal legislation known as the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act. The bill would create a state tier system, provide more information to the public and help prevent sex offenders from moving to the state.
Other possible changes include reducing the time a Tier I offender must register on the public list from 15 years to 10 years, repealing the current law that requires out-of-state offenders working in New Hampshire to register the address where they are employed, and removing all aspects of the bill that would require DNA samples from every registered sex offender.
Sexcrimedefender.com : Veto of Sex Offender Registration Reform. AUGUSTA, Maine — Gov. John Baldacci on Wednesday vetoed a bill aimed regarding the state’s sex offender registry. Baldacci said his biggest concern is that the bill didn’t do enough to differentiate between sexually violent predators and those who are not a high risk to reoffend. "I have no doubt that there are people on the registry who shouldn’t be required to register because they no longer pose a risk to public safety," Baldacci said in the statement. "But until we have a better system to judge who those people are, we should continue with our current law."
Meanwhile, last fall the Maine Supreme Judicial Court said the state’s sex offender law could be unconstitutional because it increases criminal punishments retroactively for people who already have completed sentences. "We have not made any changes [since last fall], which means we’re still very vulnerable to having our registry being unconstitutional," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
