Are Florida Stings Entrapment?

Posted on June 30, 2014 in Articles, Featured Articles

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/are-florida-stings-entrapment/

Please read through the following Op-Ed piece submitted by Martin Dyckman to ContextFlorida and share your thoughts below.

Do you think Police engaging in contact with individuals in ADULT sex ads and then introducing them to the concept of sex with a minor is entrapment or do you think they are going after people who would otherwise be predators?

There are few things worse than a 24-year-old man seeking sex from a 13-year-old girl, or so it would seem.

They should lock him up and throw away the key, or so it would seem.
But sometimes, things aren’t what they seem.

This is about a young man we’ll call by his initials, JFD. His identity is a public record available to the curious, but I would rather not compound the misery and stigma he’ll bear the rest of his life.

He was sentenced to 18 months in prison and eight years of probation, which he’s on now. He’s also on the state’s sex offender registry for life.

The following facts are from a recent split decision of Florida’s First District Court of Appeal. 

It rebuffed Attorney General Pam Bondi, who sought a harsher sentence for JFD.
JFD was trolling on an adult website that boasts, “Find sex by contacting fellow…members and get laid tonight.”

He responded to an ad from a woman, 32, who said her “little sister” was in town and they were “looking for a friend to have fun with tonight.”

The little sister’s age wasn’t stated.

The contact led to a two-hour dialogue, on line and then on the telephone. At some point, JFD learned how old the “little sister” was.

The older woman told him that “the little sister was a youngster who wanted to learn new things…

“His conversations directly with the purported thirteen-year-old were limited to a few (maybe two) awkward minutes on the telephone, and to about twenty lines on ‘instant messenger,’” the court said.

JFD turned up at a Gainesville location where, as a wiser man might have suspected, the police were waiting for him.

The “big sister” was a Citrus County deputy. The voice purportedly of a 13-year old was that of an Alachua County deputy in her early 30s.

They were part of a week-long sting in early 2012 by Gainesville police and the Alachua sheriff’s department called “Operation Tail Feather.”

It bagged more than 20 men from 19 to 65 years old.

JFD was charged and convicted of three counts involving use of a computer and cell phone and traveling for unlawful sexual conduct with a child.

Assistant Public Defender Rachael J. Morris pleaded on JFD’s behalf that he was a victim of entrapment. Circuit Judge Mark W. Moseley wasn’t persuaded. Neither was the jury.

But Moseley did agree that the offense “was committed in an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse.” He ruled also that the “victim” had initiated the crime.

In such cases, the law allows a judge to impose less than the state guidelines minimum, which would have been three and a half years.

The state appealed that. JFD appealed also on the entrapment issue.

Each side won and lost, although JFD won less and lost more.

Writing for the district court, Judge Robert T. Benton II disagreed that the “victim” had initiated the crime, but he upheld the lighter sentence on the other two grounds.

On the most important issue, entrapment, Benton held that JFD said enough to convict him when he remarked that “actually, it’s kind of been on my mind to do something like that.”

A second judge concurred in the result–but not necessarily in Benton’s reasoning–and a third dissented in favor of sending JFD back to prison.

According to Morris, JFD was a student, accomplished in music and sports, when he went online for sex. All that is gone for him now.

We can suppose that at least some, if not most of the trophies in Operation Tail Feather, were serial pederasts who deserved to be caught and punished severely. Stings may be the only way to put a stop to them.

But in JFD’s case, there’s a tarnish on that trophy.

It would have been no crime to keep a sex date with a 32-year-old woman. It’s undisputed that the idea of a threesome involving a child came from her, after JFD had already taken her bait. The cop reeled him in like a starving trout. There was no evidence that he had ever done or attempted anything like that before.

In a famous 1928 dissent, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. once remarked, “…I think it a less evil than that some criminals should escape than that the Government should play an ignoble part.”

It was the government that made a criminal out of JFD. If that isn’t ignoble, what is?

Martin Dyckman is a retired associate editor of the St. Petersburg Times. He lives near Waynesville, North Carolina. Column courtesy of Context Florida.

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans. 

Florida Registrant Challenges Restriction on Access to His Own Child

Posted  on June 26, 2014 in Articles, Featured Articles 

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registrant-challenges-restriction-on-access-to-his-own-child/

The Supreme Court Press “Petition of the Month”_TM for June 2014 is Kyle E. McClamma v. Josepha Michele Remon, Supreme Court Dkt. No. TBD, an appeal coming out of the Eleventh Circuit. The petition was filed pro se by the petitioner Kyle E. McClamma, a resident of the Tampa, Florida Region.
Question Presented:

Whether a probation officer has the power to forbid a person from living in his own home, despite there being no residency restriction in the sentencing order. (paraphrasing three questions)

Supervised release conditions are often contained on a “check the box” form where a judge can tick off the conditions applicable to an offense. In a case of possession of child pornography, one check the box item is a restriction on contact with minors or frequenting a place where minors congregate. However, when such a check box item becomes artfully interpreted by a zealous probation officer, it can lead to absurd consequences as it did for petitioner Kyle McClamma. McClamma, a first time offender convicted of a single count of possession of child pornography, was deemed by the sentencing judge to be a low risk to the community and given a downward departure in sentencing. When he returned home from incarceration, his creative probation officer informed him that, since he had a newborn child at home, could not be at that home since it contained a minor (his child). She demanded he evict himself from his home and not see his baby without a supervising adult present. Nowhere in the sentencing order was mention made of a ban on contact with his baby or that he could not live in his own house. Predictable mayhem ensued – lack of stable housing, financial woes, and divorce – hardly the stated goals of supervised release. McClamma filed a 2255 petition to challenge these conditions, which stand in conflict to the majority of circuits that have found a ban on familial contact to be an unconstitutional infringement upon the home. This petition has stagnated for 2.5 years without action by the court. McClamma also filed a Bivens action, the subject of this petition, claiming damages for his forced homelessnes and other damages. The lower court stood by the probation officer and granted her conditional immunity. The petition McClamma v. Remon, Supreme Court Dkt. TBD, takes on this issue, asking the fundamental question – who is in charge of sentencing – judges or probation officers?

My wife and I were stunned at the probation officer’s enforcement of a boilerplate condition that prohibited contact with anyone under 18 without written approval to include our daughter.  [w]hile awaiting sentencing, the district court made it clear, at the government’s request, that my child would be excluded from any contact restrictions it enforced.                                                                                                                                         - Kyle McClamma

	Kyle –Thank you for sitting down with us and discussing your Supreme Court filing.Let’s get the tough part of the conversation out of the way first. You were convicted in federal court of a single count of possession of child pornography – but that’s it. Essentially the lowest grade offense in this category and you received a downward departure from the judge, who deemed you to be a low risk, correct?
	I was sentenced to 36 months in federal prison, a downward departure of 17 months, followed by a life term of supervised release.  The district judge commented that he had never sentenced anyone lower for this charge.  In his words, the decision for the downward departure was because I had no previous criminal record, had never produced or distributed the prohibited images, and enjoyed community and family support.  Additionally, evaluations and risk assessments were conducted by 4 mental health providers and sex addiction specialists which concluded that I displayed a long standing addictive behavior to pornography.  All determined that I was low risk to re-offend or to commit a contact offense. I make no excuses for the legal boundaries that I crossed or the damage I have caused through my participation as a possessor of illegal internet pornography.  I have never denied what I have done and I have fully cooperated with the authorities.
	As you were preparing for re-entry, a very unpleasant surprise was waiting for you. The probation officer unilaterally decided that you should have no unsupervised interaction with your own child. How did the probation officer justify this?
	My wife and I were stunned at the probation officer’s enforcement of a boilerplate condition that prohibited contact with anyone under 18 without written approval to include our daughter.  First, while awaiting sentencing, the district court made it clear, at the government’s request, that my child would be excluded from any contact restrictions it enforced.  Second, the probation officer conducting the pre-sentence report did not recommend any contact restrictions.  Lastly, the district judge at sentencing made no mention of contact restrictions with minors, especially one that would include my child. I actually had no idea that the judge included this restriction in his written order nearly 10 days after the sentencing.  I was whisked away to prison and did not see the order until my release 31 months later.  The probation officer offered no explanation as to why she chose to verbally enforce this condition the way she did; only permitting contact with my daughter provided that my wife was present.  Throughout the Bivens litigation process, the probation officer has maintained that she was interpreting and executing the district court’s directive which she asserts was left to her discretion.
	Are probation officers allowed to do that? To prevent you from spending time with your own flesh and blood without a court order?
	While the right to maintain an unfettered relationship with one’s child is not guaranteed, the vast majority of the circuit courts hold the lower court to an extremely high threshold of inquiry before subjecting the defendant to any condition requiring supervision with their own children.  It is clear and evident in my case that the district court did not provide notice that a contact restriction would even be imposed or conduct any kind of inquiry as to whether my daughter should be included in that restriction.   Even in cases where the defendant has committed a contact offense, unless their own child was involved, the majority of circuit courts have reversed the lower court’s inclusion of the defendant’s children in a boilerplate no-contact-with-minors restriction.
	Editor’s Note: See United States v. Myers, 426 F.3d 117 (2nd Cir. 2005), United States v. Wolf Child, 699 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2012), United States v. Doyle, No. 12-5516, decided April 3, 2013 (6th Cir.), United States v. Perazza-Mercado, 553 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2009),   United States v. Voelker, 489 F.3d 139 (3rd Cir. 2007),  United States v. Smith, 606 F.3d 1270 (10th Cir. 2010), United States v. Malenya, No. 12-3069 decided on December 3, 2013 (D.C. Circuit).
	Interestingly, the circuit case most analogous to mine was decided one day before I was sentenced in 2006.  United States v. Davis, 452 F.3d 991 (8th Cir. 2006).  Davis was convicted of possessing child pornography without having any history of inappropriate conduct with a minor.  On plain error review, the Davis court concluded that his daughter be excluded from any condition restricting contact with minors as the condition was not reasonably related to his offense. “We believe that not to correct the error at hand would undermine the fairness and integrity of our judicial proceedings.”   “The public expects the courts to exercise that discretion, not to impose a special condition as a matter of course.” Id at 995.

The real shock of the probation officer’s enforcement of the boilerplate condition was that she prohibited me from residing in my own home with my wife and daughter.                                                                                                                                               - Kyle McClamma

	But there were more surprises in store, correct?
	The real shock of the probation officer’s enforcement of the boilerplate condition was that she prohibited me from residing in my own home with my wife and daughter.  I was forced to secure alternative housing arrangements which exhausted valuable funds that were already limited from my time in prison.  The frustration from not being able to fulfill my role as a father and husband took its toll on the marriage, and with no end in sight, my wife filed for divorce six months later.
	And thus you filed the Bivens claim?
	Initially, I had no idea or reason to believe that what the probation officer was doing was wrong.  I simply thought that this was a part of my sentence that I foolishly overlooked, or that it was some kind of protocol required by the court.  After all, I have no legal background, and when you are released from prison, the last thing you want to do is ruffle the feathers of your probation officer by challenging their authority. But as time passed and I became embroiled in a costly divorce and spoke with various attorneys, I realized that the probation officer had violated my constitutional due process rights to property (my home), and familial association (my wife and daughter) by verbally enforcing a residency restriction not imposed by the sentencing court. After a few failed attempts to interest law firms in taking my Bivens claim on a pro bono basis, I decided to file the claim pro se as the four year filing limit was rapidly approaching.  Through limited research capabilities due to my restrictions, I found case law involving qualified immunity defenses and discretionary actions performed by federal officers.  Put quite simply, case law, statutory law, and probationary policy does not authorize her verbal directive to enforce a condition not imposed by the court.  Therefore, her actions cannot be permitted as a discretionary function.  A finding to the contrary exposes the court to an improper delegation of judicial power in violation of Article III of the constitution.    However, the district court dismissed the Bivens claim by granting her qualified immunity on grounds that she was performing a job-related goal and that her actions were authorized.  The circuit court affirmed the district court’s order.
	It seems like they are doing everything in the power to make absolutely sure that you are completely unable to return to civil society. They don’t want to live in your house, be with your family, or communicate with the outside world. How have you survived so long after your release?
	While I had the support of my parents, church members, and surrounding neighbors, this counselor really helped me to remain focused throughout the divorce.  He also helped me navigate through the probation officer’s strict enforcement of my supervised release conditions. Finding employment was nothing short of a miracle.  I had worked in television broadcasting for 15 years, but was pretty much blacklisted after my conviction.  I took a correspondence course in medical coding when I was in prison, and 10 months after my release I passed the professional coding certification exam.  I had applied for numerous jobs, but with my criminal record, supervised release conditions, high unemployment, and an unsupportive probation officer, no one was interested.  I had even scored high enough on the 2010 census bureau exam to be considered for hire by an agency that touts itself as an equal opportunity employer, but my conviction promptly ended that effort.  Finally, in April 2010, I landed an interview with a medical billing company owned by two women.  The interview became really emotional as I laid out my criminal past and restrictions, but they hired me. Even then, there were obstacles that remained.  My probation officer had a negative and discouraging conversation with my employer in an attempt to persuade them to reconsider their offer because this position required the probation office to grant permission for me to use a computer with internet access.  Four years later, it still remains a sore topic with probation, but those ladies have provided me a safe sanctuary of stable employment to which I am very grateful. A year after my divorce, I began dating a woman in the church and two years later, we were married.  Last January, we discovered that we were expecting our first child.  My wife is an incredible woman who supports my legal efforts and believes in me.  She is a determined wife and soon-to-be mother who refuses to allow our family to be disrupted by the inappropriate and unnecessary actions of the court and its probation officers.
	You had mentioned your family’s advocacy on your behalf. Describe the organization they started and what it is trying to accomplish.
	Upon my arrest in 2005, my family began immediately to research the area of child pornography and related legal implications.  While we shared in the regret of my actions, we were also in response mode as best we could be!  The first eye opener was a book written by Pamela Paul title Pornified: How Pornography is Transforming Our Lives, Our relationships, and Our Families.  While my family was not necessarily prudish about pornography in general, the fact that it had led me to the point of being arrested for illegal viewing was shattering.  There were several  research articles found,  and eventually, even while I was awaiting sentencing, through research and study, they began seeking organizations that were involved in the sex offender ‘world’.  The first organization was the national Reform Sex Offender Laws (RSOL) http://nationalrsol.org/  and a state affiliate that has come to be known as the Florida Action Committee. http://floridaactioncommittee.org/ When the RSOL national conferences began in 2009, my mother attended in Boston, going alone not knowing what to expect. This is where she began to meet others who had a loved one caught up in the sex offender’ industry’.  She has attended each annual conference since that time, often facilitating and/or presenting at breakout sessions and serving on the organizing committees. She also became an affiliate member of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) http://www.atsa.com/  after coming across several articles written by members of the group.  (Incidentally she hates that organization’s title and sat in on a committee report at one of their national conferences where a name change was being discussed. To this date no change has been made but there is hope for a future change.) The organization’s membership includes top level national and international professional researchers, as well as treatment providers, some of whom fill dual roles as both researcher and treatment providers. The current  research reveals that there is little connection between possession of CP and hands on offending which is impetus for working to inform law makers to make some changes.  This is no way intended to minimize or disregard the seriousness of child pornography but given that public safety is given as the ultimate reason for sentences and subsequent probationary situations, this is significant and needs to become a considerate factor in the sentences and conditions required.   This year will be the 4th National ATSA conference my mom has attended! Through RSOL involvement, my mom became acquainted with several who had family members, typically sons or husbands, who were charged with what the US Sentencing Commission terms as simple possession, which indicates a low risk and non-production or distribution charge.  So it came as no surprise when we found an article in Feb. 2011 with the headline Prosecution of child Porn Soaring in which the FBI stated “No other crime is growing at the 2500 percent rate.” Out of a common need, the organization known as Cautionclick National Campaign for Reform (CCNCR) was formed.  My mom serves on the board as an advisory member.

When we reviewed the legal writing in the final draft of your petition, we were blown away. It was equal to the quality of a good appellate lawyer. But you didn’t start that way. Tell our readers about your journey from novice (dating back to your handwritten motion) to where you are today?

One month before my ex-wife filed for divorce, I struggled with the dilemma of taking legal action against my probation officer as I did not want to appear confrontational or uncooperative.  Additionally, my financial resources were very limited due to my incarceration and unemployment.  So, out of desperation, I carefully constructed a two-paged handwritten letter personally directed to my sentencing judge.   On a Sunday in October 2009, I drove 120 miles to the Ocala Federal Courthouse, said a quick prayer, and slid the letter through the locked lobby doors.  Four weeks later, I received a call from my defense attorney stating that my letter had been placed on the docket and construed as a motion for clarification of terms of supervised release.  Shortly thereafter, I became embroiled in divorce proceedings. Since my family law attorney had to carefully navigate my criminal charges and sentencing orders, I quickly received a crash course in the litigation process.  He recommended that I contact a federal appellate law firm in Orlando for help in filing a § 2255 motion claiming that the supervised release condition that restricts contact with my daughter is unconstitutional.  Incidentally, this motion has been pending for 2 ½ years. I carefully observed the strategies for formulating effective arguments by using facts and case law.  From there, I familiarized myself with the federal local rules of criminal and civil procedure, and began reading articles on qualified immunity defenses and the § 1983 remedy for civil violations of constitutional rights perpetrated by federal officers. Next, I formulated my arguments in anticipation of how the opposing side would defend their position, trying to leave open matters that I could refute in my reply brief.  Once I drafted this outline, I researched case law; first with the U.S. Supreme Court precedents, then with the 11th circuit rulings, and then persuasive opinions from other federal circuits to develop conflict.  It was also necessary to become familiar with pertinent statutory laws and policies which draw in the governing bodies of Congress and the Sentencing Commission as well. My goal was to be able to support every argument with case law no matter how insignificant.  It’s really satisfying when you can uncover a nugget that is both analogous to your circumstance and binding to the court.  I have found it helpful to closely study how the Supreme Court and circuit courts structure their case opinions (e.g., standard of review, analysis, conclusion, dissent), so that I can narrate my argument through their citations and statements.  I believe this adds tremendous credibility to a pro se filing while also mitigating the exposure to inexperience and mistakes. It is truly a process that takes time and practice, and while I have not reaped what one might call a victory, I have been able to address matters to the highest court in the land at a minimal cost and a satisfactory level of professionalism.   Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans.

New Florida Statute Requires Schools To Provide Information About Sex Offenders

Posted by fac-admin on June 24, 2014 in Featured Articles 

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/new-florida-statute-requires-schools-to-provide-information-about-sex-offenders/

SOURCE

Earlier this year, the Florida Legislature enacted a requirement for nonpublic colleges, universities and schools. Effective July 1, 2014, all such institutions are required to inform employees and students at orientation and on the school’s website of the existence of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement sexual-predator-registry website and the toll-free telephone number that gives access to sexual predator and sexual offender public information.

A disturbing trend we have seen in school communities is the presence of more sexual offenders or sexual predators who are often under the radar for most institutions: parents, grandparents, or individuals on the authorized pickup lists. Many schools do not perform criminal-background checks on these individuals or even check the sexual-offender website to determine whether these individuals should be permitted on the school’s campus.
When a sexual offender or predator is discovered in your community, it can be a difficult issue to deal with. Although it may be easy enough to restrict the individual’s activities at school, what about the fact that these same individuals are present at play dates, sleepovers, and other activities away from school?

To help educate other parents in the community and to place the burden on parents to be aware of who is supervising their children, we have long suggested that schools put a statement in their student handbook advising parents that the school performs criminal-background checks on its employees and volunteers with unsupervised access to children, but cannot attest to the background of the various parents with whom their child may associate away from school. This policy provides a link to the appropriate governmental websites where sexual-offender information can be found.

To meet the requirements of this new Florida law, all nonpublic schools should now address this issue during yearly employee, student, and parent orientation. In addition, you should place this information on your website under your safety guidelines:

Parents, students, and employees should regularly visit the public registry to review it for individuals who may have prior criminal records and sex offenses. Information concerning registered sex offenders and predators in Florida may be obtained by visiting http://www.fdle.state.fl.us, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Sexual Offenders database.

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans. 

Sex Offender Status May Jeopardize Treatment for Florida Veteran

Posted on June 20, 2014 in Articles, Featured Articles 

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/sex-offender-status-may-jeopardize-treatment-for-florida-veteran/

A Korean War veteran may be denied treatment for prostate cancer because of sex offenses he committed over 20 years ago.

Today, Panama City station WJHG reports that the man, who was previously homeless and staying at the Panama City Rescue Mission may be denied both treatment by the Veterans Administration AND a roof over his head, all because of his status as a sex offender.

Apparently, the offender wasn’t candid about his criminal history and the rescue mission never checked. As a result, the rescue mission will be changing its policies to screen for sex offenders. At the same time, the VA, which previously committed to treating his cancer, is now re-thinking that decision in light of the veteran’s status. According to the news station, “Naval Support Activity-Panama City, which houses the local VA clinic, tells NewsChannel 7, sex offenders are not allowed on base. It’s unclear if the VA will accommodate veterans with sex convictions.”

What is clear, is that Sex Offenders, even those no longer on probation, are saddled with a lifetime of punishments that extend beyond their judicial sentences. They are also no longer entitled to a roof over their head at a homeless shelter or treatment at a VA hospital, unlike, say… a murderer.

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans.  

About Half of Rape Allegations are False, Research Shows

Posted on June 20, 2014 in Articles, Featured Articles 

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/about-half-of-rape-allegations-are-false-research-shows/

 

False allegations of rape are believed to be more common than many persons realize. These are the findings of four research studies:

• A review of 556 rape accusations filed against Air Force personnel found that 27% of women later recanted. Then 25 criteria were developed based on the profile of those women, and then submitted to three independent reviewers to review the remaining cases. If all three reviewers deemed the allegation was false, it was categorized as false. As a result, 60% of all allegations were found to be false.¹ Of those women who later recanted, many didn’t admit the allegation was false until just before taking a polygraph test. Others admitted it was false only after having failed a polygraph test.²
• In a nine-year study of 109 rapes reported to the police in a Midwestern city, Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin reported that in 41% of the cases the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred.³
• In a follow-up study of rape claims filed over a three-year period at two large Midwestern universities, Kanin found that of 64 rape cases, 50% turned out to be false.⁴ Among the false charges, 53% of the women admitted they filed the false claim as an alibi.⁵
• According to a 1996 Department of Justice report, “in about 25% of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI, … the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing.⁶ It should be noted that rape involves a forcible and non-consensual act, and a DNA match alone does not prove that rape occurred. So the 25% figure substantially underestimates the true extent of false allegations.

And according to former Colorado prosecutor Craig Silverman, “For 16 years, I was a kick-ass prosecutor who made most of my reputation vigorously prosecuting rapists. … I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made to the Denver Police Department. … A command officer in the Denver Police sex assaults unit recently told me he placed the false rape numbers at approximately 45%.”⁷

According to the FBI, about 95,000 forcible rapes were reported in 2004.⁸ Based on the statements and studies cited above, some 47,000 American men are falsely accused of rape each year. These men are disproportionately African-American.⁹

Some of these men are wrongly convicted, sentenced, and imprisoned. Even if there is no conviction, a false allegation of rape can “emotionally, socially, and economically destroy a person.”¹⁰

---

1 McDowell CP. False allegations. Forensic Science Digest, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 1985
2 Ibid.
3 Kanin EJ. An alarming national trend: False rape allegations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994 http://www.sexcriminals.com/library/doc-1002-1.pdf
4 Ibid., p. 2, Kanin reports that in the city studied, “for a declaration of false charge to be made, the complainant must admit that no rape had occurred. … The police department will not declare a rape charge as false when the complainant, for whatever reason, fails to pursue the charge or cooperate on the case, regardless how much doubt the police may have regarding the validity of the charge. In short, these cases are declared false only because the complainant admitted they are false. … Thus, the rape complainants referred to in this paper are for completed forcible rapes only. The foregoing leaves us with a certain confidence that cases declared false by this police agency are indeed a reasonable — if not a minimal — reflection of false rape allegations made to this agency, especially when one considers that a finding of false allegation is totally dependent upon the recantation of the rape charge.”
5 Ibid., Addenda.
6 Connors E, Lundregan T, Miller N, McEwen T. Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial. June 1996 http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt
7 http://web.archive.org/web/20050404230831/http://www.thedenverchannel.com/kobebryanttrial/2812198/detail.html
8 Federal Bureau of Investigation. Forcible rape. February 17, 2006. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html
9 Innocence Project: Facts on post-conviction DNA exonerations. http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/351.php
10 Angelucci M, Sacks G. Research shows false allegations of rape common. Los Angeles Daily Journal, Sept. 15, 2004. http://www.glennsacks.com/research_shows_false.htm

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans. 

Step in, DOJ - Editorials - MiamiHerald.com

Step in, DOJ - Editorials - MiamiHerald.com

Change in sex offender law leads to appeals

Change in sex offender law leads to appeals

Pittsburgh Post Gazette

More than that, the issue remains in question nationally, as well. ... The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act falls under the federal Adam ...

FL - Florida cop (Javier Perez) doesn’t like being filmed, has activist falsely detained for public masturbation

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2014/06/fl-florida-cop-javier-perez-doesnt-like.html#.U5e6dygfGSo

Florida: Man found hanged in Seville couldn't have committed suicide

http://beacononlinenews.com/news/daily/6920

Previous Articles about Andrew's (suspicious) Death:

1. VCSO: Man Found Hanged In Wooded Area In Seville ...

   newsdaytonabeach.com/vcso-man-found-hung...area-in-seville   
   

   Seville, FL - Deputies are investigating after a man was found hanged in a wooded area ... Major Case Unit is investigating the case as a suspicious death,” Haught ...

2. Sheriff's Office releases identity of man found hanged in ...

   beacononlinenews.com/news/daily/6722  
   

   ... Osteen, Pierson, Cassadaga, Seville and Barberville in Florida. ... identity of man found hanged in Seville; ... this man and it sounds VERY suspicious to ...

3. Volusia deputies investigating suspicious hanging death ...

   www.news-journalonline.com/article/20140111/NEWS/140119835   
   

   Deputies are investigating a suspicious death after a man was found hanged in Seville, an official said Saturday evening. The Volusia County Sheriff’s ...

4. Man found dead, hanged, in Seville - The West Volusia Beacon

   beacononlinenews.com/news/daily/6718  
   

   Man found dead, hanged, in Seville. ... Office is investigating a suspicious death in the ... was found hanged in a wooded area of Seville near the ...

5. Man hanged in Volusia County woods, deputies say - Orlando ...

   articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014-01-11/news/os-hanging...   
   

   The Volusia County Sheriff's Office is investigating after a man was found hanging in a wooded area in Seville, a small community of about 600 people in Volusia County.

6. DeLand Man Identified As Victim In Seville Hanging Incident ...

   newsdaytonabeach.com/...man...in-seville-hanging-incident   
   

   Seville, FL - Deputies continue to investigate after a man was found hanged in a wooded area in Seville over the ... the case as a suspicious death ...

7. Deputies investigate 'suspicious death' in Seville | Volusia ...

   www.mynews13.com/.../cfn/2014/1/12/seville_suspicious_d.html   
   

   Volusia deputies investigating 'suspicious death' in Seville. Volusia County deputies say an acquaintance of the victim found the body hanging in a ... Florida who is ...

8. DeLand man identified as Seville hanging victim | News ...

   www.news-journalonline.com/article/20140114/news/140119702   
   

   The man found hanged in Seville has been identified as Andrew C. Mayer of DeLand, an official said.

9. Man found dead, hanged, in Seville - RSSPump

   man-found-dead.rsspump.com/?key=201401131908fc.man-found...   
   

   The Major Case Unit of the Volusia County Sheriff's Office is investigating a suspicious death in the Northwest ... Man found dead, hanged, in Seville. ... FLORIDA ...

10. SHERIFF'S OFFICE INVESTIGATING SUSPICIOUS DEATH IN SEVILLE

    www.volusiasheriff.org/press/2014press_releases/january/...   
    

    ... INVESTIGATING SUSPICIOUS DEATH IN SEVILLE. The Volusia County Sheriff’s Office is investigating the death of an adult male found hanged in a wooded area in Seville
    
    Also, below is an image of the article following up after Andrew's death. The reporter summarizes what had happened after interviewing a person at the location, allegedly assisting Andrew in his suicide...
    
    

     

    
    

    

    
    

    (If anyone has or comes across the link to this article at The West Volusia Beacon, please email me at one.to.see.change@gmail.com.)
    
    

FAC Requests the FDLE Notify Registrants of Changes to Laws

Posted by fac-admin on June 8, 2014 in Featured Article

In a letter to the FDLE last week, FAC President, Gail Colletta, requested the FDLE provide a summary of the changes to the registration laws that will go into effect in the coming months.

A copy of the letter can be seen by clicking the link below. We will update you with their reply.

 
FAC_FDLE

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans. 

Loopholes cast doubt on effectiveness of sex offender laws in Volusia cities

Posted by fac-admin on June 8, 2014 in Articles

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/loopholes-cast-doubt-on-effectiveness-of-sex-offender-laws-in-volusia-cities/

Source

PORT ORANGE — Registered sex offender David Allen Hall lives 2,112 feet from Spruce Creek Elementary School.

He and other offenders who have served their sentences have been the targets in recent months of politicians including the Port Orange City Council who have enacted new regulations in the name of safety. Port Orange expanded its requirement for sex offenders to live further than 2,500 feet from schools, day-care centers and playgrounds, while in March Gov. Rick Scott signed a package of bills tightening penalties and prison sentences for sex offenders and South Daytona became the 10th city in Volusia County to increase living restrictions for sex offenders.

Yet Hall – who served 14 years for lewd or lascivious assault upon a child, a second-degree felony in 1996, after he was found guilty of molesting a 7-year-old child he was baby-sitting in New Smyrna Beach — remains in his home. Because of exemptions in local and state regulations, Hall can live anywhere he wants and believes that he should have that right. He said he has undergone rehabilitation and is trying to get his life back together, but the politicians’ efforts have only served to complicate those efforts.

“I just want to have a normal life like everyone else,” Hall said. “I’m not a risk to anyone.”
Some criminal justice advocates and researchers concur that recent law changes targeting sex offenders are costly to taxpayers and make it harder for ex-convicts to re-enter society and become productive citizens.

“This legislation is not based on research; it’s based on fear and political advantage,” said University of Miami Law Professor Tamara Rice Lave. “When legislators are passing laws, they are competing against each other to show who is toughest on crime and are choosing sex offenders because they are vilified.”

LIMITS TO THE LAW

After Port Orange residents discovered that Howard Thomas Porter, a sex offender convicted of distributing child pornography, was living across the street from Sugar Mill Elementary School earlier this year, the City Council adopted an emergency ordinance to require sex offenders to live at least 2,500 feet from child care facilities, schools, parks and playgrounds — 1,500 feet farther than state law requires.

But Porter, like Hall and at least 21 other sex offenders in the city, can live wherever they want because state law exempts sex offenders convicted prior to 2003 in Florida and those convicted out of state before 2010. That means Porter, who was convicted by a New York court in 2004, could return to the duplex on McDonald Road. He moved to Jacksonville shortly after the ordinance passed, saying he was kicked out by his uncle who owned the duplex. Ordinances trying to close the exemption would likely face legal challenges, as would amending state law to apply statutes retroactively, officials said.

Port Orange Vice Mayor Don Burnette proposed requiring that red signs be placed on city-owned right of way outside the homes of sexual predators. Of the 64 sexual offenders living in Port Orange, four are sexual predators who have been convicted of first-degree felony sex crimes or two second-degree felony sex crimes.
 

Burnette’s proposal drew a mixed reaction from council members like Bob Ford who expressed concerns about how the signs would impact neighboring property values. The council decided to table the measure after a legal review.

The city of Perry in North Florida adopted a similar measure last year for its only sexual predator, who has since moved to Clearwater.

“We had several concerns from a legal standpoint and whether we could defend or enforce something like this,” Port Orange City Attorney Margaret Roberts said. “There isn’t a lot of guidance as far as other cases on record, but there could be a serious challenge.”

Burnette said it wasn’t fair to throw away taxpayer money in a potential court battle and thought it was better to raise awareness about sex offenders through an education campaign.
“I think the fact that we talked about it and brought it forward has caused parents to take a look at things,” Burnette said. “They are talking to their kids, and we have raised awareness and just by doing that I think we have accomplished a lot.”

Port Orange resident Margie Patchett, who has a grandchild at Sugar Mill Elementary, has organized several meetings with concerned parents. A legal challenge would be worth keeping offenders from preying on young children, she said.

“What better way to use our taxpayer dollars than defending ourselves to make children safe?”

Patchett said. “Even if one offender re-offends, that’s not good enough.”
Lave at the University of Miami said policies such as increasing living restrictions and placing signs in the yards of sex predators would make it more difficult for sex offenders to find jobs and integrate back into society.

“To live a law-abiding lifestyle you need a stable home and community,” she said. “If you don’t have that, you are more likely to commit crimes.”

PREVENTING RECIDIVISM

In 2003, the U.S. Department of Justice tracked 9,700 sex offenders and found that 5 percent of those offenders were arrested for another sex crime within three years. Researchers like Lave consider that rate low, pointing out the recidivism rate for offenders of all crimes is 43 percent and 67 percent for non-sex offenders released during that same time period.
 

“There’s an idea that once someone is a sex offender, they are always a sex offender, but that’s not always true,” Lave said. “We know that cognitive therapy can help lower recidivism rates.”
 

Hall, the sex offender who lives near Spruce Creek Elementary School, has not been convicted of any other sex-related crimes since his 1996 arrest. Even though he is exempt from living restrictions, he will remain in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s sex offender registry for the rest of his life.

Sex predators and violent offenders face additional oversight after serving their prison sentence. They are evaluated by a team of mental health professionals to determine the likelihood of repeating acts of sexual violence. If they are determined to be a violent predator, they will be sent to the Florida Civil Commitment Center in Arcadia to wait for a trial.

Senate Bill 524, which Scott signed last month, will require all offenders to be evaluated for civil commitment and require additional assessment and procedures for that determination as of July 1.
Hall served 13 years in the state’s civil commitment center after his 16-month prison sentence. He said the commitment center punishes offenders for laws they haven’t yet committed.

“They are setting people up for failure,” he said.

The push to strengthen sex offender laws came after Donald James Smith raped and murdered 8-year-old Cherish Perry Winkle in Jacksonville last June. Smith, who was convicted of kidnapping in 1993, was a registered sex offender with a criminal record, and he committed the crime three weeks after he was released from jail for an attempted child abuse conviction in 2012.

Lave said that cases like Smith’s are rare and making policies that paint all sex offenders with one broad stroke is unfair.

“Because so few people re-offend, we are locking up many people who aren’t dangerous,” she said.
But even if the chance of a sex offender committing future sex crimes is slim, that’s not a chance leaders like Burnette want to take.

“You can’t get into their minds so you don’t know what they are going to do,” Burnette said. “If we keep making it increasingly difficult for where they live there is the possibility that they will go off the grid completely.”

By Lacey McLaughlin
lacey.mclaughlin@news-jrnl.com

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans. 

Maimi-Dade, Florida: Sex Offender Shuffle

Sex Offender Shuffle Continues!!!!!!!!!

Posted on June 6, 2014 in Featured Articles 

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/sex-offender-shuffle-continues/

The colony of homeless sex offenders in Miami-Dade County is once again being moved… 100 yards to the east!

After several months of complaining that over 100 registrants were sent to live in his parking lot, the owner of Adolfo’s House Beauty Supply received the concession from local police, who evicted the approximately 133 registrants living transient at the corner of NW 71st Street and 36th Court on Wednesday night.

Registrants were told that they would no longer be able to stay there at night and would be subject to arrest for trespassing if they were found there the following night.
Yesterday morning, registrants began making frantic calls to their probation officers asking what to do. Most are on GPS monitoring devices and if they are not at that street corner, they would similarly be subject to arrest.

The Miami-Dade probation office’s solution was to move them one block over. 100 yards to the east, which is the street corner where they spent their night last night. Within the next 48 hours 133 registrants will be scrambling to get their drivers licenses updated, as required by law, to “transient at 71st and 35th” instead of “71st and 36th”, paying the $25 fee for the address change and jeopardizing their employment to get it done.

… until the Miami-Dade Sex Offender Shuffle moves them elsewhere.

Florida Action Committee (FAC), founded in 2006, is a state-wide consortium of concerned citizens and professionals whose purpose is to promote the prevention of sexual abuse while preserving the safety and dignity of all citizens through carefully structured laws targeting the truly violent, forced, and/or dangerous predatory acts of sex. FAC believes that many aspects of the current approach to sex offenders seriously undermine justice and actually increase the threat of sexual assault against others, particularly children. FAC opposes a publicized registry of sex offenders and seeks to bring an end to the humiliation of people who have already paid for their crimes. FAC asserts that only by supporting justice for all people—offenders and victims alike can a truly safe society be built and secured for all Americans.