NFL Coach’s Son in Underage Sex Case

Greenbaypressgazette.com : Green Bay Packers offensive coordinator’s son in underage sex case.

As more and more people are caught up in these sex offender laws, many will eventually be the children of public figures, elected officials and prominent citizens. It can happen to anyone’s family member!

Michael Philbin, son of Green Bay Packers offensive coordinator Joe Philbin, pleaded no contest to two misdemeanor counts of sexual intercourse with a child and two misdemeanor counts of battery for the incident. He was sentenced today to six months in jail and 2 ½ years of probation for having sex with two drunken 16-year-old girls at an Aug. 21 house party. State Assistant Attorney General Dennis Krueger said he opted for misdemeanors over more serious felonies after reviewing the evidence gathered during a six-month investigation.

Brown County Circuit Court Judge Sue Bischel, in accepting a joint sentencing recommendation, said by all accounts Philbin was a good person who made a horrible decision. Reading from a pre-sentence report, Bischel said Philbin acknowledged that he took advantage of the girls knowing they had too much to drink.

Bischel also ruled Philbin did not have to register as a sex offender and could petition to have the misdemeanor convictions removed from his record if he completes probation.(WHY NOT?)

Should Sex Offenders’ Homes be Restricted?

Pennlive.com : Should Sex Offenders’ Homes be Restricted?

Bryan Conrad, 35, works three jobs and has a girlfriend. He lives in Lemoyne. “I’m here,” he said. “I’m settled.”
But he lives closer than 300 feet from Lemoyne Middle School, a problem for Conrad. He’s a registered sex offender.

He’s in violation of an ordinance passed by the Lemoyne Borough Council in 2007. The ordinance prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 500 feet of places such as day care centers, parks and schools. Conrad has been living in Lemoyne since October, his house cater-corner from the middle school on a stretch of Market Street.

Conrad is an example of a growing dispute in Pennsylvania. More towns are passing ordinances restricting sex offenders from living near schools and parks, and some towns are being sued over the laws.

As he shoved his hands in the pockets of his sweatshirt, Conrad said he didn’t know about the ordinance when he moved in. “Why would I take the chance?” he said. The violation was discovered by a resident. The resident has a son who walks to Lemoyne Middle School each day and said he wanted to remain anonymous to protect himself and his family from any possible retaliation. (anonymous? Perhaps this resident should be posted on an online registry)

Once every couple of months, the resident checks the state’s Megan’s Law list, a Web site that shows the photos and addresses of registered sex offenders, he said. Megan’s Law seeks to protect the public, especially children, from sex offenders by listing their locations and alerting communities to sex offenders in their neighborhoods, according to the Web site.

He brought his concerns to the West Shore Regional Police Department on Wednesday. He stressed that he did not intend to harass Conrad. He just wants to protect his children.

“It was five minutes of stupidity, and I walked away. But it was too late,” Conrad said last week.
“Is it ever going to be in the past?” he asked.

Even officials and concerned parents are conflicted about these ordinances.

“That’s really a double-edged sword,” said Lt. Douglas Grimes, the commander of the state police Megan’s Law unit. “There are good things and bad things that come out of these residency restrictions.”
Of course, nobody wants a registered sex offender near a school, he said. But too much restriction can concentrate several sex offenders in one area, he said.

“It was a lapse in judgment,” Conrad said of his offense. “I pay for it every day, and here I’m going to pay for it again.”

11th Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenges to SORNA

sexcrimes.typepad.com : 11th Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenges to SORNA.
(interstate commerce challenge)

In United States v. Ambert , the 11th Circuit reviewed and rejected all of the major constitutional challenges to SORNA prosecutions under 2250(a). I had never heard of this case before, perhaps because the defendant was represented by a private attorney. Here is how the 11th Circuit addressed the Commerce Clause argument:

We have not had occasion to address this issue, although several district courts in this Circuit have done so. Most have found SORNA to be a proper regulation under Congress’ commerce power…. One district court, however, found that SORNA, 42 U.S.C. § 16913 and 18 U.S.C. § 2250, exceeded Congress’ commerce clause authority. United States v. Myers, 2008 WL 5156671 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 9, 2008) (unpublished)…. Section 2250 is a proper regulation falling under either of the first two Lopez categories because it regulates both the use of channels of interstate commerce and the instrumentalities of interstate commerce…. Plainly, § 2250 focuses on sex offenders, like the defendant, who travel in interstate commerce. In this focus, SORNA is analogous to a statute prohibiting church-based arson “in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce” upheld by this Court in Ballinger, and to the Mann Act prohibiting the transport of women “in interstate commerce” for an immoral purpose, upheld by the Supreme Court long ago in Caminetti v. United States, 242 U.S. 470, 491 (1917).

There are several things that are troublesome about the opinion. First, the 11th Circuit has had more than one opinion finding that 2250 cannot be supported under the Commerce Clause. In fact, there have been three such opinions, including United States v. Powers which is on the 11th Circuit calender for argument. Second, there is no mention of the USSC opinion in United States v. Morrison, despite the clear connection between the relevant statutes in terms of attempting to deter sexual violence. Third, the idea that punishing sex offenders for failing to register can be supported under the first Lopez category continues to boggle the mind. How are sex offenders “channels” of interstate commerce? Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, the facts of the Ambert case are especially egregious in terms of Commerce Clause justification. The alleged interstate travel by Ambert was a two day trip to California on July 9, 2007. In other words, his failure to register was in no way connected to his travel between states.

How could the 11th Circuit reached its conclusions with such important facts and errors present in the case and opinion? In defense of the court, the brief for Ambert spent less than two pages on the Commerce Clause argument (despite the 11th Circuit being a hotbed for district courts finding no basis for SORNA prosecutions under the Commerce Clause). In that limited section, there was no mention of the district court decision within the 11th Circuit in United States v. Powers which found no justification under the Commerce Clause months before the brief was filed. The result is, thus, especially disappointing because appeals from the cases where Commerce Clause arguments were won at the district court are now precluded from any chance of success at the 11th Circuit.

Photographer Prosecuted for Fairy ‘Child Porn’

Yorkshirepost.co.uk : Photographer prosecuted for fairy ‘child porn’.

A naive photographer employed by parents to take pictures of their young daughters to turn into images of fairies has been prosecuted because the photos fell under the definition of child porn. Under the legislation, the images of the two girls – aged 10 and 12 – were classed as level one child pornography, despite the fact their parents had asked for the pictures to be taken and were even present at photo shoots.

Sex Offender Residency Laws are Ineffective

Syracuse.com : Sex Offender Residency Laws are Ineffective.
By Michael Hungerford

A recent article about the court ruling holding that New York state law pre-empts local sex offender residency laws left out a number of very important points. First, the public safety rationale for the local laws is at best questionable. According to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, most sex assaults are committed by persons who have no prior sex offense convictions. Since only those who have been convicted are on the state sex offender registry, most who commit sex offenses are not subject to any residency restrictions.

Many if not most sex offenses are committed against adults, not children, who are often used as the main justification for these laws.

In addition, the federal Center for Sex Offender Management notes that the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults against minors are committed by family members, relatives, friends, baby-sitters or others known to the child or family. Again, no residency law will protect against assaults committed by those kinds of offenders, who often live in the very same household as the victim.

In Iowa, prosecutors are now calling for a repeal of a state residency restriction law. They criticize such laws because, among other things, “research shows that there is no correlation between residency restrictions and reducing sex offenses against children or improving the safety of children.” The Iowa prosecutors also note that “law enforcement has observed that the residency restriction is causing offenders to become homeless, to change residences without notifying authorities of their new locations, to register false addresses or to simply disappear.”

When offenders fail to maintain proper registration as a direct or indirect result of residency restrictions laws, such as those recently passed in Tully and previously enacted in Jordan, Cicero, Cayuga County and Auburn, no one is truly safer. Before spending the taxpayers’ time and money on ineffective measures such as these residency laws, our local elected officials should first educate themselves on the facts and not just react to undifferentiated, hysterical fear that does not in fact protect our children.

Sex Offenders Must Report Emails , Phones

DallasNews.com : Bill targeting online predators calls for Texas sex offenders to report e-mail addresses, numbers.

Austin – Registering as a sex offender has made it hard enough for Marc P. to have anything resembling a normal life.

The Dallas County man, who received deferred adjudication more than a decade ago for having sex with a 14-year-old when he was 18, has his address and photo on file for the world to see – not a selling point, he says, for potential employers, landlords or girlfriends.

Now, Texas lawmakers want Marc and other registered sex offenders to also report their e-mail addresses, cellphone numbers and online screen names to the state, and to give social networking sites permission to boot them offline.

Opponents say the legislation would add another layer of data to a state sex offender database that already contains too many inaccuracies. And it would make it even harder for sex offenders who have served their time to participate in modern society. To Marc, now 33, it’s simply a higher price than he should have to pay for a one-time mistake.

“What’s next, a chip in my brain? A scarlet letter?” asked Marc, who lives with his parents, is attending junior college and feels such a strong stigma against sex offenders that he asked that his last name not be used. “Are they going to look me up on dating Web sites? Check out my Facebook page? Now I’m going to be punished for being computer literate.”

Texas’ current registry requires sex offenders to report their address, birth date, height, weight and race to local authorities, and to keep an up-to-date photo on file. This information is available to the public on searchable Web sites.

The proposed bill would make it a state jail felony not to also register e-mail addresses, cellphone numbers and other online identifiers, such as screen names and social networking monikers, with the state.

Critics of the proposed expansion of the database also note that the registration system, which contains information on nearly 50,000 Texans, is already riddled with errors and omissions. A 2006 Dallas Morning News review of the registry found it was highly inaccurate: Roughly half of North Texas sex offenders could not be located, and one in six were living somewhere other than their registered addresses.

If the goal is safe communities, human-rights advocates say, convicted sex offenders are far less likely to commit new crimes if they can successfully re-enter the community. Finding safe housing and a good job often requires Internet access, social networking sites and e-mail accounts – all things sex offenders may shy from if they’re burdened with registration requirements.

“If we make it so that people just don’t want to have online identifiers, it’s going to make it even more difficult for them to conduct job searches, to respond to e-mail inquiries about housing,” said Sarah Tofte, a researcher with Human Rights Watch. “It will make it next to impossible for them to try to establish some stability in their lives.”

Sex Offender Bill Killed

MercuryNews.com : Sex Offender Bill Killed.

Carson City, Nev.—An Assembly panel voted Tuesday to kill a bill that would have changed lifetime supervision requirements imposed on convicted sex offenders, after critics said the changes would violate constitutional due process protections. Under AB36, convicted sex offenders who violated the terms of their lifetime supervision would face a state Parole Board hearing, rather than a court hearing.

Representatives of the Division of Parole and Probation said the bill was needed because the process of getting a court hearing often takes too long, and there are too few consequences on the books for violating lifetime supervision.

But David Smith, executive secretary of the state Parole Board which is separate from the division, opposed the bill, saying it would be more appropriate to conduct such hearings in a court.

“Due process is sometimes time-consuming,” said Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, chairman of the Assembly Corrections, Parole and Probation Committee. “It’s inconvenient sometimes, but it’s the system that we have and we just don’t cast it aside for expediency.”

The committee also heard AB38, a bill to ensure that civil rights aren’t automatically restored to convicted sex offenders who are sentenced to a lifetime of parole.

“Why on earth would the Division of Parole and Probation see as a priority disenfranchising people they supervise?” asked Lee Roland of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada. “When you’re talking about reducing someone’s right to vote, there needs to be compelling reasons to do so.” Roland pointed out that the bill’s broad definition of sex offenders could mean that people who urinate in public or steal pornographic images also could lose their civil rights.

Manendo moved to kill AB38, but the committee agreed instead to reconsider it at a later date.

The committee also heard testimony on AB35, which would make it tougher for a sex offender to get a judge to release the offender from lifetime supervision.

Jerod Updike, a convicted sex offender who at age 22 was charged with attempting to meet a 15 year old over the Internet, opposed the bill. “I understand trying to protect children, and I understand serious molesters and people who have had direct contact,” Updike, who is hearing-impaired, said through an interpreter. “But for my situation, where I was a young kid who made a poor choice over the Internet, I feel that lifetime supervision doesn’t connect to the crime that I committed.”

Kids Face Jail for Nude MySpace Photos

Newsday.com (AP) : NJ girl may dodge jail for nude MySpace photos.

A 14-year old New Jersey girl arrested for posting nude pictures of herself on MySpace.com may avoid jail and sex offender laws, according to a prosecutor handling the case. She was arrested this week and charged with child pornography and distribution of child pornography for allegedly posting nearly 30 explicit pictures on the social networking site.

The charges carry penalties of up to 17 years in jail, and those convicted of distribution of child pornography can be required to register as a sex offender.

Seth Kreimer, a constitutional law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, is working with the American Civil Liberties Union to stop a Pennsylvania prosecutor from charging three teenage girls who authorities say took racy cell-phone pictures that ended up on classmates’ cell phones.

Besides Pennsylvania and New Jersey, prosecutors in Connecticut, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin have also tried to put a stop to kids sending nude photos to one another over cell phones and e-mail by charging the teens with child pornography.

Group Wants Sex Offender Laws Changed

Kim’s 18-year old son spent two years in jail and is on the sex offender registry for life after a sexual relationship with a 14 year old girl. He is in a halfway house in Beaumont because he cannot live at home with his sister.

Susan’s 17-year old son was charged with attempted sexual assault of a 14-year old. He is on probation for 7 years and on the registry for 10 years. (Click image below for video)

Banned from Beaches, Pools, Parks

winknews.com (Florida) : New sex offender ordinance.

Fort Myers, Fla. – A new Lee County ordinance may place tougher restrictions on where sex offenders are allowed to go. In a 5-0 vote Tuesday night, Lee County Commissioners supported the ordinance which broadens the definition of “child safety zones.”

Those areas include beaches, playgrounds, public swimming pools, amusement parks like Sun Splash in Cape Coral and any location that could be considered a customary gathering place for children.

A draft of the ordinance is up for review at the state level. Lee County leaders say it could be approved within the next two weeks.

Watch video report here.

This is unbelievable; banishing citizens from beaches, swimming pools and amusement parks ! What nation is this !?