Legal Issues & Court Cases Affecting Sex Offenders & Truthful Recidivism

A Primer for Teenagers and Young Adults!
Three Must Read Articles
» 6-17-2004 : Age Inappropriate: A casual fling can earn a lifetime label as a sex offender! People say you make your own luck. That seems to apply to bad luck, too, and Curtis Franks has made more than his share. His mother, Jamie, believes that her son's losing streak began when his father left home, in 1990.

Curtis was ten at the time; he started doing drugs two years later. It was always low-level, but he didn't really outgrow it, either. By the time he left school, he'd been busted for theft and had even spent a few nights in jail for a motor-vehicle offense. But his big weakness was drugs. The habit kept him down.

The townhouse became a party pit. People were always around, playing video games, watching the tube. In late 2000, a new girl started hanging around the place. Curtis says he didn't know all that much about her, but she quickly became a regular. "She had short blond hair, nice body," he says. "She seemed like a nice girl." She lived nearby, and she'd stop by at all hours, sometimes well after midnight. ......

"She told me she lived on her own," Curtis remembers. "We'd just hang out. We were mostly with a bunch of people, listening to music. I was never really all that into her." In mid-February, however, one thing led to another, and the relationship changed. On the night of February 17, 2001, they had sex, downstairs in Curtis's room. Curtis says she even planned it, setting up the tryst close to Valentine's Day to make it seem more romantic. She brought over flowers, he recalls.

He says he began having doubts about the relationship almost immediately, though, and he called the girl the following weekend to break it off. "At first she seemed cool with it," he says. "Then she was all passive-aggressive, like, 'Whatever.' And then she got mad and hung up." At around 9 p.m. on the night of February 21, there was a knock on Curtis's door. Behind the knock were five cops who had an unpleasant surprise for him: The girl had claimed that Curtis raped her. But the bigger surprise was that she was only fourteen years old. ..... [can you guess the rest?] (ERIC DEXHEIMER)....much much more, a few pages, but worth the time to read, journalist has done a wonderful job....

People -v- Meyers

Did the Michigan court of appeals intend its decision in Michigan -v- Meyers, to include defendants who were involved in a negotiated plea bargin?

The court stated, "Meyers pleaded guilty of this charge without negotiating a plea agreement [plea bargin]." page 2.

That statement by the court is unnecessary in a case of a simple guilty plea. It begs the question, was the court, excluding cases where there was a "Plea Bargin?" The court then went on to its final decision, holding that Meyers did have to register.

A plea of guilty is not the same as negotiating a plea bargain (a contract, which is sacrosanct), whereby the defendant, the prosecutor and the judge must agree to the terms. In order to change that "Plea Bargin" another hearing must be held on that topic. SANTOBELLO v. NEW YORK, 404 U.S. 257 (1971)

Mr Dickerson is correct, there is something wrong when, a negotiated plea bargin (a contract) approved by the Judicial branch, can be retroactively set aside by, the Legislative or Executive branch of the government, without at least violating the Separations of Powers clause of the constitution.

Especially without a hearing where all parties are present, and the issue of all the terms of the plea bargin, are reviewed and agreed upon, and the new plea bargin read into the court record.

If such is permitted, many folks who have negotiated plea bargins throughout history, based upon statutes that may have changed with time, should fear for their liberty today.

»3-24-2004 Michigan: BRIAN DICKERSON: A plea deal thwarted, a life is ended! Ernest Hemingway wrote that every true story ends in death. This is a true story.

It begins two years ago with a troubled 14-year-old girl who documented her sexual exploits in a diary. She called herself a predator. But Oakland County Prosecutor David Gorcyca was more interested in her slightly older sex partners. He charged four of them with criminal sexual conduct, a felony.

In May 2002, when what became known as the Bloomfield Sex Diary case broke, I argued that Gorcyca had overreacted by bringing criminal charges for what amounted to consensual sex between promiscuous teenagers. I noted that, if convicted, the defendants would be listed on Michigan's sex-offender registry until they reached middle age.

After a public uproar, Gorcyca relented. Under a plea agreement blessed by two sentencing judges, all four defendants were permitted to plead guilty to a lesser charge of seduction. The prosecutor and defense attorneys agreed that none of the defendants would be imprisoned or listed on the sex-offender registry.

It should have ended there -- a fiasco averted, a case of overzealous prosecution brought to a sane resolution. But it didn't. Last month, more than a year after the charges against them were resolved, all four defendants were notified they'd be registered as sex offenders after all.

One of them, 20-year-old Justin Fawcett of West Bloomfield, was particularly devastated. On Feb. 27, three days after Fawcett's probation officer broke the news that he'd be publicly branded for the next 23 years, Fawcett's father e-mailed me to express his fear that Justin would kill himself.

Judges, probation officers and defense attorneys I spoke to this week attributed Justin Fawcett's legal dilemma to new marching orders from Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox's office, which recently advised the Department of Corrections to place defendants like Fawcett on Michigan's sex-offender registry whether or not the offense they've been convicted of is specifically mentioned in the registration statute.

Cox's spokesman, Matt Davis, says the attorney general's advisory was designed to bring the Department of Corrections in line with a recent Michigan Court of Appeals ruling. The ruling, in a 2002 case called Michigan v. Meyers, says defendants may be listed on the registry for any crime "that by its nature constitutes a sexual offense against an individual who is less than 18 years of age."

So if you're a state legislator, pay attention. Because you enacted this indiscriminate law, and it's way past time for you to fix it. If you're a prosecutor, take heed. Because the criminalization of teenage promiscuity is destroying young lives. And if you're a parent, wake up. Because if you think this couldn't happen to your teenager, you've missed the whole point of Justin Fawcett's story. (Brian Dickerson, Detroit Free Press)....more....

»3-22-04 Georgia: TOUGH CRIME LEGISLATION HAS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES! Marcus Dixon, 19, is unusual. He is black, but his (adoptive) parents are white. A star athlete in high school, he stands 6 foot 6 and weighs about 265 pounds. And with a 3.96 GPA, he scored 1,200-plus on the SAT. Any one of those factors would make him a standout; the combination is rare, indeed.

So it is no surprise that his 15-year prison sentence, which grew out of a prosecution for rape, has drawn national attention. Because of the charges, he was thrown out of high school just before he was expected to graduate. His football scholarship to Vanderbilt University, which prides itself on attracting scholar-athletes, was rescinded. His future, once so promising, has soured.

The story of his grossly unfair sentence is as unusual as everything else in his life. It is a story of unintended consequences, of a public sick of violent predators, of a Democratic governor up for re-election who was determined that no Republican competitor would portray him as "soft on crime." In 1994, Gov. Zell Miller proposed a tough "two strikes" law that required mandatory sentences for seven violent felonies. To most Georgians (including me), the law seemed a good idea. The state's prison system was releasing violent felons after most served little more than half their sentences.

Unlike the "three strikes" laws in some states, Miller's "two strikes" proposal was supposed to ensnare only the worst offenders. It requires 10 years, without parole, for any felon convicted of any of seven violent crimes, and it mandates life in prison without parole for a second offense. So voters overwhelmingly endorsed Miller's proposal, writing his "two strikes" legislation into the state constitution. Experts warned at the time that the law could easily backfire. "... A lot of decisions are made on emotion," James T. Morris, then chairman of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole, said at the time. "If we aren't careful, decisions we make in 1994 ... might have a far-reaching impact on things people might not see today."

The Georgia Legislature ought to reconsider the "two strikes" laws, but it is unlikely to do so. Even in an era of falling crime rates, politicians are reluctant to do anything -- no matter how reasonable -- that might suggest leniency toward criminals. But there is hope that Dixon's harsh sentence will be overturned by the Georgia Supreme Court. If Dixon didn't commit rape -- and a Floyd County jury says he didn't -- he has no business spending any more time behind bars. (Cynthia Tucker)....more....

A Primer for Parents, Teenagers and Young Adults!
When Criminal Justice Personnel (includes police) wish to speak to children, juveniles, or young adults, the wisest course of action is to seek advise of a lawyer beforehand:
» US Supreme Court: RE: Juveniles who have been asked by the police to come in to discuss what happened (being a possible crime or whatever)? Juvenile cannot rely upon the absence of Miranda Warnings, whatever is said is admissible or in this case a confession.

Respondent Alvarado helped Paul Soto try to steal a truck, leading to the death of the truck's owner. Alvarado was called in for an interview with Los Angeles detective Comstock. Alvarado was 17 years old at the time, and his parents brought him to the station and waited in the lobby during the interview.

Comstock took Alvarado to a small room where only the two of them were present. The interview lasted about two hours, and Alvarado was not given a warning under Miranda v. Arizona, 334 U. S. 436. Although he at first denied being present at the shooting, Alvarado slowly began to change his story, finally admitting that he had helped Soto try to steal the victim's truck and to hide the gun after the murder. Comstock twice asked Alvarado if he needed a break and, when the interview was over, returned him to his parents, who drove him home.

After California charged Alvarado with murder and attempted robbery, the trial court denied his motion to suppress his interview statements on Miranda grounds. In affirming Alvarado's conviction, the District Court of Appeal (hereinafter state court) ruled that a Miranda warning was not required because Alvarado had not been in custody during the interview under the test articulated in Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U. S. 99, 112, which requires a court to consider the circumstances surrounding the interrogation and then determine whether a reasonable person would have felt at liberty to leave.

The Federal District Court agreed with the state court on habeas review, but the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that the state court erred in failing to account for Alvarado's youth and inexperience when evaluating whether a reasonable person in his position would have felt free to leave the interview. Noting that this Court has considered a suspect's juvenile status in other criminal law contexts, see, e.g., Haley v. Ohio, 332 U. S. 596, 599, the Court of Appeals held that the state court's error warranted habeas relief under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) because it "resulted in a decision that ... involved an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by [this] Court," 28 U. S. C. §2254(d)(1).

Held: The state court considered the proper factors and reached a reasonable conclusion that Alvarado was not in custody for Miranda purposes during his police interview. Pp. 7-15. (US Supreme court: YARBOROUGH, WARDEN v. ALVARADO)....more....

A Primer for Criminal Justice & Mental Health Professionals!
The focus must be therapeutic for long term safety of society!
Child Sexual Abuse Within The Family: The American way of handling this is to break up the family and prosecute the offender, yet there is another way!

» 5-13-2004 Australia: Govt stands by child sex offender program! The Western Australian Government is standing by a taxpayer-funded agency that offers conditional confidentiality to child sex offenders. Opposition Justice spokeswoman Sue Walker wants the Perth-based agency SafeCare shut down, saying it undermines the criminal system.

The Western Australian Government is standing by a taxpayer-funded agency that offers conditional confidentiality to child sex offenders. "Perpetrators are saying that they would seek treatment services much earlier if they weren't necessarily faced with being dobbed into the police - SafeCare provides that sort of facility and service for perpetrators," she said. (ABC News Online)....more....

» Australia: SafeCare Inc.,! SafeCare Inc. is an independent, community-based organisation that provides treatment, counselling and support services to families where child sexual abuse is an issue..

This site provides information on SafeCare for clients, students, educators, referring organisations and the broader community. (SafeCare Inc.)....more....

» 5-13-2004 Australia: Don't do that, Daddy! WHY should anyone help a man who has sexually abused children in his family circle? Popular sentiment is that, once exposed, he should be evicted from suburbs, posted on pedophile websites and banished to a black hole.

But in a series of consulting rooms in Perth, adults and children with first-hand knowledge of child sex abuse meet under a different premise. The 10-year-old girl playing in a corner with her older sister knows precisely what her father did each bedtime, fondling her genitalia and encouraging her to stroke his penis. She knows why her father, Wayne, disappeared from the family for a year. He went to jail. Still, she, her sister and their mother do not want him to disappear from their lives.

The entire family – abuser, abused child and other family members – attend Safecare, a West Australian program with a unique way of tackling child sex abuse within families. It's also a highly controversial approach; although half the abusers who are Safecare clients are known to the authorities or have gone to jail, another half are not.

They have come to Safecare voluntarily, disclosed their abuse and received the promise of conditional confidentiality. If they immediately move out of home, undertake never to be alone with any child and attend Safecare's two-year program, their crime will not be reported to the authorities.

This is only possible in Western Australia, the only state in the country to have resisted the introduction of mandatory reporting of sex abuse. Safecare's supporters say it has offered a rare window of opportunity to explore new ways of treating intrafamilial sex abuse, of encouraging unknown offenders to come forward, and of working with entire families.

"The vast majority of child sexual offending occurs behind the closed doors of the family home," argues Safecare director Christabel Chamarette. "The demonisation of pedophiles – picturing them as strangers who stalk children in playgrounds (or) public toilets, or as the local priest systematically abusing young members of the congregation – fails to acknowledge the reality of child sexual offending." (Victoria Laurie)....more....

Risk Assessment for Family Court: Advantages & Disadvantages in using Community-Based FAMILY Intervention for Child Sexual Abuse Risk Assessments. (PDF file 6pgs) Christabel Chamarette MPsych. (Clin) MAPS Clinical Director, SafeCare Inc.

A Primer for Schools, School Administrators and Other School Employees & Volunteers!
8-19-2004 Washington
How much do you know about sex abuse in schools?
A coach runs away with his 15-year-old team member. A female teacher is arrested for having sex with a 14-year-old student. Whenever these inappropriate relationships make the news, parents start to worry about the safety of their children at school. Here's a quiz to see how much you know about the problem. True or false.

QUESTIONS: 1. The prevalence of sexual misconduct by employees at schools is highly exaggerated and not something a parent or child would normally have to be concerned about. ... .... ... 2-8 see article

ANSWERS: 1. FALSE. According to a report just given to Congress by the American Association of University Women, an estimated one in 10 kids faces misbehavior by school employees sometime between kindergarten and high-school graduation, ranging from inappropriate jokes to serious molestation. This could add up to more than 4 million students affected. ...... ...... 2-8 see article

DR. JOYCE BROTHERS, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST ..more..

Sexual Abuse Within Schools by Employees!

This new federal study seems to suggest, that legislators need to change their focus from "Sex Offender Residency Laws," designed to keep previously convicted sex offenders from living within xx+ feet of a school, to looking at "Better Controls Within The School Systems!"

The complete report is available below, be advised, the report is 150 pages and is a PDF file; it will take a long time to load.
"Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature, March 1, 2004"
by Charol Shakesshaft, Ph.D., Professor, Foundations, Leadership and Police Studies, Hofstra University and Managing Director, Interactive, Inc..

»3-15-04 US Schools: Sexual Abuse by Educators: Is Scrutinized! A draft report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education concludes that far too little is known about the prevalence of sexual misconduct by teachers or other school employees, but estimates that millions of children are being affected by it during their school-age years.

The scope of the problem appears to far exceed the priest abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church, said Charol Shakeshaft, the Hofstra University scholar who prepared the report. The best data available suggest that nearly 10 percent of American students are targets of unwanted sexual attention by public school employees—ranging from sexual comments to rape—at some point during their school-age years, Ms. Shakeshaft said. "So we think the Catholic Church has a problem?" she said.

To support her contention that many more youngsters have been sexually mistreated by school employees than by priests, Ms. Shakeshaft pointed to research conducted for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and released late last month. That study found that from 1950 to 2002, 10,667 people made allegations that priests or deacons had sexually abused them as minors. Extrapolating from data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000, Ms. Shakeshaft estimated that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a public school employee from 1991 to 2000 —a single decade, compared with the roughly five-decade period examined in the study of Catholic priests.

The Education Department contracted with Ms. Shakeshaft to examine what is known about the prevalence of sexual misconduct against students by school employees. The agency was responding to a provision in the No Child Left Behind Act. The little-noticed provision required a "study regarding the prevalence of sexual abuse in schools, including recommendations and legislative remedies for addressing the problem of sexual abuse in schools." The provision went on to set a completion date of "not later than 18 months" after the enactment of the law, which was signed by President Bush in January 2002.

She said that after she turned in a draft of the report last May, she received feedback from the department that led her to believe that the literature review was no longer intended to lay the groundwork for a future study. In a letter stating that the Education Department "has not made plans to conduct further work on a national study on sexual abuse in schools," Ms. Shakeshaft was asked to change the original subtitle of her report, which was "A Synthesis of Existing Literature in Connection With the Design of a National Analysis." Ms. Shakeshaft then retooled and expanded the report to include more information about what is known about the issue, and submitted another draft to the department last week. (Caroline Hendrie, Education Week)....more....

»11-1998 A Trust Betrayed: Sexual Abuse by Teachers! This three-part series on child sex abuse by school employees is the result of a six-month project by Education Week involving scores of interviews with state and local education and law-enforcement officials, other experts, teachers, principals, parents, and victims, as well as an extensive review of court documents, journal articles, and public- policy records. (A Special Report, Education Week 1998)....more....

News Articles Showing What Occurs in Society

COURT CASES with EMPHASIS ON JUVENILES: