I find the statutory rape charge odd. I've never seen a perp get charged with that in a rape, abduction/murder case involving a child. I wonder if it's to simply charge him with as much as they can?
I think they are covering their bases maybe.
You are mistaken if you think the ACLU doesn't fight for defendant's and prisoner's rights. A quick glance at their very website makes this crystal clear.
For fear of turning this thread political I will say I respect your belief and we can agree to disagree.
Justice for Adriaunna is my only concern in this case.
Prisoner's rights yes, defendant's rights, not so much. But again, the ACLU has about zero to do with the status of our laws with regard to violent offenders and sex offenders. That's just a fact. A bit of research shows quickly why our laws are the way they are and why certain laws are underutilized.
But yes, this IS about politics, (although not in the typical sense of the word - which IMO is a meaning that can be used when when someone wants to nicely end an important discussion so they do not have to hear something they may not agree with). And politics determines what we can do to protect children like Adriaunna. Which is a seriously important subject to discuss when we encounter horrific cases like hers. Otherwise, why are we here? Are we here to rant about groups we don't like or to create change and educate ourselves?
Here are some facts:
1. There is a one strike available in California for violent sex offenders. The prosecution had the ability to use it in John Gardner's case. Instead, they struck a plea bargain with him which enabled him to get out a few years after violently assaulting a 13 year old and murder Amber and Chelsea:
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2010/Mar/15/region-one-strike-law-for-sex-offenders-already/
Why did they strike that bargain? If anyone thinks any DA would do such a thing based on the activism of the ACLU, they just don't know prosecutors or how the system works. The ACLU has nothing to do with the decisions highlighted in the cases below, either. It's mostly cost:
2. The state of Utah has declared they have no more room for sex offenders in their jails. "Failing to register is a class A misdemeanor, a minor offense that would result in a minimum 90 days in jail. But when there's no room in the jail, police don't enforce it" says Jack Ford, the spokesman for the Department of Corrections in Utah (Hyde).
Allowing offenders to walk free because there is no space to hold them is an increasing problem not only in Utah, but also throughout the entire nation. http://voices.yahoo.com/slap-wrist-sex-offenders-610410.html?cat=17
3. To put everything into a better perspective, the abuse and neglect of state laws pertaining to sex offenders can be seen even in the central Kentucky area. Last fall, the 27 Newsfirst investigation team discovered a sex offender living two blocks away from a school, which was in clear violation of the 1000 feet law. This prompted more searches and more discoveries of convicted offenders living in violation of the law. The sex offender even had visits from his parole officer whom never said anything about the violation. It seems like officials are just looking the other way when it comes to strictly enforcing sex offender laws. When the lack of enforcing the law is this evident, even in Kentucky, it is hard to imagine how many offenders from
Maine to California can slip through the registration undetected.
http://voices.yahoo.com/slap-wrist-sex-offenders-610410.html?cat=17
4. State corrections officials place risk levels on many of Washington's approximately 20,000 registered sex offenders, the overwhelming majority of them male. But the final decision on the offender's leveland, by extension, whether the public knows he is an offenderresides with the sheriff or the police chief where the offender lives. In some cases, there are delays before files are properly reviewed.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/2011-08-31/news/washington-s-screwed-up-sex-offender-registry/
5.
North Carolina is one of 35 states that refused to comply with the terms of the 2006 federal Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act, in part because of the cost of implementation. The failure to adopt the new terms of the law by its July 27, 2011 deadline cost North Carolina a federal grant worth $8.7 million. However, the state estimated it would have cost $14.7 million to implement SORNA.
http://www.dickerson-law-firm.com/C...tly-Federal-Sex-Offender-Registration-Law.asp
6.
Texas is one of five states to shun a national sex offender registry created in 2006, citing cost concerns. The Houston Chronicle reported Saturday that officials say it would take an estimated $38 million to modify the state's existing registry program. Therefore, the state is willing to risk losing about $1.4 million in grant money to help local agencies enforce the law, they say.
"We couldn't afford the national program," Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat and chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, told the newspaper.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/0...-to-join-sex-offender-registry/#ixzz2cvnEX5Hm
7. A 15-year-old state law that created a lifetime-supervision sentence for Colorado sex offenders provides insufficient treatment for many of the highest-risk inmates and has left thousands of others waiting for therapy in prison, according to a recent audit.Demand for treatment in the Department of Corrections' Sex Offender Treatment and Monitoring Program greatly exceeds supply, the audit found. More than 1,000 inmates who are ready and waiting for treatment have passed their parole-eligibility dates, the auditors found. Their prolonged incarceration may be costing Colorado taxpayers as much as $30 million a year.
The auditors reported that low-risk sex offenders in Colorado remain imprisoned at great cost, that the most dangerous offenders get too little attention and that nearly half the therapists they observed were "poor" conducting group therapy sessions with behaviors "outside the range of what is acceptable for a therapist."Anderson, who sponsored the 1998 law...defends the law today, saying problems with waiting lists and therapist training could be solved with adequate funding of treatment programs.
"It's all about money," she said. "I've known for some time that they haven't had enough money in the treatment budget."
The law established indeterminate sentences five years to life, for example for many sex-offense crimes in Colorado. Sex offenders who successfully complete a prison-treatment program and get paroled then enter a community-based lifetime-supervision program.
Now, legislators say they also plan to scrutinize the sex-offender treatment program within the prisons and the law that created potential lifetime sentences for sex offenses.http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23101487/audit-rips-states-lifetime-supervision-sentence-sex-offenders
8.
Unlike other prosecutors in California and the position of the state Attorney General, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley refused to apply tough provisions of Jessicas Law retroactively against sexually violent predators (SVP). A copy of an October 2006 an agreement Stipulation Agreement.pdf
between Cooleys office and the Public Defender and L.A. Superior Court shows that a deal was reached not to seek indeterminate commitments of the worst sexual predators instead of the two-year maximum allowed before Jessicas Law passed if their cases already were in the legal system.
Jessicas Law contained a retroactive provision allowing indeterminate commitments in all pending cases and that provision has been applied across the state, unheld in appellate courts and supported by Attorney General Jerry Brown.
This is the only place where the D.A. is not following the law, said Ipsen. Jessicas Law, which is the will of the people and has been affirmed by the courts, says any person who has been determined to be an SVP should be committed to a mental-health facility for an indeterminate period after serving a sentence for their crime.
But that is not what is happening in SVP cases that were filed prior to the effective date of Jessicas Law, which was September 20, 2006, at least not in Los Angeles.
And Cooleys decision has caused repercussions in his Violent Predators Unit and put childrens lives at risk, according to sources in his department.
The Stipulation Agreement shows that for a 24-month period after the effective date of Jessicas Law, the District Attorneys Office agreed not to seek indeterminate-period commitments for SVPs facing involuntary treatment at a mental hospital. Every SVP faces such a trial after serving a criminal penalty, as there is no known cure for sexually violent compulsivity.
In L.A. County SVPs whose cases were filed before the passage of Jessicas Law get new recommitment trials every two years. With every trial theoretically comes an opportunity for release. So far, 16 sexual violent predator cases in L.A. County have received two-year commitments since Jessicas Law went into effect, instead of the indeterminate-period specified by the law.Other deputies in Cooleys SVP Unit and in other units in his office would speak only off the record, under condition of anonymity. To a person, the message was clear in those phone interviews: Prosecutors are in a state of revulsion because of the Stipulation Agreement. The normally outspoken attorneys say they will be sent to traffic [division] if they talkor worse. One said the atmosphere at SVP and the D.A.s office among the ranks is chilly and numb. http://ronkayela.com/2008/05/exclusive-da-cooley-goes-soft.html
9. In 1994, analysts predicted that Three Strikes would result in over 100,000 additional inmates in state prison by 2003. Clearly, that rate of growth has not occurred. A number of factors have probably contributed to a lower prison population, including the use of discretion by judges and district attorneys to dismiss prior strikes in some cases.
While courts do not track how often such discretion is used, some surveys of district attorneys suggest that prior strikes might be dismissed in 25 percent to 45 percent of third strike cases, resulting in shorter sentences for those offenders. http://www.lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm
10. Since 1990, 19 states, including North Dakota,
have enacted laws authorizing the involuntary civil
commitment of sexually violent predators. The
constitutionality of this civil commitment process, with
certain required procedural safeguards, has been
upheld by the United States Supreme Court.
The high
cost of confining and treating those sexually violent
predators for an indefinite period of time has led
states to look for alternatives to civil commitment while
still maintaining public safety. These alternatives
include an outpatient civil commitment program and
the use of indeterminate sentencing for certain sex
offenders.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=9NxVt8yiPz_To7LuPOUSWA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.cGE
