| News & Noteworthy © ---
Featured Issue 5-14-06 |
| Megans' laws placing innocent men at risk. Could vigilantism have ended their lives? |
| 5-14-2006 Maryland:
Caught in a neighborhood web: Innocent man mistaken for registered offender |
.WASHINGTON - It all seemed darkly funny at first. Eric Haskett was merely taking a nap in a car when he roused suspicion in a rural Frederick County neighborhood. A neighbor traced Haskett's license plate to an address once used by a registered sex offender. Then his girlfriend's parents told him to scram; law enforcement officials, including three FBI agents, began investigating; and Haskett began fearing that the suspicions could cost him his job at a gag shop that sells such kid-friendly items as whoopie cushions.
"It blew me away that a federal agent was sticking a badge in my face. Three agents, dog -- like I'm the ringleader!" said Haskett, 28, of Mount Airy. After allaying the concerns of several law enforcement officials over the past few weeks, Haskett also asked them what he could do to clear his name. "They said the best bet is to leave the area," Haskett said.
Haskett has no criminal record and has not been accused of wrongdoing, according to public court records and law enforcement officials. The confusion arose after he rented a room in a house on Liberty Road where convicted sex offender Donald M. Sanders had also rented a room; the sex offender registry listed only the house address, not room numbers. Sanders moved out about the time Haskett moved in, and the two men had no other connection, according to interviews with them, their landlord and law enforcement officials.
..more..
: by Fredrick Kunkle, The Washington Post
|
.It may be helpful to read the Post Article, but a summary of the essential facts follow:
The Story Summarized:
Erik Haskett (of Liberty Rd, Mt Airy, MD) drives 14.7 miles to his girlfriend's home (Ali Huenger, Emmaline Dr, New Market MD) to have dinner with her. Erik is tired and gets there early, so he stops down the street parks his car and takes forty winks before going to Ali's home. (exactly where is known, Schuster's e-mail says "between Cairo and Emmaline" which is Samuel Rd which connects Cairo and Emmaline.)
Stefani Shuster (of Emmaline Dr, New Market, MD) sees Erik sleeping in his car. Stefani writes down his license plate number goes home and [presumably] e-mails that license plate number to the Maryland State Police. Her reason for alerting police, there have been reports of a suspicious 'gray box-like car' in the neighborhood. [Article doesn't explain why that car is suspicious or if Erik's car is similar]
Verbatim Report of Stefani Schuster's e-mail to neighbors:
A few days later, Schuster sent her e-mail to neighbors: "Many of you have probably heard over the past month of an older gray box-style car that has been hanging out at odd times in Summerfield. He was seen again between Cairo and Emmaline last week around 4:30-5:00 p.m."
The e-mail said the license plate number was given to police and traced to Haskett. The e-mail also noted that the Maryland Sex Offender Registry showed Haskett living at the same Liberty Road address as Sanders, the convicted sex offender.
"He [Sanders] is most likely living with and borrowing this car from Haskett," the e-mail said. "Please pass on this e-mail to as many people as you know in this neighborhood."
Relevant Comment by Scotti C. Burdette (Ali's Mom):
"Don't [mess] with suburbia, because we will chew you up and spit you out," said Summerfield resident Scottie C. Burdette, 45, a mother of five, including Haskett's girlfriend. "Believe me, I got that e-mail about 20 times, so you can imagine how this exploded." Then Burdette realized that her daughter's new boyfriend, Haskett, was named in the e-mail.
Unanswered Questions:
1) How did Stefani Shuster get Erik Haskett's private DMV records when all she had was a license plate number?
2) Was Erik Haskett's car an "older gray box-style car"?
3) Given reports of a suspicious car in the neighborhood, why wouldn't the Maryland State Police send a car out immediately upon receipt of the e-mail rather than contact the FBI? Consider, if MSP had sent a car out they would have gone to Stefani Schuster's home and would have seen Erik's car parked across the street at Ali's home? Remember, he went there for dinner (see comments by Ali's Mom).
4) Why did the FBI get involved? Apparently they are the ones who first contacted Erik about his napping in the car. Stephani e-mailed the Maryland State Police who maintain the registry.
5) Why didn't Stefani Schuster see Erik's car at the house across the street (Scotti C. Burdette, Ali's Mom) when he went there?
Commentary:
The exact date of Erik's nap is not known but article reported it to be "late March."
Consider this: Erik wakes up, drives to Ali's home, has dinner then goes home. Nothing unusual right? However, research turned up these facts: Ali Huenger (Erik's girfriend) lives directly across the street from Stefani Shuster's home. The house numbers are 1 number apart that tells you they are opposite each other. That street has 4 homes on each side and 3 at the end which is a Cul-de-sac.
Missing is how Stefani Schuster obtained the DMV information the news reported she e-mailed to neighbors a few days after finding Erik napping in the car. DMV records under federal law are considered private records and even law enforcement may not give that information out.
Stefani's comment "... that the Maryland Sex Offender Registry showed Haskett living at the same Liberty Road address as Sanders, the convicted sex offender." is absolutely false. Erik Haskett is not listed on the sex offender registry. Her comment gives away that she somehow obtained Erik Haskett's home address, but from where?
There is sufficient information in the article using various Internet searches to find all addresses, except Erik Haskett! The only way anyone could know his exact address, is by the comment of his landlord "Barry Leahy, who rented the rooms to Sanders and Haskett, said the incident points out the potential abuses of sex offender registries." Then lookup Donald M. Sanders on the sex offender registry, which still showed him residing there at that time.
The most disturbing comment is made by Stefani Shuster when her e-mail says "'He [Sanders] is most likely living with and borrowing this car from Haskett," the e-mail said.'" Granted the newspaper inserted "[Sanders]" but they did so based upon Stefani's comment. Her comment implies that, at the point she wrote the e-mail, she had looked up Donald M. Sanders on the Maryland sex offender registry, and seeing his photo then felt he was the one she saw sleeping in the car earlier. The Post has a picture of Erik and the registry has a picture of Donald, they do not look alike! Besides how could she see the driver of the car when he was sleeping?
Finally, Ali's Mom says she received the e-mail 20 times, which means many other people got it as many times. Law enforcement tells Erik Haskett, in response to his question "How do I clear my name?", '"They said the best bet is to leave the area," Haskett said.' Anyone who wants to know why they gave that advise, simply click on the "federal law" below then read the "Civil Action" section.
This is a prime example of how the registry information can be misused or misinterpreted and place two innocent men at risk of being murdered, from the date of the e-mail to the newspaper article which hopefully the general public will read! Sensationalizing sex offenses and offenders keeps the public incensed and ready to become the next vigilante!
--------------------------
Federal law prohibiting release of DMV information
GlobeXplorer Aerial Photos Satellite Images and Maps Allows one to see the proximity of the two homes.
|
|
|
| News & Noteworthy © ---
Featured 5-9-06 |
| Megan's Law Report Card: A De Facto Standard? |
| 5-9-2006 California:
'Megan's Law Report Card' fails nearly half of U.S. |
.Nearly half the country, including California, is failing to adequately inform the public about registered sex offenders, according to a national survey on Megan's Law. The "Megan's Law Report Card'' was released this week by the New York-based watchdog group Parents for Megan's Law. It compared sex offender registries and community notification programs of all 50 states.
Twenty-four states earned an "F'' based on the survey answers each state provided. ‘‘I think where you live shouldn't determine how well you can protect your children from sex offenders,'' said Laura Ahearn, executive director of Parents for Megan's Law. ‘‘This survey demonstrates that we need a more uniform Megan's Law across the nation.''
..more..
: by Melissa Pinion-Whitt, Staff Writer
|
.California seems to be worried about getting a failing grade on a "Megan's Law Report Card" a Parents for Megan's Law (PFML) survey. Allegedly this is a survey that compares sex offender registries and community notification programs in all 50 states. The real question is, compares them to what? What is the standard, does anyone know?
Has anyone seen the survey questions, not to my knowledge? In fact, are there any national standards that all states are to follow? If so, who created the standards and who enforces them? Can the standards be independently validated or are they hypothetical? One person's perception of how all parents should protect their children? Questions abound about this survey.
If states are to be judged they should be judged by whether they follow the law set up by their state legislature; the will of the people. Is the Megan's Law Report Card an evaluation of whether a state legislature has failed to protect children according to their state laws? Apparently state legislatures ignore this standard as many are not getting a A+ in 2006. Yet, the media plays it up. Why?
States are autonomous accountable only to their own laws and the U.S. Constitution. There is nothing in law which requires any state to do the same thing as all other states. Why have multiple legislators if they must think alike, if that were true there would be no reason for legislators to vote.
I wonder, is one of the questions "What protections does the state have to protect children of registered sex offenders from harassment and vigilantism?" That seems to be a relevant question and if that is not addressed what other questions are missing? Does the absence of such a question or questions indicate a bias, prejudice or favoritism?
In the 2005 survey on the PML website it indicates that Florida was given a A+ grade. In Florida a 2005 newspaper report indicated that 50% of those listed on the state registry are "ghosts," people that do not exist in Florida's communities. (See "GHOSTS IN THE MACHINE: Are dead sex offenders really dangerous?" 11-24-2005 by James Carlson) Apparently Florida lists the deceased, deported, those who have moved to another state, and even those in prisons. Why are they important to the general public and how does the "Standard" account for them in its rating system since they are missing from the state's communities?
Florida also is the state which has had the most little children murdered by nonsex offenders and previously convicted sex offenders. How does the "Standard" account for that? However, it must be noted that Florida's U.S. Representative is pushing Congress for legislation to further control all sex offenders nationally. Is the "Standard" politically motivated? We simply do not know as Florida has again been given a A+ rating in 2006.
Interesting though another state in 2006 has been given a A rating, Wisconsin. The U.S. Representative of that state happens to be the author of a bill in Congress to further control sex offenders nationally. Is the "Standard" politically motivated?
In 2005 Maryland and Texas were also give a A+ rating and have slipped to a C rating in 2006. Maryland failed to pass Jessica's law (Authored by Florida's U.S. Representative) and Texas is still considering it, could there be a political relationship?
However, despite all those issues and others not mentioned, the accuracy of the "Standard" is not even guaranteed by the authors of the survey. See their website -page displaying 2005-2006 state survey ratings- where it says: "PFML does not assume any responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, currency, or the appropriateness for use for any general or particular purpose, of this web site or its contents. Without limitation, PFML does not warrant such contents or any use of thereof would not violate or infringe upon the rights of others."
A "Standard" or is sex offender ghosting haunting the nation?
|
|
|
Featured Issue: 5-3-05
| Are Megans' Laws Self-Defeating? |
| 5-3-2005 Florida:
Many cities want laws to rout sex offenders:Spurred by a proposal in Miami Beach, dozens of cities across the state now want wider buffer zones for sex offenders -- though experts question their constitutionality and their effectiveness. |
.Miami Beach's push to limit the places sex offenders can live within the city limits has set off a flurry of similar legislative action in Florida and other states but may face constitutional challenges and may not have much effect, child advocates say.
The ordinance, proposed by Miami Beach Mayor David Dermer, would require sexual offenders to live at least 2,500 feet from schools, playgrounds, bus stops or any place children gather. It would virtually push those offenders outside city limits since Miami Beach is just 7 ½ miles wide and has 37 parks and more than a dozen schools. The change would more than double the 1,000-foot buffer zone established by the state.
Since then, the city of North Miami has given preliminary approval to a similar ordinance. Officials in the city of Sweetwater were to vote late Monday on legislation. Dozens of other cities have made inquiries, said John Heffernan, special advisor to Dermer. In Broward County, officials in Pembroke Pines, Hallandale Beach, Miramar and Fort Lauderdale are all considering similar proposals -- which have drawn some criticism from constitutional experts.
Experts worry that if several cities pass the same 2,500-foot buffer zone, large swaths of the state could be rendered off-limits to offenders who have already served time. ''I think there is a plausible constitutional argument about infringing on somebody's basic civil liberties,'' said Mark Tushnet, a professor who specializes in First Amendment law at Georgetown University Law School. ''I would expect someone to challenge it if an entire part of the state is effectively carved out,'' Tushnet said.
But Dermer and other city leaders argue that the rights of children supersede those of sexual offenders, who may repeat their behavior. ''Those who focus on the protection of predators and not the children are in the business of twisting the truth to make a trap for fools,'' Dermer said. North Miami's Joe Celestin, who insists that he first suggested the increased distance, said he simply wants offenders out of his city. ''I don't really care where they live. At this point I don't care if they live out of civilization,'' Celestin said.
``I think the law is sending a very clear message.'' While the proposed law isn't retroactive, it could affect the remaining 31 sexual offenders if they choose to renew a lease or rent a different apartment on the Beach. Despite the groundswell of support, Dermer may face some resistance as the law comes up May 18 for a public hearing and final vote.
For example, landlords may object to an amendment that was attached to the ordinance by a city committee: It would place some of the responsibility for verifying the sexual offender status of a potential renter on landlords. Landfords who fail to do so could be fined. In an April 26 letter to commissioners, David Kelsey, president of the South Beach Hotel and Restaurant Association, argued that the law would penalize just about any property owner. ''It would seem to follow that a prohibition that applied to the residency of a tenant must also apply to the residency of a property owner,'' Kelsey wrote.
Advocates say it's better to have realistic rules offenders can follow so they will register. To reduce the chance of recidivism, offenders need to be able to find jobs and housing, child advocates and legal experts say. ''A law like 2,000 feet could very well make it impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere in a community,'' said Teresa Jacobs, program manager for the Minnesota-based Jacob Wetterling Foundation, which aims to protect children from sexual exploitation and abduction. ``The more difficult it becomes [to find a place to live] the more you are going to see lack of registration and more transient lifestyles that is actually putting your children more at risk.'': by NICOLE WHITE AND AMY SHERMAN ..more..
| 5-3-2005 New Jersey:
Hamilton readies pedophile ban law |
.Registered sex offenders living in the township may soon be looking for an out-of-town address if a proposed ordinance prohibiting them from living in certain neighborhoods is approved. The ordinance, which is expected to be introduced by the township council tonight, would create a "pedophile free zone," prohibiting convicted sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a township school, playground or park.
With 24 public schools and six private schools in the township, along with more than 30 parks, the ordinance would make it difficult for sex offenders to find a place to live in Hamilton, Mayor Glen Gilmore conceded. "Given the fact that what we are trying to accomplish here is to lessen the risks our children are exposed to, if it creates a hardship on someone who has a history of attacking children, it is a consequence they are responsible for and I don't think it's unreasonable or unfair," Gilmore said yesterday. [snip]
But according to experts on sex offenders and registry laws, the Hamilton and Miami Beach ordinances would not solve the problem and would likely be challenged in court. "A good case can be made that they make it more difficult for sex offenders to become law-abiding citizens," said John La Fond, a law professor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City school of law, who has written a book on sex offender registry laws called "Preventing Sexual Violence. How Society Should Cope with Sex Offenders."
La Fond said a great deal of evidence exists to show that, in general, most sex offenders are not a risk to the community once released and notification and registry laws are a waste of resources and manpower. "I would be very surprised if laws such as this have any impact on sexual recidivism or community safety. They obviously make people feel better but there is no evidence establishing that they work."
Moorestown attorney William Buckman, who sits on the board of directors of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, called the law a bad idea and said it most likely would be overturned by the court for a number of reasons, including the fact that it imposes a penalty that is unconstitutional. "It's unconstitutional to limit people's ability to find a home once they have served their sentences," Buckman said. "If every town did that, there are few places in New Jersey that are not within 1,000 feet, let alone 2,500 feet, of a school. This sounds like an attempt by Hamilton Township to prohibit registered sex offenders from living in the town." : by DARRYL R. ISHERWOOD, Staff Writer
..more..
|
|
|
|
|
