Growing Practice of “No Bond” and Unreasonably Harsh Sentences for Some Child Sex Crimes Sparks Judicial Concern
By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
In July 2006 former President George W. Bush signed into law the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (“Walsh Act”). Title I of the Walsh Act, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), received the most media attention because it expanded the National Sex Offender Registry and established sanctions up to a maximum of twenty years for sex offenders who do not comply with the law’s registration requirements.
One of the lesser publicized impacts of the Walsh Act has been the restrictions on bail and the increased sentencing disparity for defendants charged with simple possession of computerized child pornography. The latter problem was succinctly described by Judge Merritt’s dissent in a January 9, 2009 decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Paull, in which he said: “As a recent October 23, 2008, Wall Street Journal article by Amir Efrati points out, our federal legal system has lost its bearings on the subject of computer-based child pornography. Our ‘social revulsion’ against these ‘misfits’ downloading these images is perhaps somewhat more rational than the thousands of witchcraft trials and burnings conducted in Europe and here from the Thirteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries, but it borders on the same thing. In 2008 alone the Department of Justice has brought 2,200 cases… in the federal courts. Some trial and federal judges are sending these mentally ill defendants like Paull to federal prison on very long sentences. But the 17-1/2 year sentence for Paull may be the longest yet. He is a 65-year-old, psychologically disabled, former minister with Type I diabetes with many complications. How could this sentence be ‘not greater than necessary’ to punish this crime?”
Some federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Texas (“Southern District”) have expanded the “witchcraft” mindset from harsh sentencing practices to the unilateral practice of requesting detention pending trial, no bail, for all defendants charged with possession of child pornography. This creates a situation where child porn defendants in some federal districts are granted bail, albeit with strict conditions, while defendants in the Southern District are denied bail. This harsh policy of pretrial detention for child pornography defendants in the Southern District raises serious constitutional concerns; primarily, that the Eighth Amendment prohibition that “excessive bail shall not be required” is violated. The Supreme Court nearly 60 years ago in Stack v. Boyle held that criminal defendants charged in non-capital cases “shall” be released on bail if they give adequate assurances that they will appear at trial and submit to sentence if convicted.
With the Bail Reform Act of 1984, Congress codified the presumption in favor of pretrial release but also firmly established that bail is not a matter of constitutional right in all cases. Three years later the Supreme Court in United States v. Salerno upheld this congressional mandate by saying that “when Congress has mandated detention on the basis of a compelling interest other than prevention of flight … the Eighth Amendment does not require release on bail.”
With the Walsh Act, Congress eliminated a federal district judge’s discretion in setting bail in child pornography cases by imposing mandatory conditions on those child porn defendants released on bail. While the district court still maintains the preliminary discretion in deciding whether to grant bail or impose pretrial detention in these cases, Congress mandated that federal judges impose certain mandatory conditions as terms for bail.
But just as many federal judges across the country have rebelled against recommended sentencing determinations by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, federal judges have also placed the mandatory bail conditions of the Walsh Act squarely in their sights. For example, most recently the Senior Judge for the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York, Jack B. Weinstein, in United States v. Polouizzi followed the lead of a number of other federal courts in holding that the mandatory bail provisions of the Watch Act are unconstitutional for the following reasons:
- Violates the Eighth Amendment Prohibition Against Excessive Bail: The court made the preliminary observation that “the weight of nisi prius authority is that the Adam Walsh Act is unconstitutional in cases such as the present one, since it requires imposition of electronic monitoring without discretion in all cases falling within the statute’s ambit.” Judge Weinstein found these mandatory “bail conditions … unconstitutionally excessive [because] they impose restraints that are more than necessary to achieve the government’s interest—in this case, preventing risk of flight and of danger to society or children.”
- Violates the Fifth Amendment Prohibition Against a Person Being Denied Liberty Without Due Process of Law: Judge Weinstein noted that while the concept of “due process” is flexible, it nonetheless requires “procedural protections” when an individual’s liberty interest is at stake. Judge Weinstein found that an individual’s “valid liberty interest in freedom of movement … is arbitrarily and substantially reduced by the Adam Walsh Act. The right to travel from one place to another free of hindrances is a well established aspect of constitutionally protected private freedom.” The judge added that “a curfew, by its definition, restricts the ability of the defendant to move about in a public area during periods of time. The condition of a mandatory curfew with an associated electronic monitoring bracelet imposed pursuant to the Adam Walsh Act substantially constrains freedom-of-movement liberty … Electronic monitoring devices that inhibit straying beyond spatial home property limits, like those used to restrain pet dogs, are intrusive.”
Judge Weinstein, like most other judges, stopped short of concluding that the Walsh Act violates the constitutional doctrine of “separation of powers” as Judge Leslie G. Foschio did in December 2006 in the case of United States v. Crowell—a decision emanating from the Western District of New York and decided just six months after the Walsh Act was signed into law by President Bush. Judge Weinstein rejected Judge Foschio’s position by saying that the “violation of separation of powers theory does not provide a sufficient basis for declaring the Adam Walsh Act unconstitutional. Congress has a major role in regulating bail. The Bail Reform Act of 1984, for example, was protective of a defendant’s rights against imposition of excessive bail.”
But clearly the constitutional friction between the federal courts and Congress over the issue of child pornography, whether it relates to degree of sentencing or the amount of bail, is escalating. And for good reason, the courts are intended to be independent guardians of constitutional liberties while Congress is a political machine whose primary goal is to enact legislation that (1) will ensure their reelection and (2) promote political partisanship. As we pointed out in a blog earlier this year:
“Congress has repeatedly created new offenses, increased penalties, and issued directives to the Commission concerning child pornography offenses. The following is a list of many of the laws enacted by Congress over the last three decades regarding child pornography-related offenses:
- Protection of Children Against Exploitation Act of 1978;
- Child Protection Act of 1984;
- Child Sexual Abuse and Pornography Act of 1986;
- Child Abuse Victims’ Rights Act of 1986;
- Child Protection Restoration and Penalties Enhancement Act of 1990;
- Sex Crimes Against Children Prevention Act of 1995;
- Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act of 1998;
- Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003;
- PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008;
- Providing Resources, Officers, and Technology to Eradicate Cyber Threats to Our Children Act of 2008;
- Keep the Internet Devoid of Sexual Predators Act of 2008; and
- Effective Child Pornography Prosecution Act of 2008.
“This endless stream of legislation has contributed to an increasing, and more open, judicial chaos in the specific area of child pornography sentencing.”
The sentencing chaos has now spilled over into the area of bail. This is evidenced by the practice of judges in the Southern District of Texas, which encompasses Harris County, denying bail in virtually every child pornography case brought in this district. But with other federal courts across the country expressing their constitutional dissatisfaction with the mandatory bail conditions of the Walsh Act, the “no-bail” practice in the Southern District will inevitably come under increasing attack by criminal defense attorneys.
We believe that possession of child pornography under any circumstances is offensive and society has every right to criminalize this conduct, which is ultimately derived from extreme child abuse. Yes, the images are disgusting and violate some of our most cherish moral values, but are those who view these terrible images in the privacy of their homes violent monsters, incapable of redemption. Wouldn’t theses individuals, who simply possess child pornography without acting-out or abusing children, be better punished by court ordered counseling and other therapies intended to mend their obviously damaged psyches that obviously fuel this demented obsession? Or, is it better to do what comes easiest to most of us, lock them away forever and forget they exist.
It has become patently obvious that Congress uses these types of crimes as easy targets upon which to legislate to create political advantage, much like the Witch Hunts of former times. That’s why we support the growing movement in the federal courts to bring some sanity to the sentencing and bail practices flowing from the Walsh Act.
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Subscribe
Hey John I always say a leopard (predator) never changes his/her spots. The rate of rehabilition with these folks are very low. First the public must pay to get this person help. Most of the time these people dont want any help. They dont think what they are doing is wrong. Then the public must pay for their drugs. Then at any time they will get off those meds and offend again. This process is revolving.
The reason why there are so many laws on this subject is because of loopholes these defendants find in the system. They were mostly created by very sincere parents and good people of the community. Child abuse alone is so messed up, but when you factor in sexual abuse it seriously has scard many women and children who grow into abusers themselves.
Imagine walking around your whole life never being able to feel love. To always feel mistrust and fear when dealing with family members. These people lives solitary lives as they have so many problems relating to people. If someone has child pornography stored on their computer and gets caught with it I say give him a very long sentence. I personally would rather pay for his time in prison than on the streets where he is likely to offend again.
As for bail, forget it. If they are already this far gone theres no rehabbing them period.
Comment by Michael — June 21, 2010 @ 4:05 pm
Hey, Michael,
Imagine being arrested , prosecuted, convicted , imprisoned for YEARS; upon release your additionally demanded to register , follow deranged and cruel guidelines, restrictions and banishment policies,are exposed to the WORLD as a predator under a ‘civil’ regulation, because someone, other then you, ‘MURDERED’ Megan Kanka , Jessica Lundsford or Adam Walsh? (FOR OBTAINING A PICTURE THROUGH THE INTERNET or SEXTING?
You have NO idea how many children and youths are being gathered, registered, imprisoned and branded as predators, murdered, commit suicide and suffer endlessly because of these deranged ‘MURDER’ laws, do you?
You support these law because, your against child abuse?
* Justin Fawcett, NJ suicide
* NJ, A Galloway student at Richard Stockton College of New Jersey who was found delinquent for an offense he committed at 15-year-old “with” a 13-year-old girl is banned from his college dorm? A sexual contact = predator in NJ because Megan was ‘MURDERED’? Supreme Court stopped residency restriction in NJ, But, Still this young man is registered for LIFE , banned from NJ and NATIONAL parks, my Space, Miami beach and selling ice cream from a truck, etc,etc! A NJ “predator”?
* Wendy Whitaker was 17, for life is banned from her home in Georgia, Now, in jail for going home!
* Brandon is serving 60 yrs in Texas, http://www.freebrandon.org
* Dale Wayne Ellis: Marked at 14, Bludgeoned to death at 20
* Meet US sex offenders: Criminalizing Child’s Play: http://www.solresearch.org/~SOLR/rprt/JSOs.htm#Sct_1_gallery
* personal stories: US children named predators’ ?Ethical Treatment For All Youths : http://www.ethicaltreatment.org/stories.htm
* Ricky’s Life : http://www.rickyslife.com/
* Matthew Freeman: http://www.annarbor.com/news/a-young-man-struggles-with-the-sex-offender-label/
* 20/20 The Age of Consent: When Young Love Is a Sex Crime – ABC News
* In the Matter of T.T., NJ , at 12 played with a douche found in bathroom with 6 year old brother. A Megan’s Law registrant ripped from his home, punished, labeled and registered ?
* William Elliott, at 24 shot DEAD , loving relationship, boy 19, a girl 15 ends in murder, because of Megan’s “murder” law?
* NY- Inmate, 17, hangs himself at Rikers
BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Sunday, January 6th 2008, 4:00 AM
A Mount Vernon teen hanged himself at Rikers Island after the jail failed to follow a Queens judge’s order to place the inmate under suicide watch, lawyers charged Saturday.
David Mercado, 17, was supposed to be placed under round-the-clock protection after a Dec. 17 arrest in Queens on statutory rape charges that said he had sex with a 14-year-old girl.
But within 24 hours he hanged himself, attorneys for Mercado’s family said.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/01/06/2008-01-06_inmate_17_hangs_himself_at_rikers-1.html#ixzz0JklqSUy9&D
* This January in Pennsylvania, 6 teenagers were charged. Three girls for creating child porn, and three boys (who it was sent to) for possessing it. In Texas, an eighth-grader actually spent a night in prison after his coach found a nude picture on his cell phone which had been sent by another student. In Wisconsin, a 17-year-old was charged with child pornography after posting naked pictures of his girlfriend, who is a year younger, on the internet. In Rochester, New York, a boy aged 16 faces seven years in jail for circulating an image of a girlfriend to friends.
A 15-year-old girl in Ohio and a 14-year-old girl in Michigan were charged with felonies for sending along nude images of themselves to classmates. Similar charges have been filed in cases in Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, New Jersey, and Utah. Some may remember back to the case in Florida a few years ago where a teen couple took pictures of themselves nude, and engaged in “unspecified sexual behavior.” The police got involved somehow when one of the kids sent the photo to the other. They were tried in the courts and convicted for both production and distribution of child pornography, and the teenager who had received the image also had the charge of possession. It was taken to an appeals court, and they lost. The convictions stood.
America, Our children and families need your ‘HELP’!
This was ‘NEVER’ the intention but, the hateful outcome and horrific results of allowing dishonest tyrants rule in this County, NOW WHAT?
ReformSexOffenderLaws.org
Comment by HonestOpinion — July 19, 2010 @ 11:02 am
I totally agree that a leopard doesn’t change it’s spots. But what about an offender who gets labeled wrong? Believe me it does happen just like there an people who truly were innocent but didn’t have the money to get that high priced lawyer that some of these richer pedophiles can afford to get. Basically you feel like sex offenders have no rights at all.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a bleeding heart or anything like that, but you don’t take a person’s rights away. That’s not what America was built on, not by a long shot. Next time you look up they will be applying this type of law to all crimes. And how do you punish someone for a crime that they haven’t commited yet? You have to look a the flipside of that shiny quarter you have in your pocket.
Comment by Johnson — July 21, 2010 @ 2:34 am
oh come on. there are offenders who can be rehabilitated. those who can proved to society that they can be changed and trusted need to have
Comment by Tricia — September 23, 2010 @ 8:39 am
I would love to hear from the person “Johnson – July 21, 2010″ a wrongly labeled sex offender. A friend of mine is in the same boat and his two young boys are paying for it. Can anyone help me? I would love to hear from you. I live in New York State and someone said to look at the “Adam Walsh Law” and that will give me information but there are so many pages on the internet about this that it is overwhelming. Can someone get back to me – I am desperate and this friend of mine is suffering beyond belief. thanks.
Comment by Debbie — October 6, 2010 @ 3:39 pm
It’s a shame that our society has to abide by the AWA that doesn’t seem to support “innocent until proven guilty” ideals. My family has been ripped apart by these new laws, and will suffer until the end unless the laws change. My husband possessed illegal images due to a pornography addiction that started pre-teen with adult magazines. Like any addiction, it escalated over time, and in the last few years he ended up in the wrong areas. The ease of technology for trading photos played a major role in attaining the images. He’s doing 9 years (which we were told to be thankful for), but will be affected for the rest of his life because of the AWA and how it paints all sex offenders with a broad brush (registry, “public safety”, civil suits). Do I think what he did is wrong? You bet. Do I think he’s a horrible person that deserves to lose 9 years of his life and be plagued by anxiety from here forward? Not at all. Do I think there are victims in those images? Most definitely. Do I think they are HIS victims? No I don’t. Before he self-reported, he spent 18 months of his own money (not the taxpayers) and time rehabilitating himself in therapy and SAA meetings, finally facing the childhood pain that caused him to seek out the numbing that pornography gave him. He has mended an estranged relationship with his father, as well as strengthened the relationship with his mother. He continues to attend religious services and seek positive interactions (where he can find them) on the inside. People can change. I believe a leopard can change its spots. It’s just sad that our laws won’t fully allow him to pay his debt to society and move forward.
Comment by Red — October 11, 2010 @ 1:48 pm
My family has been torn apart because of the sex offender laws in this country. My husband has to register as a sex offender for life because of things he did when he was 13. Because he is on the registry, I consulted with my attorney before marrying and asked her if this would cause a change in my custody – she said “He is not a pedophile. This is a juvenile crime. You have nothing to worry about!” If only that had been the case. He had been in my life since my daughter was 7 months old – when we we built our home together, my daughter was 4 yrs old. Months after we built our home and moved in, someone in the neighborhood discovered he was on the sex offender list. We initially chose the home because it was close to my daughters daycare center and was easy for us to drop her before going to work – this neighbor went to our daycare provider to let them know that a sex offender has moved into the area and to be careful! When my ex – who I left because of achoholism, physical abuse and mental abuse – found this out from the daycare provider that week(who had had no issues with my husband for the 4 years he had be in our daughters life) he immediately went to CPS and reported that my daughter was being sexually abused in order to get full custody. This resulted in our whole family being sent to court experts to assess his risk to my daughter. Also my daughter was sent to an expert in assessing whether she had been sexually abused. After months of meetings the experts came back and said my daughter had NOT been abused (not that I needed an expert to tell me this) and that our family should be restored. Do you think the courts followed the many experts advice???? NO!!! Not only did they say that my husband had to leave when my daughter was there, but they also restricted MY time with her saying that if I believed my husband was not a danger to my daughter that I was naive. My answer to that? If I thought someone I was dating or marrying was any risk to my child and married them anyway – I deserve to have her removed from my home! At this point, my choice is to divorce my husband who has done nothing wrong to my daughter or myself or let this nightmare continue with me only getting to see my daughter every other weekend and 2 hours 1 night per week. No one who knows about this can believe what has occurred with the courts and the orders that continue to strip not only my husband but myself of our rights as parents. It is not only the sex offender that suffers from these laws. My daughter and I suffer daily. My husband is a good and decent man who would not harm a fly. He does not deserve to be treated like a pedophile. I am a good and loving mother who does not deserve to be separated from my daughter. You know what the judge says to rationalize ripping our lives apart? Just in case….
Comment by Crystal — October 30, 2010 @ 2:24 pm
I pled guilty to possesion of child porn in Texas over ten years ago (state charges, the feds would not press charges) and received 90 days in the county jail and ten years defered adjudication, was told I would have to register as a sex offender for the ten years I was on probation and for ten years after succesful disposition of the probation. This is what the DA, Judge, my lawyer and I agreed to in court.
After being released from county I reported to probation where I was informed that the Judge and DAdidn’t knowwhat they agreed to, that it was illegal for them to make that deal and that I would haveto register for life.
I completed my probation without any problems, during which time I obeyed all terms of probation, earned a Associates and BS degrees while working.
I understand that I may purchase and possess firearms, move about freely as long as I follow registration laws, serve on jury duty and vote.
However I do have to register for life (unless I can successfully challenge this in court which I am told the Adam Walsh Act would overrule if adopted in Texas) I lost a good career because while I informed the HR director I was on defered adjudication probation and what my charges were and was told the companies policy was to never hold defered adjudicaions against anyone his replacement said I was lying and that she had proof I had been convicted (evidently my presence on the registry) despite the company providing the court a letter explaining the scope of my duties so that my terms be modified in order to allow me to recieve travel permits and use internet for work purposes.
While on probation and in treatment I met young men married to and rasing families with their victims that were just a few year younger than themselves. I saw young men 18 years old that were not allowed to live with their parents beacause of the presence of younger siblings that were not the victims of their crimes.
The semantics regarding sex offenders are interchanged so readily that the public is polarized even more than the nature of the crimes demand.
All offenders are not predators.
All registered offenders have not been convicted.
By definition pedophiles are mature adults with a sexual attraction to children who have not yet reached puberty not 19 year olds have sex with 16 year olds.
Sexual assaults are far more likely to be commited by a friend, neighbor, date, babysitter or family member than by a random stranger.
We have a local district judge that forces offenders to place signs in their yards and on any car they regularly travel in announcing their ofender status. Meanwhile our local tax appraisal districts will devauate the appraisal of a property within close vicinity of the address of an offender but gang infested neighborhoods or sites of drivebys and murders.
Sex offenders are an easy mark for elected officials. Everybody hates taxes and sex offenders. The tide will only turn when the registry becomes so vast that politicians have children and family members on the registry (look at the way many drug laws have been laxed of the past 30 years) and the economics and logistics of the registry become so overwhelming that they no longer can justify the inclusion of of sex crimes being treated as the most horrible.
Comment by RSO — October 31, 2010 @ 8:02 pm
The problem with this all is lumping every offender into a single group with little distinction and not taking ‘time’ in to the equation. The fact is, that non-pedophile offenders have a lower recidivism rate than the general felon population at large.
Further, it is proven that treatment does work for many offenders. How the US Supreme court ruled that going back and making offenders register that had been offense free for 20 or 30 years is not in violation of the ex post facto laws of the constitution is mind boggling and extremely frightening. US law is made by precedent. By doing this with sex offenders, it kicks the door down for any other offense no matter how old the offense. Any offender or felon, no matter their crime that has gone 20 or 30 years or more and committed no new offenses in my mind is just as safe to have as your neighbor than anyone else.
People also forget that ‘new’ first time offenders are constantly entering the system and at a higher rate than the recidivist offenders. The Adam Walsh act is against everything American. Americans believe in second chances at the core of their nature. We don’t punish people for life except for the most aggregous crime, murder and sometimes, not even then, depending on the circumstances. I also find it interesting that only three countries in the world, the US, Canada, and the UK even have such a thing as sex offender registration and in Canada and the UK they are not public.
For the US supreme court to rule that going back and making offenders register that have been long out of the system by saying registration is not punishment is laughable on the face of it. It’s probation or parole under another name. If probation isn’t a punishment, then why is it so often used in sentencing ? Because it’s a punishment and the US Constitution clearly states that retroactive punishment is not tolerated in this nation and is a core value of this nation. That is, it WAS a core value.
The parents of two people who lost their children, Patty Wetterling, mother of Jacob, and Mark Klaus, father of Polly, both have publicly stated that registration laws have gone too far and are a waste of resources and ineffective. The fact is, registration does not prevent an offender from re-offending. How THIS idea made mainstream is also a mystery. It makes it easier to investigate such crimes, marginally, but in no way does it prevent such crimes. It should also be noted that the propensity to commit ANY crime, not just sex offenders, declines markedly with age.
What we are doing with this and other things, such as TSA searches and various other laws that have been passed recently that decay our rights, are extremely disturbing to me. Although not a perfect analogy, it goes back to the saying that by not protecting the rights of others, no matter how much you may disdain them, it ultimately puts YOUR rights at risk.
Futher, by it’s widespread use or rather ‘abuse’, there is another unintended consequence of this that I’ve noticed in young people. It no longer carries the stigma it once had. Look at the various public figures tangled up in sex abuse cases. A stigma of a sex crime doesn’t carry nearly the weight with the younger generation that it does with mine and possible the population at large.
The sex offender laws have been so abused, that society has become numb to it. When I viewed the offenders in my neighborhood, I was shocked to learn that sex offenders are everywhere around me and I wondered how knowing this protected me or my family. That’s what has never been discussed. How does this actually protect anyone ? If I find my neighbor is a sex offender, what good does that information do for me. We don’t let our children run loose anyway and offenders can travel to committ another crime. It’s as if the states believe offenders only offend in their neighborhood, which brings up ANOTHER point. Most victims know their attackers and or are RELATED to them. Statistically, the most dangerous person to your children, is you. Not some random stranger.
If the state feels these people are so dangerous to us, they shouldn’t be free. Which leads to another conundrum illustrated in the move the Godfather when the mortician came to Brando to ask a favor to deal with the men who raped his daughter. You don’t here what he asked, but you know by the Godfathers ( Brando ) response. ‘That is not justice, your daughter is still alive.’
These laws exist because if a politician is against it, he has to deal with that when he runs for re-election. The ‘my opponent voted against XYZ law dealing with child abuse or sex abuse’ is going to be used again him or her. TIn fact it’s damn hard to say your against registration laws at the dinner table with your own family or the living room with your own friends. If you’re against this, then that means you must be FOR sex offenders. This has been and is, a recipe for disaster. But the founding fathers designed a method to deal with this. The courts. And those courts have failed miserably to protect us from our politicians and ourselves.
If sex offenses have become so prevalant as compared to the past, I would think it would be important to try and find out….why. Kids are bombarded with sexual content and images, it’s no wonder more and more of them go astray later in life.
Had enough ? Start a conversation about the patriot act, I have more but I just view the reaction to sex offenses and subsequent laws as being more dangerous to our society and nation than sex offenders themselves. I’m far more afraid of our government than I am any other person, sex offender or no sex offender and our founding fathers told us we should be. National ID act, the Patriot Act, TSA body searches, registering people for crimes, ignoring ex post facto, the police no longer requiring a court order to enter your home and search it. ALL scares me INFINITLY more and had you asked me 30 years ago this was where our nation would be in 2010 I’d have laughed in your face at that absurdity.
This is about far more than ‘registering sex offenders’. It’s a break and marked shift away from the core values of our nation that have served us well for over 200 years till now and it scares the hell out of me.
Comment by James Thomas — December 1, 2010 @ 5:02 am
For those who’ve commented that a leapard never changes its spots; and who believe that a sex offense is something that’s inbred – an unchangeable part of someone’s personality; here are a few true facts:
The California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation conducted a study of 4,204 released offenders, who were incarcerated on charges of sexual offenses, from 2002 to 2007. The rate of recidivism was 3.21%.
The Indiana Department of Corrections conducted a study of released offenders from 2005 through 2008. The rate of recidivism was 1.05%
The Federal Government and other states have conducted similar studies, which showed almost the same results. The rate of recidivism among released sex offenders is lower than any other crime in the United States.
Right now, there have sprung up a few private, “for-profit” prison companies who anxiously fight for contracts to house and keep sex offenders, knowing they are the least of our nation’s trouble-makers. Prisons, sex offenders, registries and GPS tracking devices are our greatest growth industry.
Comment by Taxpayer — January 13, 2011 @ 12:25 pm
Thank you for the positive feedback information from the two prior comment posters. Many wish to state that those who have fallen into the sad behaviour of looking at underage pornagraphy are the worst monsters out there, and should just be thrown away. Thanks Taxpayer for the more realistic recidivism statistics regarding sexual offenders (under 5% nationally – compared to the average recidivism rates of around 70% for other crimes).
So, who am I to have any such opinion. I am currently on probation for having looked at and downloaded underage pornography. I am not proud of that fact – but I do realize it does not define the person that I am. My previous lifestyle was always one of helping, aiding, and protecting others. I was a volunteer firefighter for nearly 20 years, an EMT for 6 years, and worked in law enforcement/corrections for over 13 years. I was involoved in the search for Megan Kanka, physically participated in the search for 16 hours after which I had to go to work (being an essential employee in the juvenile criminal justice system at that time). I was heartbroken when I heard of Megan’s having been harmed and killed. So maybe you wonder, how in the heck could I have eventualy found myself having looked at underage (primarily teen) porn at a later time in life, if I was so involved and moved by the Kanka case. I went through a bad period of my life – I had a relationship fall through – had friends that I had believed in turn against me, and use my kind spirit against me for thier own political gain at the fire department I was associated with – I spiralled into depression, and did not know how to deal with such – - as a result – I started drinking alone, stopped socializing, started isolating myself, and yes – started looking at (adult) pornography upon my computer. It became addictive, I started looking at such more and more in my off work hours – and eventualy, I came accross some underage pictures. At first, such things horrified me, and I turned away from such. However, in time I started to see some of the teen pictures, and remember my first love as a teen, the happier days in my past, the exploration and excitement of the experience from back then. In time I started looking for and downloading teen pictures. Some of the sites that I found (and they were all free sites, I never paid for, or encouraged others through pay to take such pictures) would have a quick download button that would download 100 assorted pictures at one click. Later I would go back through these pictures, and eliminate the ones (younger kids) which I had no desire to look at – yes, its a fact, deleting things from your computer does not remove them from your harddrive, and I was charged with possession of those younger pictures.
During my year of pretrial and sentencing period – I was free on bond, and had no negative instances. During that time, I voluntairaly went to phychiatric counceling, at my own expense, and for my own benefit. I learned how I had fallen to so low a point, I came to realize how I had associated the teen pictures with my first love, and with happier times within my life. I also learned about a term called disasociation – which I was told explained how I was not “seeing” the child within the picture who these things were happening to, but was only seeing an “image”. I came to understand and accept how I was viewing others who had been abused or taken advantage of. I regret what I fell to, and what I did – but I also know that I never personally hurt anyone other than myself (and in so doing, my family). My psychiatrist, and additionally and independant forensic phychologist both stated in reports to the court that I was not a threat to any person in the public.
I was very fortunate in my sentencing for my crime. My federal judge took into account my charector, my community involvement, my dedication to helping others, and my non violent ways. She stated in my sentencing hearing ” Mr. XXXXX you are an increadible human being who has done much good in his life. You have made a horrible mistake, which has not only been a personal downfall, but has in fact been a very public fall from grace to you, your family, and your community. You have done much good in your past, and I am certain that you will eventualy return to doing good again upon your return to society.”
I was released from federal prison a few months ago, and am currently serving a period of probation. I am trying to put my life back together, and again return to doing good. I know that it will be a difficult journey with numerous hurdles, and I accept that I have done this to myself. I am banned from returning to my prior line of work withing criminal justice (which is a shame, as my crime was not involved in or at my work, and I was repeatedly commended for my service in my field). I also eventualy wish to return to the volunteer fire service – to serve others, and to help. However, in this area too I feel there will be those who will reject me ( I do know that the people currently in charge at the department I had belonged to (and of which I had progressed to eventualy serving as chief of) have stricken my name from all records, and will not allow me to return to serving within that department).
On the topic of the Adam Walsh act, and how it is affecting me. I live in NJ, and the state has not enacted this act at this time. One of my first questions to my probation officer upon my release was about registering, and how and where I would need to go to do such. He told me that do to my offense being of the lowest degree, I would not have to register (although he did tell me that if the walsh act is accepted by the state, that would change). In my probation officers last visit with me (he visits monthly or more – and without notice) he informed me that an investigator with the prosecutors office wanted to know why I had not yet registered (despite being home 5 months). He told the investigator that the prosecutors office has my file, and is reviewing my case to determine if I must register – the investigator told the probation officer that he would not press charges against me at this time for not having registered ( Hello…. press charges.. I have not registered because my officer in charge has said not to – even local law enforcement cant seem to keep straight what the rules are within the ever changing regulations, and ever increasing punishments). I may yet have to register, my probation officer continues to tell me I do not need to, and that he will keep me advised. Meanwhile, I am very limited in the work I am allowed to do – and further limited by employers not wishing to hire anyone in any way associated with this nature of crime.
The attitude of lumping all sexual offenders together is wrong. The justice system is supposed to look at the nature of the case, and the nature of the individual – however, continuing legislation is tying the hands of the judges, and labeling any type of sexual offender as a monster. Here is a simple fact – many people view adult pornography online – if you view it enough – you will eventualy hit a button that will take you to something you do now wish to see, and which may be illegal for you to view. I had this exact conversation with an officer at the prison I was incarcerated at, he knew my background from the files, and was curious how I could have fallen so far. When I stated the above, about looking at porn and the eventuality of coming accross something you didnt want – he did not verbally give a reply, but I noted the (probably unconcious) movement of his head in the up & down affirmative – that was enough to tell me he had probably had it happen – and hopefully our discussion caused him to reevaluate his own online explorations.
Oh, one other point to note – during my time of incarceration, I specifically asked for continued counceling from the staff psychologist. I was informed that they did not offer such services – and the only times I saw the psychologist was once every three months (scheduled during a one hour period – along with up to 30 other inmates for the same hour) for him to ask me if I was thinking of killing myself. I was told that if I wanted to go to a prison that specialized in sexual offenders, I could request such, but was also told that I would be moved from the low security facility that I was at (with dorm style living within a fenced in compound, and some freedoms) to a medium security facility with jail cells, and much strickter rules and living conditions (why would I want to do that to myself, prison was rough enough where I was).
For those who dont believe that good people can fall into this horrible act, or that those who do such, can never change – I am sorry for your limited vision – for I know in your eyes, I will always be a monster. Regardless, if you lived in my neighborhood, and your house was on fire – I would run in and attempt to save you from harm. I will continue to strive to do good, and to redeem myself from my one fall. I can only hope that society will allow me the opportunity to once again do good.
Comment by Rich — February 2, 2011 @ 1:13 pm
Simply put, Megans law doesnt work, so we should stop spending millions and millions of dollars on it. The independent study proves beyond any reasonalbe doubt, it simply doesnt work.
Real predators (not people who look at porn) need to be put in jail and not let out for 30 years and rehab mandatory. Stop wasting the taxpayers money putting people in jail for porn or the BS that was TV like “catch a predator” it was all show, and not pursuant to real life,,, NO SEX, no sex charges !
Comment by Chuck — February 5, 2011 @ 7:03 pm
The law also punishes juveniles 14 year old and up for accessing child porn online; they’re labeled as ’sick’ sex offenders and placed on strict supervised probation for a MINIMUM of 3 years (Nevada). They are not allowed in parks, bowling alleys, or anywhere children congregate (unless accompanied by an adult who is aware of their alledged crime). No computer use or internet access (cell phones, Xbox, Ps3 – all internet accessible). The list goes on and on. This is utterly ridiculous. What happened to 2nd chances? If the youth has a serious sex addiction, he/she will screw up again; that’s when harsher measures need to be enforced. Our government – The supreme courts allow file sharing networks to continue operating online knowing that these sites are high traffic areas for child porn.
Schools warn students/ parents about the dangers of cyber-bullying, but I have yet to see a safety letter regarding internet porn. As a 14 or 15 year old, I would not think I was committing a crime by viewing boys/girls my own age. Isn’t this an adult crime?
These young teens don’t think about consequences. Puberty and curiosity play a huge role for these kids. And wouldn’t a child think that since the material is so easily accessible online, that it MUST be ok to view? After all, with all the ‘great’ technology we have today, why would all this crap be available for viewing if it’s so wrong.
Everywhere you look – sex, sex, sex. Adult book stores, strip joints, billboards of half naked women, tv shows – including teen shows like “Degrassi High” that depict sex as being widely accepted and ok….only sends a mixed message to our youths.
How quickly we forget our own youth – looking at those dirty magazines dad or grandpa had stashed under the bed. curiosity – puberty – human nature.
I guess we’re all a bunch of sex offenders.
Comment by Ellen — February 11, 2011 @ 3:53 am
This is a reply to Rich:
As I mentioned in my earlier posting I have served ten years defered adjudication for a state charge of nine images of child porn.
You state that your P.O. says you don’t need to register as a sex offender but that other law enforcement is saying you have to. You need to get a lawyer and make sure you know if you need to register or not. P.O.s come and go. I personally had six in ten years. Two were great with both my best interest and the communities best interest at heart. Two were there earning paychecks and as long as I didn’t cause any problems there were no problems. One did all see could to push the buttons to get me to crack and the other is now experiencing the criminal justice from the opposite side of the fence. What one officer says or allows is old news when you get a new officer. If you need to register REGISTER!!!! I’m sure you will be much more comfortable on the registry than back in prison. Get good legal advice.
I know every case is different but I’ve never met a person charged with child porn who was allowed internet access while on probation and parole so seeing your posting on this site sends up all kinds of red flags.
I’m not accusing you of doing anything wrong but if you are, STOP IT!!!
First of all you will be discovered and you will be revoked and you will catch additional charges and you will serve more time in prison.
Secondly if this happens while it would not technically be “reoffending”
and not alter recidivism rates but the press and the public refuse to let facts like that get in the way. You will become proof that even nonviolent Sex Offenders have no control over their impulses and fuel to stricter offender legilation. The new ats 5:00pm will say “Sex Offender returns to prison for failing to follow sex laws.” You’ll be making things harder for everyone trying to get Sex Offender restrictions rethought by both the public and lawmakers.
I hope you are doing your best to finish your time with the limited freedom probation allows. I again am not accusing you of anything but you must understand the weight that even the apperance of missbevvavior carries.
God Bless You and I truly wish you success.
RSO
Comment by RSO — March 7, 2011 @ 3:57 pm
Hay John My Name Is Jerimy Press an I’m lock up for a sex crime in james burg nj and it’s not only hard to think that i’m going to be on megens law when i go home but now adam walsh act it’s stress full and to know about some of the things that are going to happen to us is just to much stuff on my mind and not to hlep my mom in an out the hospital getting treated for best cancer not saying that the law is not far just some of the thing in it is not far because i commeted when i was 13 when i get out i should have all this on my shoulders i wish i can talk more but im in school so if you get a chance please write me at Jerimy Press #65386 1 state home rd N.J.T.S monroe twp P.O. box 500 08331
Respectfully Jerimy Press
Comment by Jerimy Press — March 31, 2011 @ 9:06 am
My family is going to be destroyed by this unfair law. I have to pay, having done nothing, because I married a convicted sex offender, which is by the way innocent, and I stand to be deported because an American woman, Mrs. Walsh, did not care about her child while shopping. My husband has done nothing to any child, me or my son, but USCIS officers know better than me, and want to save me from my husband, destroying my family and deporting me back to my country. And this is supposed to be “a nation under God”? What a sad, horrible joke!
Comment by GG — April 25, 2011 @ 11:28 pm
GG… I am in the same situation….
Comment by sad — April 30, 2011 @ 8:44 am
Could you tell me something about your case?
Comment by sad — April 30, 2011 @ 8:47 am
Hi, my brother was arrested over 10 years ago (1998) in TX for statutory rape. He was 17 at the time, and the girl was 16. It was consented sex and they were a year apart but the girls mother was upset about the situation and pressed charges on him. Even though they were both minors he was still charged for statutory rape. He was never convicted of such crime but received 10 years probation and ended up on the Sex Offender registry. He completed his 10 years, and is nearly 30 today. Because of the conditions of the probation to be on the registry he has never been able to put it behind him or better his life. Even though he was never convicted of anything, he still cannot get a good job, can’t get custody of his oldest son, and has been kicked out of apartments and his family has been scrutinized for this “crime”. I would never be against protecting victims from predators but he made a mistake, and is not a danger to society. He did nothing different than a lot of 16 and 17 year olds. The girl has tried to fix things till this day, but her mother is humiliated by this fact and still is determined to keep him on there. I thought that he was protected by the consent law, just as much as the girl was because he was also a minor. After his 10 years of probation were completed, and all of his charges dismissed, the judge decided he needed to remain on the registry for the rest of his life, to me this is excessive on this particular case. How did this happen to him, if anyone can give me some advice.
Comment by Rebeca S. — May 4, 2011 @ 6:26 pm
Nice post. I study something on completely different blogs everyday. It should always be stimulating to read content from other writers and observe just a little something from their blog.
Comment by lace shower curtain — August 8, 2011 @ 4:54 pm
This really answered my problem, thank you!
Comment by public speaking training — August 8, 2011 @ 4:56 pm
Youre so cool! I dont suppose Ive read anything like this before. So nice to locate somebody with some original thoughts on this topic. realy thank you for starting this up. this website is something that is needed on the web, someone with just a little originality. valuable job for bringing something new towards the internet!
Comment by Myriam Colapinto — October 10, 2011 @ 5:47 am
Following research a couple of with the weblog posts in your website now, and I truly like your method of blogging. I bookmarked it to my bookmark website record and will probably be checking back soon. Pls look at my site as effectively and let me know what you believe.
Comment by gamis — October 10, 2011 @ 11:17 am
Along with every little thing that appears to be developing throughout this specific subject matter, many of your points of view happen to be fairly stimulating. Even so, I appologize, but I can not give credence to your entire plan, all be it stimulating none the less. It looks to me that your opinions are not totally validated and in reality you are yourself not even fully confident of the point. In any event I did enjoy reading through it.
Comment by Tucson Shuttle — October 11, 2011 @ 11:16 pm
You’ll find it next to impossible to find prepared folks on this topic , but you appear to know what youre talking about ! Thanks a lot.
Comment by YLOD — October 13, 2011 @ 4:27 pm
happy every day
Comment by najtańszy kredyt konsolidacyjny — October 28, 2011 @ 8:21 am
Excellent website. Plenty of helpful info here. I am sending it to a few buddies ans also sharing in delicious. And certainly, thank you to your effort!
Comment by Second Hand Wedding Dresses — November 4, 2011 @ 10:04 pm
A few things i have observed in terms of personal computer memory is the fact that there are specs such as SDRAM, DDR and so forth, that must match the requirements of the mother board. If the personal computer’s motherboard is pretty current and there are no os issues, upgrading the ram literally takes under one hour. It’s among the easiest laptop upgrade types of procedures one can visualize. Thanks for discussing your ideas.
Comment by Sharilyn Franzone — November 21, 2011 @ 9:02 pm
For anybody who is interested in enviromentally friendly items, may possibly possibly surprise for you the crooks to maintain in mind that and earn under a holder simply because kind dissolved acquire various liters to essential oil to make. everyday deal livingsocial discount baltimore washington
Comment by Shela Galdamez — January 8, 2012 @ 12:10 am
Wow — so much to do. Thanks!
Comment by writing services — January 11, 2012 @ 7:39 am
Simply wish to say your article is as amazing. The clarity in your submit is just excellent and i can think you are an expert in this subject. Well with your permission allow me to seize your feed to keep up to date with impending post. Thank you one million and please keep up the rewarding work.
Comment by sat navs — February 18, 2012 @ 5:15 pm