News & Noteworthy ©
Featured Issue 9-24-05 |
|
Massachusetts Police Chose Which Rights To Defend, Ignoring Constitutional Rights!
|
|
9-23-2005 Massachusetts:
Registered sex offender leaves neighborhood after protests |
.SALEM - A registered sex offender who recently moved into an East Third Street neighborhood has decided to move back out after two days of public protests by neighbors, police said Wednesday. Lt. Don Beeson said the 62-year-old man, who is listed as a "sexually oriented offender," the lowest level of classification, was voluntarily leaving the neighborhood, following clashes with neighbors who were concerned they had not been notified a sex offender was living in their midst.
"He's fearing for his safety," Beeson said. Beeson said the man had not violated any laws related to registry requirements while living in the area. He said the man is required to register once a year with the county sheriff's department in the county where he lives. "There are no prohibitions on living in proximity to a school or a church or anything like that," Beeson said. "So everything he did was what he was supposed to do." Police were called to the neighborhood, where a group of residents were demonstrating, on three separate occasions Tuesday afternoon. Group members were advised of their rights to demonstrate, and their limitations were explained as well. A spokesman for the group said they would not exceed those limitations.
Officers reported finding the demonstrations to be peaceful each of the three times they were called to the area, and no violations were observed. "What they did appeared to be legal. The only thing is, when you're making accusations like that, you want to make sure you have the right person you're making accusations against," he said. In this case, he said they had the correct person. Beeson also said the man alleged one of the protesters shoved him and expressed concern that wounds healing from a surgical procedure may have been reinjured. Although such action could be considered an assault, Beeson said, the man chose not to file charges against his alleged attacker.
Beeson estimated Salem police are aware of at least a dozen registered sex offenders living in the city. The lieutenant also explained to the crowd that there has never been a case in Salem where a registered offender has committed additional sex crimes. "We've never had a case in Salem where one of the registered sex offenders was again involved in a crime of that nature," he said.
..more..
: by RYAN GILLIS Journal Staff Writer
|
.I guess the real problem is the police have no idea what the law says. Searching the Internet we came up with the following laws that the residents were breaking which the police apparently know nothing about.
Reportedly the police were called three times, which means they allowed the demonstration to continue every time and failed to stop the harassment, knowing full well the neighbors used the registry information (provided by the police) to demonstrate with.
At some point registered sex offenders (RSO) and their families need to assert these rights. After a few arrests of people residing in the neighborhood (nationwide) the public will get the idea and stop this harassment.
RSOs and their families need to lobby for a new registry, of those people in neighborhoods who violate harassment and stalking laws.
If RSOs never take a stance they will be on the run for the rest of their lives. This will put an end to these practices and make it safer for everyone involved.
Chapter 6: Section 178N Misuse of information; penalties:
Section 178N. Information contained in the sex offender registry shall not be used to commit a crime against a sex offender or to engage in illegal discrimination or harassment of an offender. Any person who uses information disclosed pursuant to the provisions of sections 178C to 178P, inclusive, for such purpose shall be punished by not more than two and one-half years in a house of correction or by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by both such fine and imprisonment.
CHAPTER 265. CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON: Chapter 265: Section 37 Violations of constitutional rights; punishment:
Section 37. No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate or interfere with, or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with, or oppress or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the constitution or laws of the commonwealth or by the constitution or laws of the United States. Any person convicted of violating this provision shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year or both; and if bodily injury results, shall be punished by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both.
CHAPTER 265. CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON: Chapter 265: Section 43 Stalking; punishment:
Section 43. (a) Whoever (1) willfully and maliciously engages in a knowing pattern of conduct or series of acts over a period of time directed at a specific person which seriously alarms or annoys that person and would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress, and (2) makes a threat with the intent to place the person in imminent fear of death or bodily injury, shall be guilty of the crime of stalking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than two and one-half years or both. Such conduct, acts or threats described in this paragraph shall include, but not be limited to, conduct, acts or threats conducted by mail or by use of a telephonic or telecommunication device including, but not limited to, electronic mail, internet communications and facsimile communications.
(b) Whoever commits the crime of stalking in violation of a temporary or permanent vacate, restraining, or no-contact order or judgment issued pursuant to sections eighteen, thirty-four B, or thirty-four C of chapter two hundred and eight; or section thirty-two of chapter two hundred and nine; or sections three, four, or five of chapter two hundred and nine A; or sections fifteen or twenty of chapter two hundred and nine C or a protection order issued by another jurisdiction; or a temporary restraining order or preliminary or permanent injunction issued by the superior court, shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or the state prison for not less than one year and not more than five years. No sentence imposed under the provisions of this subsection shall be less than a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of one year.
A prosecution commenced hereunder shall not be placed on file or continued without a finding, and the sentence imposed upon a person convicted of violating any provision of this subsection shall not be reduced to less than the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment as established herein, ...more... [SNIP]
RIGHTS OF ALL CITIZENS
Rights of a sex offender -and- his /her family are the same as everyone else in society. Accordingly, the only question is whether or under what set of circumstances, they chose to exercise them.
The police will always default to trying to maintain order and defend the masses, which is why it is up to sex offenders and their families to remind the police of their rights!
In order to do that, they must research what laws there are and under what circumstances they are applicable to sex offender circumstances. Above are a few examples.
|
|
