|
||||
|
Posting #179 –Virginia Crime Commission Public Comment December 15By: RSOL of Virginia AGENDA **PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE HEARD PRIOR TO EACH TOPIC** I. CALL TO ORDER / APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 MINUTES II. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE RENDERED BY SENATOR STOLLE III. TRANSFER AND CERTIFICATION OF JUVENILES* IV. SENATE BILL 1289: EXPUNGEMENT OF CRIMINAL CONVICTION RECORD V. “SEXTING” VI. HOUSE BILL REFERRALS 1898, 1928, 1962, 1963, 2274: SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY VII. MELENDEZ-DIAZ V. MASSACHUSETTS VIII. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: The report on Senate Bill 847: Emergency Vehicles Proceeding Past Red Lights has been removed from the agenda and deferred to a later date. There is an ongoing civil lawsuit dealing with the subject matter of this bill. The Crime Commission has customarily refrained from making formal policy decisions on matters that are the subject of pending litigation. Dear Virginia Supporters, Well, I was allowed to make all three of my statements at the VCC meeting in Richmond even though the third one was rushed along by Senator Stolle so what you see below in red was not read as I was asked to stop. I exceeded the 3 minute statement allotment and they of course did not like my angle. Eight RSOL of VA supporters definitely attended, there may have been more but we can't be sure. Nothing was voted on by the Commission and we won't know if the five 2009-AWA bills or if a Sexting Bill will be submitted and what the details are for the next few weeks. Thank you all for your good wishes and prayers for my statements and thank you to those of you who were able to make the trip to Richmond and we truly appreciate everyone for supporting us in everything we have done and will continue to do for you and your families. RSOL of Virginia Our 3 statements: V. “SEXTING” This summer the Virginia Crime Commission considered if “Sexting” is an issue that needs addressing here in Virginia. The presentation stated that, 22 % of teenage girls, and 18 % of teenage boys, have sent or posted images or video showing themselves nude or semi-nude. 11 % of young teenage girls, between the ages of 13 and 16, have done so. This study was already a year old when presented to the Commission. According to a December 3, 2009 study conducted by the Associated Press and MTV they found that 30% of 14 to 24 year-olds had either sent or received nude photos on their cell phones or online. The Commission ended the September 16 meeting with the summary that the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s are using good judgment when it comes to prosecuting “sexting” cases. What about the recent Loudon County case where School Administrator, Ting-Yi Oei spent almost a year fighting for his career, his reputation and his life? Mr. Oei’s case proves that Virginia’s prosecutors do not always use good judgment without Legislative guidance. Sexting Legislation does need to be proposed during the 2010 General Assembly, in addition to educating Virginia’s teens and young adults of the dangers of “Sexting”. Not only should the juvenile’s that send and receive these photos and videos be exempt from prosecution but their 18, 19 and 20 year old boyfriends and girlfriends should also be free of erroneous prosecution. Today’s “sexting” is what the 1970’s and 80’s was with Polaroid cameras. Yes, the World Wide Web has changed the permanence of these photos and videos but the stigma of Sex Offender for a lifetime is too extreme of a punishment for a stupid teenage mistake. If the message was not mass e-mailed onto others as retaliation or used to harass then no crime has been committed. Even then, the lifetime label of Sex Offender is not appropriate. Requiring a teen or young adult to register as a sex offender for sending or receiving a photo only does one thing: it undermines the Sex Offender registry. As a society we want to encourage the healthy sexual development of our teenagers. But there is a difference between kids being kids and kids doing criminal things. And while certain acts and behaviors may legally qualify as crimes, are we really acting in our children's best interest by prosecuting them and subjecting them to the harsh consequences of the criminal justice system? Thank you. VI. HOUSE BILL REFERRALS 1898, 1928, 1962, 1963, 2274: SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY A few short years ago, I would never have imagined myself as part of an organization working for the reform of Sex Offender Laws. It was never my problem. I trusted our lawmakers. I trusted the system. There are times when I wish I did not know what I know today; times when I long for that peace of mind that naiveté brings. The Commission was given five bills from the 2009 Virginia General Assembly that were generally claimed by the patron to "Make Virginia compliant with the SORNA/ Adam Walsh Act guidelines", this claim is generally less than accurate and we feel is used as a trump card to ensure the passage of their bill. The Sex Offender Registry has become extremely costly to the Virginia taxpayer and to the families of the registered. It will cost $12 Million for Virginia to comply with SORNA/the Adam Walsh Act, but the state would only lose $400,000 (10% of the Byrne Grant) if they do not comply. Today there are more than 15,500 people listed on the Virginia Sex Offender Registry. That’s 1 out of every 210 adult males in our state. Approximately 1,200 new people are added every year. This number will NEVER decrease because Virginia continually increases the minimum time required to remain on the Registry, continually re-classifies “Non-Violent” offenders to “Violent” and continually adds new crimes that fall under “Sex Offender” offenses every year. The Virginia Sex Offender Registry has become a useless list of names that the public can no longer use to decipher who is a true threat and who has simply been swept up in this Legislative Predator Hysteria. Dilution is Not the Solution. Most of these proposed Bills went significantly beyond what SORNA/AWA recommends and many of the Legislators who were voting to pass these Bills are not versed in the actual recommendations. When they vote to pass they are voting in ignorance. But they vote for the Bill so that they do not to appear to be “soft on Sex Offenders” which they ALL believe would be career suicide. It’s NOT. The public knows the registry has grown out of control. As of this September the ONLY U.S. State that has become compliant is Ohio. So one would think that Ohio would have no problems with those on the registry. Not too surprisingly, being compliant did not stop Ohio mad-man Anthony Sowell from luring, possibly raping and murdering 11 women in his home. The registry in fact hid this truly evil and crazed sociopath by placing so many lesser crimes into the mix of the public registry. The Sex Offender Registry could not have saved those women; Sowell did everything required of him by Ohio. No registry can prevent a true psychopath from committing new crimes. Multiple crimes of varying degrees are now “Registerable” offenses. The plain and undeniable truth is there are even innocents listed on the Virginia Registry. This is where the Sex Offender Registry has taken a strange and unjustifiable deviation from any attempt at reducing crime. There is a huge difference between stealing a newspaper and robbing a bank, both crimes are considered theft but both are separated by law and society; thus the penalties are proportionately different from one another. This is right and this is justice. The current laws that stigmatize someone as a “Sex Offender” in the United States and particularly in Virginia DO NOT distinguish the difference. All are considered the same once listed, all named on the Sex Offender Registries are assumed to be a “pervert”, a “pedophile” and a “predator” and now as dangerous as Phillip Garrido and Anthony Sowell for life. Only the truly ignorant would subscribe to such a belief, but sadly current laws keep the average citizen ignorant of these facts, thus ignorance prevails. The situation that has been imposed upon the “Registered” is that; under the guise of protecting our children, you the lawmakers, the most honorable of us all, are in fact repeatedly trying, convicting and re-sentencing our Citizens every year without even notifying them that this has occurred. This is clearly a violation of our citizen’s God given rights and an affront to our Constitution. The only way that it’s been allowed to go forward is with the argument that the Registry is an Administrative and not a Punitive order. This of course is growing thin as more and more rights are being removed from the common man. Our Government has singled out a group of people and used them as an easy platform to win elections and instill fear into the parents of our state so that they will look like heroes. As of today the State of Virginia has continued to pile on new laws, restrictions and regulations without any regard to the MANY Sex Offender studies and reports that currently exist. The results are in, but no one making the decisions seems to have time to read them. These are written by Experts in this field and can lead YOU to the right answers; they can actually help our society become safer. Creating an atmosphere where steady employment and housing becomes nearly impossible quite often forces the “Registered” out in the streets and is not the answer. It actually places the public at a greater risk, but the right solution does not always sound harsh enough, hence the appeal of cruelty over solution. The RSOL of Virginia has shared these reports and studies with all the Virginia Legislators but thus far they have been ignored. Today we have presented every member of the Crime Commission with Dr. Richard Wright’s book purchased by many of those affected by the registry with the belief you will take the time to read it. Last week we hand-delivered a copy of this book to every member of the Congressional Judiciary Committee in DC. Education is the answer and until you wish to learn the solutions you can only destroy lives with no real hope of safeguarding those you are charged with protecting. While in DC we sat down and discussed with Congressman John Conyers (Chairman of the Judiciary Committee overseeing the AWA compliance) just where the registry has gone because the states have been allowed to run rampant and he was shocked at some of the examples and facts we offered. Additionally when speaking with Karen Wilkinson, Lead Counsel to the Judiciary Committee about these same troubling facts, she interjected that not only is the prevailing belief that the registry is failing, but that Ohio does not actually meet the requirements and was basically allowed to claim such by the SMART office in order to lull other States into the belief that it is an obtainable goal. The time has come for the State of Virginia to open their eyes and ears and to take this data seriously. Thank you.
Miscellaneous Public Comment At the May 11, 2009 Crime Commission meeting a Legislator told the panel "when we passed the Sexually Violent Predator Act we never thought ANYONE would ever be released from the Virginia Center for Behavioral Rehabilitation”. If nothing else this should illustrate a problem within the system and with the thought process at hand. Just a reminder to all, a large number of the current residents of the VCBR entered that facility willingly, because the State of Virginia told them they'd be released if they completed their treatment. After all, this "treatment" is not part of the punitive process; otherwise Civil Commitment would be considered Unconstitutional. As for Civil Commitment in Virginia today, the Static 99 is the chosen assessment tool. As we learned at the June 25 Crime Commission meeting the Static 99 consists of only 10 questions and an interview by two State evaluators who may reach completely opposite decisions so that a third person is brought in to break the split. When the Static 99 was selected to be used for assessment in the state of Virginia it was because the Static 99 was a quote scientific evaluation that would not be left open to personal opinion or bias, but in fact that is actually how the Static 99 works. A Score of “6” is considered “high risk” by the creators of the Static 99. Currently Virginia considers a Score of “4” sufficient to label one as an SVP and being civilly committed for an indefinite amount of time. If you were to examine just three of the questions from the Static 99, any college aged, homosexual male, who has never lived with a “partner” for 2 or more years need to only to have a reckless driving mis-demeanor conviction and he would be just 1 point away from being deemed a serious threat to society and could be locked away for life in the VCBR, TODAY! This is in essence an insane asylum for the “Sexually Perverse”. Every Gay and Lesbian Group in America should be appalled that this homophobic “tool” is claimed as a scientific evaluation. As bad as this already is; we learned at the June 25 Crime Commission meeting, Virginia is considering lowering the Score to civilly commit from a ‘4” to a “3”. Why? Because MAYBE some “3’s” have slipped through the system, there are no specific cases, just the concern; paranoia rears its ugly head again. According a Crime Commission presentation, in 2006 Sexually Violent Crimes were expanded from 4 to 28 increasing SVP-eligible inmates by 350%, no wonder the VCBR is filling up at a rate of 5.5 new residents a month and has become an economic concern. The presentation that noted the crimes increased from 4 to 28 listed only 15 out of the 28 crimes. I have inquired what the other 13 crimes that qualify someone for commitment are but the Commission was unable to provide them. If anyone here can please e-mail me all 28 crimes I would appreciate it. Virginia is tinkering with the recommended score of the Static 99 while piling on practically every possible sexual crime as qualification for civil commitment, but so far no one has stood up to question this. Why because of the myth that these people have been deemed the worst sexual perverts who have committed heinous crimes and will never stop. Perhaps if Virginia followed the recommended score of ‘6” as opposed to stigmatizing an ex-offender at the score of “4” and possibly “3”, that would be true but that has become merely fantasy. There are residents currently being considered for civil commitment that only had teenage consensual sex with a girlfriend who was not yet 18 years old and then stupidly committed a probation violation. I believe, Senator Stolle referred to these types of criminals as “knuckle-heads” at the September meeting. Yes, they are knuckleheads but they are not Sexually Violent Predators, so why would we persecute them as such? We know these things to be true as we have taken the time to research and communicate with those who have been wronged by this system. We know this as fact because on November 1 we received a petition from 25 inmates that had been moved from their previous Virginia Department of Corrections facility to the Piedmont Regional Jail in Farmville for civil commitment evaluation. Code of Virginia sections 37.2 - 900 thru 905 states that no inmate can be held longer than three months past their release date. How does Virginia justify violating its own Statutes? Why are these men still being held for “evaluation” for civil commitment? If they have been deemed as SVP’s then they should have been transferred to the VCBR and if the Commonwealth is unable to prove they are dangerous then they should be released from the Piedmont Regional Jail and allowed to reclaim their lives. These violations must stop and they can only be stopped by you, it is time for Virginia to create a real and true management board for all Sex Offender issues to seek and impose real solutions. While we cut funding for education we seem to have bottomless pockets when it comes to registry. The problem is that only through education will we find the answers. Let the education begin here; stop imposing pain and cruelty by voting in fear and ignorance. Not only should the Static 99 score not be lowered, it needs to be completely re-evaluated and returned to its original intent. It must begin with you, stand up against fear, stand up for what is right. Thank you.
Crime Commission Refuses 'Sexting' Recommendation (Virginia), December 15, 2009: |
|||