Quoted Text

I agree with everything Carl Strock has said so far.

Quoted from 303

I wonder if Carl realizes that he is starting to be as despised as the offenders he evidently so admires? Let him bestow his 2007 pedophile admiration awards if he likes.

Quoted from 318

First off, "ben", to take your business away from the workplace of a sex offender is not only puerile, but completely unnecessary. What is it going to do except hurt the profits of the store's owners who have already won over your trust and sales? Please, tell me, what are you going to accomplish by refusing to get your lunch at a business that you've patronized in the past, solely because you hold disdain towards someone YOU DO NOT KNOW?

Quoted from 318

Do you know how many "child molesters" are employed in this city and country? I can almost guarantee that you support at least one company that employs someone who has been convicted of a sex crime, or even someone who hasn't been convicted, as not everyone who commits one is. For instance, you didn't recognize the person in question until your buddy pointed it out to you. Thanks for assuming that I somehow know who you're talking about, because I don't.

And no, I understood your reason, but not the intentions behind it. Now that I do, they are just as puerile as I thought. You had to look that up in the dictionary, though, didn't you?

Quoted from 197

letter to the editor - http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Now, if only we can find a planet that might be habitable, and a big enough ACME rocket.....

Quoted from 129

Mr. Salami:  So, can we look forward to that being Mr. Amedore's first introduced piece of legislation?  What is your prediction about the first act he will take upon being sworn in?

Quoted Text

Jessica's Law Proposes Tough Penalties For Child Sex Crimes  
ALBANY--Furthering his commitment to keep New York's children and families safe, Gov. George Pataki has proposed Jessica's Law, legislation that imposes tougher penalties on those who commit sexual crimes against children, and further strengthen other sexual assault laws.

"As a father of four, I can hardly imagine anything worse than the sexual abuse of a child," Governor Pataki said. "This new legislation will ensure that if you commit the worst kind of violent sexual crime against a child, you will go to prison for a minimum of 25 years. But Jessica's Law will do more than that -- it will also raise the age threshold for crimes against children and further penalize the worst-of-the-worst sexual predators as well as repeat sexual offenders."

The Governor's legislation is named for Jessica Lunsford, a nine-year-old-girl who was abducted, sexually assaulted and murdered by a registered sex offender living in her neighborhood in Florida. "Jessica's Law" was first signed in Florida last year. Governor Pataki's proposed New York Jessica's Law is modeled on the original Florida law, and if passed, it would be one of the toughest laws in the country against violent sexual predators of children.

Just last week, at the Governor's urging, the Legislature passed an expansion of Megan's Law, lengthening the amount of time sex offenders would be mandated to remain on the Sex Offender Registry and ensuring thousands of sex offenders would not come off the lists beginning this month. This new law ensures that all sex offenders remain on the Registry, most for life, and continues to give every parent and family the ability to find information about sex offenders in their neighborhoods.

"Last week we strengthened Megan's Law. Today I am proposing Jessica's Law. And still, we can and must do more to further ensure the safety of our children and families. We still need to work together to pass new laws that would further toughen Megan's Law, protect our children and families by civilly confining dangerous sexual predators, toughen sentences for those who molest and rape children, end the statute of limitations on rape, and require every criminal to submit a DNA sample to the State's DNA Databank," the Governor added.

Several of the provisions of Jessica's Law have been acted on by the State Senate since 1996, but they have not been acted on by the State Assembly Majority Leadership.

Mark Lunsford, father of Jessica Lunsford, the child for whom the bill is named, said, "I want to commend Governor Pataki and New York State for looking to implement tougher laws to protect children. Although we will never be able to prevent all of the crimes that will be committed against children, we can implement laws that will further protect them and avoid senseless tragedies. The death of my daughter-like so many other children-could have possibly been avoided; and there is no time better than the present to take action so that it doesn't happen again. I look forward to helping New York protect its children by working with the Governor and the New York Legislature to get New York's version of Jessica's Law passed.

"Like Governor Pataki, I believe this will only be accomplished by working through bi-partisan partnerships. I believe the Governor and I will be able to successfully work with the Assembly and Senate so that New York's children can live lives free from fear and harm. I believe that together, we can implement laws that will keep dangerous individuals who want to harm and destroy innocent lives away from our children. Never again should a child have to suffer the pain and fate that my daughter did. It is our job to make sure this never happens again and that children can safely play in our communities and neighborhoods." Jessica's Law would include:

Tougher Sentences for Sex Crimes against Children

Mandatory A-I sentence of 25 to Life for violent sexual felonies against children (Jessica's Law)

Increase age threshold for most serious sexual crimes against children from "under 11" to "under 13"

Mandatory life without parole sentence for causing the death of a child during a sexual assault (Tamiqua's Law).

Creation of a higher-level A-I felony offense for using children under the age of 13 in a sexual performance.

Increased sentencing for all other sexual crimes against children.

Tougher Sentences for Repeat Sex Offenders

Mandatory 25 to Life sentences for all second-time sexual felony offenders.

Tougher Sentences for the "Worst of the Worst" Sexual Offenders

Mandatory 25 to Life minimum sentence for new crime of "Predatory Sexual Assault".

Aggravating factors for the new crime of "Predatory Sexual Assault" would include: (1) causing serious physical injury; (2) use or display of a gun, deadly weapon or what appears to be a gun or deadly weapon; and (3) committing more than one sexual assault; (4) a prior sexual or violent offense.

Strengthening Other Sex Assault Laws

Adding numerous sex crimes to list of "violent felony offenses". Eliminating requirement that "physical injury" be demonstrated in aggravated sex abuse cases.

Require the Board of Parole consider input from the State Board of Sex Examiners prior to granting parole to any sex offender.

Make Sexual Abuse in the Second Degree (subjecting one incapable of consent to sexual contact for any reason except age) a felony. Currently, it is only a misdemeanor to subject a person who is physically helpless or mentally disabled or incapacitated to sexual contact.

During his 12th and final State of the State Address three weeks ago, the Governor called for new laws that would further protect our children and families by: requiring the civil confinement of dangerous sexual predators; imposing longer sentences for those who molest and rape children, or commit violent or repeat sexual assaults; strengthening New York's Megan's Law; ending the statute of limitations on rape and sexual assaults; and requiring all criminals to submit a DNA sample to the State's DNA Databank. 1-23-06

Quoted from 197

letters - http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

From: "David Giacalone"   
To: berman.43@osu.edu, coreyrayburnyung@gmail.com, "Nicole Black" ,  upstreamblog@yahoo.com, "pat zollinger"
CC: ttyler@timesunion.com, news@capitalnews9.com, lamend@dailygazette.com, "Carl Strock" , newstips@wnyt.com, news@fox23news.com
Subject: NYCLU Letter threatens lawsuit over Schenectady County Sex Offender Laws
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 19:21:24 -0400


    Dear Webloggers, Editors and Journalists,

I wanted you to know that the NYCLU mailed a Letter this afternoon to all members of the Schenectady County Legislature, concerning the County's sex offender residency laws. It is also signed by Albany attorneys Terence Kindlon and Kathy Manley, and myself (a retired Schenectady lawyer, and editor of the weblog f/k/a).  The Letter explains why the laws are unwise and unconstitutional, and advises that "If you should persist in enforcing these laws, we would be left with no other option but to pursue litigation with all the attendant legal costs to the county which that implies."  

You can see the NYCLU Press Release by clicking here SchdySOPressReleaseAug7-2007 .

Below, I have pasted in a weblog posting describing the Letter. You can find it at
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/e.....ty-sex-offender-law/

Please let me know if you have any questions.

be well,  

David

David Giacalone, editor
f/k/a . . .breathless punditry & one-breath poetry
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalEsq
mail: haikuEsq@localnet.com,



NYCLU Letter threatens lawsuit over Schenectady County sex offender law   (Aug. 8, 20007)
In a four-page letter joined by three area lawyers, the Capital Region Chapter of the New York Civil Liberties Union advises each member of Schenectady County's Democratic-controlled Legislature that the sex offender residency restrictions [SORR] enacted by the County on June 12, 2007 are unconstitutional and will be challenged in a lawsuit, if not immediately rescinded or drastically revised. (see Agenda, at pp 68 - 74, for text of the law) The Letter declares: "it should be clear to all that this legislation was passed in haste, without careful attention either to New York state law or to constitutional protections."

Dated and mailed Aug. 7, 2007, the Letter is signed by Melanie Trimble, Executive Director of the Capital Region Chapter, and by Albany lawyers Terry Kindlon and Kathy Manley, of Kindlon Shanks & Associates, and myself, David Giacalone, of Schenectady.  Kindlon is a well-known criminal defense lawyer and Manley is experienced in appellate and civil liberty litigation.

In his recent unsuccessful special election campaign for State Assembly, County Legislator Edward Kosiur, primary sponsor of the County's sex offender residency law, proudly boasted that it is the “toughest sex predator law in New York State” (see our July 30 posting "stop Kosiur"). In a detailed discussion at the time it was passed, we described the most outrageous features of the new law:

It requires sex offenders — at every level — to leave their homes starting Oct. 1, should they reside within 2,000 feet of public parks, pools and playgrounds, as well as schools, day care and youth facilities. In addition, should such facilities at any time in the future by located within 2000 feet of a sex offender's residence, he or she has 90 days to relocate outside of the forbidden zone. The restrictions effectively ban sex offenders from living in the city of Schenectady and its close-in suburbs, and are therefor likely to cause relocation and future location of sex offender residences in more rural parts of Schenectady County and into Montgomery County.

The NYCLU Press Release (Aug. 7, 2007) describes the Letter [link to be added], which:

details the deficiencies in the county’s sex-offender laws, threatening legal action if the laws are not repealed or drastically revised to conform with state standards.
lays out the overwhelming legal case against the laws and marshals the large body of social science evidence which shows how such laws are more likely to cause problems than to solve them.
notes that, in the recent 105th Assembly District special election, voters “have sent a strong message that these laws, in their current form, are invidious.” And "The Schenectady County Legislature should listen to the voices of its constituents." [see the update to "stop Kosiur"]
states that "New York state law already puts severe but carefully-thought-out restrictions on those who have been convicted of sexual offenses," and explains how the Schenectady laws violate state pre-emption principles that prohibit local governments from exercising authority in a manner inconsistent with state law and policy; and
shows how the residency restrictions -- which amount to banishment and require the eviction of law-abiding citizens -- also run afoul of the prohibition on ex-post facto laws by increasing punishment for a crime after it has been committed. Noting that no case has been found upholding an SORR imposed without "grandfathering" current residents to allow them to stay, the Letter stresses: "It is shocking to think that the County Legislature would force people who already have paid for any crime they may have committed to uproot or abandon their families, to break leases with landlords, and to forsake communities where they may have lived in peace for decades."
The Letter also points out that the laws place an undue burden on surrounding communities to which sex offenders might be forced to migrate. Recent studies indicate that such laws may actually correlate with increased recidivism and cause former offenders to stop registering with law-enforcement authorities and to abandon the community support services that may actually inhibit them from re-offending. “There is no evidence,” Trimble observes, “that invoking residency restrictions around schools has any effect at all on rates of sexual offense.”

The Letter concludes with a plea and a warning:

"We strongly urge the Schenectady County Legislature to reconsider its actions and rescind these onerous, unjust and unconstitutional laws. If you should persist in enforcing these laws, we would be left with no other option but to pursue litigation with all the attendant legal costs to the county which that implies. "

p.s. I have no idea whether our Letter will help Susan Savage, Chair of the County Legislature (who hand-picked Ed Kosiur to run for the 105th District Assembly seat and foolishly rushed through the SORR to aid his campaign and advance her personal crusade against "sexual predators"), and County Attorney Chris Gardner (who apparently believes the law is unconstitutional as written) to come to their senses. They should know that a lawsuit challenging this unwise and unconstitutional law is a certainty, should they fail to void or totally revamp the SORR in the next week or so. Wasting tax dollars on an expensive defense of a fatally deficient law is intolerable, as is leaving the families of sex offenders in an anxious limbo with the October 1 relocation date a mere 7 weeks away. As a lawyer, I am aghast at their embracing a law that has no redeeming value. As a registered Democrat, I can assure Ms. Savage and other Party leaders that their actions have made myself and many fellow Democrats in this County angry, embarrassed and ashamed -- and in no mood to permit our Party to be destroyed by arrogant and foolish leaders, either now or in future elections.

eviction notice —
a moth ricochets
in the lampshade

. . . by Alice Frampton — The Heron’s Nest (March 2004)



autumn wind —
a leaf and homeless man
cross paths

……………………….. by Andrew Riutta

Quoted Text

Residency law faces possible challenge
Schenectady County action against sexual predators is biased, NYCLU claims  
  
By CAROL DeMARE, Staff writer
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Thursday, August 9, 2007

SCHENECTADY -- The New York Civil Liberties Union has put Schenectady County lawmakers on notice that if they continue to enforce tough new restrictions on where convicted sex offenders can live, the county will face a lawsuit.
In a letter to all 15 legislators, the Civil Liberties Union's Capital Region Chapter pulled no punches, warning legislators the local laws would be challenged in court on constitutional grounds. The NYCLU condemned the legislation and said the county was wrong to usurp state laws that applied to convicted sex offenders.

In June, legislators unanimously passed residency restrictions requiring sex offenders to leave their homes starting Oct. 1, if they were within 2,000 feet of public parks, pools and playgrounds, schools or day care and youth facilities. A second law bans offenders from moving within 2,000 feet of such areas.

Late Wednesday, after the NYCLU letter, dated a day earlier, became public, Schenectady County Legislature Chairwoman Susan Savage issued a brief written statement suggesting the laws could be amended.

"As a result of discussions with members of the County Legislature and town supervisors, we are considering changes" to the two local laws, Savage said. "These changes were already under consideration and are not in response to the threatened lawsuit by the New York Civil Liberties Union."

For weeks since the measures were passed and at public hearings before that, Democrats in the Legislature stood firm, saying they had no intention of amending the controversial laws.

The restrictions have been cited as the reason behind the loss of chief-sponsor Democrat Ed Kosiur's bid for the state Assembly last month.

Officials in the towns of Rotterdam, Duanesburg, Niskayuna and Princetown had rallied against the county measures, claiming they would force sex offenders into the suburbs or even into hiding.

"We don't banish people any longer in the 21st century," Melanie Trimble, executive director of the local chapter, said Wednesday. "You cannot banish ex-offenders who have fully complied with the law and completed their sentence or probation."

In the four-page letter, the organization urged the legislature "to reconsider its actions and rescind these onerous, unjust and unconstitutional laws. If you should persist in enforcing these laws, we would be left with no other option but to pursue litigation with all the attendant legal costs to the county which that implies. If you seek to amend these laws rather than repeal them, we strongly recommend that you bring them into conformity with New York state practice."

Trimble criticized the rash of sex-offender laws that are popping up all over the area and throughout the state and country.

"These laws tend to make the citizenry less safe from re-offending sex offenders," Trimble said. "They tend to drive them underground away from the rehabilitation resources and from friends and family and counseling."

"The main thrust of any argument against these laws, besides the pre-emption argument, is they simply do not do what they purport to do," she said. "There is no statistical record that shows these laws cause a reduction in the recidivism rate among sex-offenders."

-emption refers to a locality overriding what the state already has in place. In New York, there is comprehensive legislation designed to protect the public from ex-offenders," Trimble said.

Several local governments have either adopted or are studying proposed laws. Albany County approved a measure last summer restricting convicted Level 2 and 3 sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools and day care centers. The law has not been challenged.

"The difference between Albany County and Schenectady County is that Albany County was modeled after the Iowa state statute," which has been upheld in federal court, said William Conboy, attorney for the Democratic majority in the Albany County Legislature.

Trimble said the state has virtually the same law -- the 1,000-foot limit. It also has a civil confinement law for the worst offenders and Megan's Law that mandates registration on the state Sex Offender Registry.

Besides Trimble, the letter was signed by Albany attorneys Terence Kindlon and Kathy Manley and Schenectady attorney David Giacalone.

Schenectady laws are "clearly unconstitutional, and they need to realize they should not be putting the taxpayers of Schenectady County in a position to defend an indefensible piece of legislation because they're going to lose," Trimble said. DeMare can be reached at 454-5431 or by e-mail at cdemare@timesunion.com.

Quoted Text

From: "David Giacalone"
To: "pat zollinger"
Subject:  Proposed Changes to Sex Offender Law - Schenectacy County
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:44:11 -0400

Hello, Pat,

Attached is a copy of the proposed new laws for Schenectady County.  The plan is to call
for a public hearing on Aug. 22, with a vote on Aug. 23.

The law repeals Local Law 04-07; in addition, Local Law 07-07 would remove Level One offenders from Local Law 03-07, and add a new section:
Section 4. This local law permits a town, village or city located within Schenectady County, in order to provide further protection and safety for its residents, to enact local legislation that is more restrictive in nature and that meets the specific needs of a locality, including, but not limited to, local legislation that increases the measurement of the residency restriction beyond two thousand feet or that prohibits loitering for the purposes of engaging in illegal conduct.

Also, a RESOLUTION declares, among other things:
WHEREAS, this Governing Body finds that the New York State Legislature should introduce and approve legislation that would: (i) develop comprehensive statewide management policies for persons who have been convicted of certain sex-related offenses; (ii) increase sentences and sanctions for convicted sex offenders; and (iii) implement a statewide program for the monitoring of convicted sex offenders using GPS technology; and

WHEREAS, this Governing Body encourages all county governments to consider enacting residency restrictions for persons who have been convicted of certain sex-related offenses; and

The Resolution also directs the County Manager to do a Report on improved monitoring and designate a person to help local communities by providing random residency checks of sex offenders.  In addition, the Sheriff is to assign a person to develop methods of "intercepting and catching online sexual predators."

David
p.s. There is a very interesting discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy weblog (the "blawg" with the largest readership, which is linked to by over 12,000 separate weblogs), stemming from a posting on Aug. 8 by Prof. Eugene Volokh “Speakers Arrested Because Their Speech Supposedly Has ‘No Legitimate Purpose’,” about a group of people arrested in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, for “harassing” a sex offender by posting information about him in several places (apparently in the hope of driving him out of town).  Eugene corrects points out the free speech problems raised by the law, but then goes on to describe the sex offender involved and explain why his offense seems inappropriate for longterm listing on an SO Registry.

David Giacalone, editor
f/k/a . . .http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalEsq

Quoted from benny salami

The backlash from the Kosiur/Savage Relocation of Pedophiles law cuts both ways. Republicans that were stupid enough to support it and open there big mouths in support of this must also face the music. Number One on this list is Bobby Farley who not only voted for it but was stupid enough to go on the radio extolling its virtues. He is up for re-election again in November. Hopefully, this is soon enough that the enraged Glenville and Niskayuna voters will remember. As for Sue Savage, don't forget Gringo, that she will be facing a primary from Rev. Jim Murphy of Glenville, for her unpardonable sin of supporting and promoting this disgrace.

Quoted Text

Lawmakers rethink sex-offender bill
Schenectady County Democrats lead move to tone down legislation  
  
By PAUL NELSON, Staff writer
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Wednesday, August 15, 2007

SCHENECTADY -- Seeking to mollify critics and minimize political fallout, county Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday proposed tweaking a controversial sex offender law that has drawn the ire of municipal leaders and prompted threats of a lawsuit.
The revised legislation, which must be voted on by the County Legislature after a public hearing, calls for rescinding the portion of the law that would have made it retroactive. The other change would exempt low-level sex offenders from residency restrictions.

In June, legislators unanimously passed restrictions requiring convicted sex offenders to leave their homes starting Oct. 1 if they lived within 2,000 feet of public parks, pools and playgrounds, schools or day care and youth facilities. A second law would ban offenders from moving within 2,000 feet of such areas.

By scaling back the new law and removing the retroactive clause, sex offenders who currently live in so-called restricted areas would be allowed to remain in their homes and not be forced to move by Oct. 1.

The initial law would have applied to all three levels of convicted sex offenders. The revision would exclude Level 1 -- the lowest level -- from the statute.

The lone person to address the county panel Tuesday during its regular meeting was Duanesburg Supervisor Rene Merrihew. She repeatedly called the measure ill-conceived and thoughtless.

Merrihew also came armed with petitions from "750 angry people in District 4" and said she got 60 more letters from Princetown residents.

"We're angry at the total disregard for us and our children," said Merrihew, who punctuated her comments by saying she and fellow supervisors remained committed to having both laws rescinded.

All 12 lawmakers present voted for an Aug. 22 public hearing on the changes. Three members of the body were absent.

Though he voted for the public hearing, Legislator Robert Farley, the Republican minority leader, echoed the sentiments of many of his colleagues who said that the people must be heard before their elected officials vote.

"I think we need to listen more on this, the best ideas don't come from any one on this legislature, it comes from the public," he said.

Despite the changes, Niskayuna Supervisor Luke Smith, who did not attend the meeting, still believes the legislature needs to hit the pause button.

"We are concerned with the entire legislation, specifically that it doesn't do what it's intended to do, which is protect children," Smith said before the session. He added that the panel needs to research the issue further and consult with experts, including probation officers, police and mental health officials.

Addressing the media outside county chambers, legislature Chairwoman Susan Savage, a Niskayuna Democrat, said she had solicited opinions from Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney and Sheriff Harry Buffardi.

"It's hard to meet everybody's needs, but at the end of the day we think we will have a piece of legislation that is similar to what our neighbors in other counties have," Savage said.

She stressed that the proposed changes were being contemplated before the New York Civil Liberties Union put the county on notice last week that if it continued to pursue the legislation, it could face a lawsuit.

"We think we're meeting the majority of the concerns," Savage said.

The legislature's Democratic majority, who had previously faced Republican complaints that they were soft on sex offenders, touted the legislation as the toughest of its kind in the state.

Its passage of the legislation gave chief sponsor, Ed Kosiur, a shot of media exposure just weeks ahead of his bid to win a special election to the Assembly seat in the 105th District. The district includes parts of Schenectady and the county towns of Rotterdam, Princetown and Duanesburg. It also includes all of Montgomery County.

But the legislation backfired on Kosiur, who despite a 4,000-voter Democratic enrollment advantage, lost the July 31 election to Republican George Amedore Jr.

Republicans and some Democrats said the issue inflamed voters in rural Duanesburg and Princetown, where officials feared the legislation would force sex offenders to move because those towns are more spread out.

Voter turnout numbers from the election seem to bear that out. Board of elections officials say nearly 50 percent of voters went to the polls in those two towns, while overall turnout for the election hovered at about 30 percent.

Savage has insisted the turnout wasn't a sign that the legislation was a political miscalculation. "There were really other (things) that were (to blame) such as the misrepresentation of (Kosiur's) tax record," she said earlier in the day.

Nelson can be reached at 454-5347 or by e-mail at pnelson@timesunion.com.