"...now private citizens are increasingly taking matters into their own hands. In addition to the constant barrage of insults and threats directed at Mr Uitenbogaard in Hengelo, another member of Martijn was driven from his home in the northern province of Friesland. And a writer who merely supported Martijn’s right to free speech has also had the windows of his house smashed and ‘Paedophile’ painted on his front door in red letters."
One Last Visit for Mother and Son?
Uh, no. Apparently not.
This, despite the fact that the son's original accuser has long since recanted her testimony saying the sexual assault she had originally testified to never occurred.
She was nine when she was coerced into her accusation by her mother, then embroiled in a bitter divorce proceeding and in need of an alibi to keep her from being prosecuted for unlawfully fleeing the state with her daughter.
She was eleven when she recanted.
She's now 21 and one of the two cousins she had originally accused of molestation is still in prison. His mother is dying. They would like to see each other one last time. And the State of Texas remains indifferent to both.
Let's be clear: convicted felons are routinely denied freedom even when evidence comes to light that they were wrongfully convicted.
This happens frequently in the U.S. today and should shock and outrage us to the core.
Yet somehow, this continues. And, with Justices like Antonin Scalia in the Supreme Court, we should not be surprised.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is “actually” innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged “actual innocence” is constitutionally cognizable, said Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court
San Jose man faces life sentence for attacking man suspected of molesting his stepdaughter
The reporter, in this case, spins the story to evoke outrage from her/his readers that an enraged father could be held responsible for his premeditated and vicious attack on a man he suspected of molesting his daughter.
This has been a recurring trope in America for some time now, possibly starting with the thuggish Ellie Nessler's execution style murder of her sons "molester" within the very courtroom where he was being tried, nearly twenty years ago.
After serving just three years in prison for shooting her victim five times in the head, she returned to her life as a low-level methamphetamine dealer and mother of a nearly grown-up career criminal and soon-to-be murderer in his own right (he stomped a man to death whom he had hired to clean up his family's property).
But according to her supporters, who were, and still are, legion, she should have, instead, received a handsome reward for summarily executing a "child molester".
Largely unacknowledged is the transformation of the American public into an angry, vengeance-seeking mob who have become convinced by their leaders and their journalists that mob-violence and summary execution are perfectly reasonable propositions for securing justice. The media, through outrageously biased "realistic" crime shows, and journalistically bankrupt news magazines and cable news shows, have continuously communicated to the public that real justice is denied them through the courts.
Even the concept of rights have been redefined to include special "victim's rights" and since all virtuous people are now imbued with these emergent rights, they now see the traditional rights of the accused in direct conflict with their own "victim's rights" and demand those of the accused be degraded relative to their own.
And it isn't just the U.S. anymore. It's the U.K., Australia and even The Netherlands.
Marthijn Uittenbogaard, a controversial Dutchman who argued against that country's raising of the age-of-consent laws and who has argued for its abolition, has been continually hounded, harassed, assaulted and had his house vandalized by those who apparently believe that he should not have the right to speak or even to exist, despite his having committed no crime.
This is a very dangerous path which the U.S. has trod and which the rest of world is now following.
The Problem Is, They're All News Corporation
Poisoning the well.
Twenty-five years ago, Rupert Murdoch's newspapers distinguished themselves from others.
has had an inestimable effect upon culture, law and trust worldwide.
The "Truthiness" of sexual violation
High trust / low trust
transferring our trust from family and friends to authority figures.
Petition forces parliamentary debate on "Martijn" in The Netherlands
The previously "tolerant" Dutch nation is quickly erasing any traces of their legendary open-mindedness. U.S.-style sting operations and unprovoked searches are the new face of Dutch justice.
The group "Vereniging Martijn", is being subjected to escalating levels of legal harassment and vigilante violence.
Yesterday, one of the group's spokespersons, Marthijn Uittenbogaard, had the front window of his house smashed by rocks and ammonia was poured through his mail slot.
Previously, he has been physically assaulted and receives almost daily threats. A motorcycle gang recently held a large protest in front of his house.
So far, the police show little interest in affording him the same protections that it provides to Geert Wilders or, previously, to Ayan Hirsi Ali, despite continuous threats to his life.
Michigan Supreme Court: Homeless sex offender can be punished for not registering address
Despite not having a residence, and having been barred entrance to homeless shelters because of his sex offender status, the court ruled that he could be held criminally liable for not telling police where he was living.
These laws are working exactly as they are intended to work, to make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for registered sex offenders to exist without violating laws to which no one else is subjected. Thus, they exist as both a means of harassment and as a pretext for further incarceration.
The term for such laws is "Status Offenses" i.e. an action that is prohibited only to a certain class of people, such as Jews in Nazi occupied countries in the last century.
Social Networks: Thinking Of The Children
After chasing children back into their homes to live in protected isolation from all possible contact with unauthorized adults, society/government now insists that they be completely shielded from social media (which may include possible contact with unauthorized adults) even though they probably do so while safely ensconced within their own living rooms or bedrooms.
This is a perfect example of "mission creep" in which we continue to move the goalposts of acceptable risk closer together to define an ever-smaller field of existence which kids must then content themselves to occupy.
This tendency is also described as "The Precautionary Principle" which posits that all risk, no matter now minuscule, is unacceptable.
Except that, of course, its not "all" risks. Only those risks corresponding to the most lurid possibilities with which society has become obsessed, namely, stranger abduction and the ostensibly explosive combination of kids and sex, are addressed by the social fortresses in which children are now held in protective isolation.
These stated concerns for children leave unaddressed the actual dangers they face as a result of these policies: social isolation, frustration, obesity, inexperience and ill-preparation for adulthood, loneliness, depression, a distorted view of the world, etc.
But none of those concerns are all that interesting or sensational, are they?
Where's the excitement and, well, the catharsis in those?
The problem is, real problems are just so damned boring!
It's like the difference between watching, say, Nightmare on Elm Street on the one hand, and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, on the other. Which would you rather watch?
http://www.kqed.org/news/story/2011/07/11/60667/social_networks_thinking_of_the_children?category=technology
This tendency is also described as "The Precautionary Principle" which posits that all risk, no matter now minuscule, is unacceptable.
Except that, of course, its not "all" risks. Only those risks corresponding to the most lurid possibilities with which society has become obsessed, namely, stranger abduction and the ostensibly explosive combination of kids and sex, are addressed by the social fortresses in which children are now held in protective isolation.
These stated concerns for children leave unaddressed the actual dangers they face as a result of these policies: social isolation, frustration, obesity, inexperience and ill-preparation for adulthood, loneliness, depression, a distorted view of the world, etc.
But none of those concerns are all that interesting or sensational, are they?
Where's the excitement and, well, the catharsis in those?
The problem is, real problems are just so damned boring!
It's like the difference between watching, say, Nightmare on Elm Street on the one hand, and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, on the other. Which would you rather watch?
http://www.kqed.org/news/story/2011/07/11/60667/social_networks_thinking_of_the_children?category=technology
Kirkland 6-year-old patted down by TSA agents
When Paranoias Collide:
Reconciling the paranoia of "bad touches" with the paranoia of "security theater"
Oh, what to do???
Sometimes They Say What They Really Think
"Former U.S. Atty. Don Heller, who wrote the California death penalty law 33 years ago, said he has turned against capital punishment, believing it is too costly and is administered unfairly and too slowly..
Anyway, he says, "some of these guys should be left out in the general prison population. Then someone can take capital punishment into their own hands, particularly with a baby rapist." "
Obviously, Heller, despite no longer believing in the death penalty, has not lost his wonderfully endearing savagery, since he advocates here the murder of sex offender prisoners by other inmates.
His statement has broader relevance since it is unlikely that he would have said this while still employed by the U.S. government. I believe that he speaks for many of our public servants who leave unvoiced their true regard for human rights.
Certainly he speaks for the majority of those posting online comments to newspapers.
Indeed, savagery is the norm today, not the exception.
The Trauma Myth
In January 2010, Perseus Books published her book The Trauma Myth,[1] in which she suggests that child sexual abuse is rarely a traumatic experience for the victims at the time it occurs, and is instead described by victims as confusing.[2] She argues that later in life, after the memories are processed, examined, and more fully understood, the experience becomes traumatic. Clancy writes in “The Trauma Myth” that when she arrived at Harvard in 1996, the trauma theory held that “a child will only participate in abuse if forced, threatened, or explicitly coerced” (p. 41). Then she interviewed victims and learned, “They did not fight it. It was not done against their will. They went along . . . only 5% tried to stop it” (p. 41). Clancy concludes that since sexual abuse of children is not violent per se, the millions of victims who did not experience their sex abuse as traumatic grapple with crippling thoughts of shame, embarrassment, and self-blame, thus compounding their suffering. She advocates for a refined understanding of the immediate effects of child sex abuse in order to better help those who are currently excluded from a clinical and popular culture that embraces the trauma model.Susan A. Clancy is a psychology researcher at Harvard University in the field of memory.
Flash Mobs of Sex Offenders to Descend Upon Orange County California Beaches and Parks?
Using Twitter, organizers hope to stage seemingly spontaneous events with hundreds of R.S.O.'s and their supporters at parks and beaches where local ordinances declare them to be unwelcome visitors. Stay tuned; we hope to find out more!
Call to ban art with nude children in Australia
As with sex offenses, child pornography is being defined ever-more widely.
Every expansion of criminal statutes is accompanied by greater government intrusion into the lives of its citizens.
Beware: this cannot end well.
Tenant Kills Landlord Because "He's A Pedophile!"
Of course! Notice how allegations of sexual abuse have become the #1 reason for justifying a crime?
http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story/Possible-motive-released-in-Albany-landlord/Gu_ZNM7gc0KFoW3MFiEsiQ.cspx
the incredible disparity in American societal attitudes toward sex and violence
Developmental psychologist James W. Prescott, formally of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, argues that there is a "preference for sexual violence over sexual pleasure in the United States." He says, "This is reflected in our acceptance of sexually explicit films that involve violence and rape, and our rejection of sexually explicit films for pleasure only (pornography)," he says. "Apparently, sex with pleasure is immoral and unacceptable, but sex with violence and pain is moral and acceptable."
Child Sexuality
The major problem in dealing with sexuality in children has always been the adult’s own hang-ups, discomfort, and embarrassment with sex. There is that tendency to ignore children’s sexual questions and behaviors, a tendency to believe that we don’t have to answer children’s sexual questions because they couldn’t possibly know what they are asking. This serves to deny the child’s sexuality because of the adult’s own uneasiness. The consequence, of course is that the child gets the message that she is asking an improper question that her mother disapproves of, therefore the child will stop risking her mother’s rejection or anger, keep quiet, and wonder silently to herself.
What Else Could We Possibly Do To Sex Offenders?
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20060417/NEWS08/604170312/Sex-offenders-spread-across-state-nation?odyssey=nav%7Chead
What We Can Learn From Casey Anthony
Recent statistics show that children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their mother than anyone else. Contrary to popular mythology, they are rarely killed by a sex-crazed stranger.
FBI crime statistics show that parents were responsible for 57 percent of child murders, with family friends and acquaintances accounting for another 30 percent and other family members accounting for eight percent
Crime statistics further reveal that of the children under 5 killed, most were murdered by their mothers. More FBI studies have been used to prove that murderous mothers are "sick" and can be used to support the theory that mothers consider children to be their property.
Everything is Now “Potential” Child Porn By Dr. Marty Klein
This is the decade of destroying children to protect them. It’s the decade of arresting teens for emailing sexy photos of themselves, turning them into Registered Sex Offenders. It’s the decade of arresting teens for having sex with each other, turning them into Registered Sex Offenders. It’s the decade of arresting and expelling 6-year-olds for “inappropriately hugging” classmates, turning them into “at-risk juveniles.” It’s a disgusting Moral Panic. The Fear of Child Porn has gotten completely out of hand. The bizarre behaviors of Sheriff’s Departments, state legislatures, school districts, and “morality” groups are not about protecting kids. They’re about responding to Panic. This is about adults, not about kids. It’s about frightened people reassuring themselves that they’re safe; that they’re doing everything they can to make a changing world less confusing; that they’re “erring on the side of caution” (as if there are no negative aspects to that); and that we specifically aren’t letting the niceties of the Constitution or common sense stop us.
We know it’s a Panic, because laws that were designed to protect kids are now being used to destroy them, along with some of the basics of our adult system of government. And most people don’t even feel bad about it.
Accusers as "Victims": A Case Study
A reminder of how little is required to convict "sex offenders".
Proposed law would bar sex offenders from veterans cemeteries
Apparently, this Missouri Legislator is referring to DEAD sex offenders, although I'm surprised that she doesn't also wish to exclude living sex offenders from visiting the cemeteries.
Sure, and while we're at it, lets bar any veterans who were guilty of war crimes during their stint in the armed services from being buried in "hallowed ground", too. If they massacred children in Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, let's keep them out of the Veteran's Cemeteries, too.
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- A Missouri lawmaker has introduced new legislation in Congress that would prevent sex offenders from being buried in national cemeteries.
The "Hallowed Grounds Act," introduced by Republican Rep. Vicky Hartzler, would prohibit an individual who is classified as a Tier III sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act from being buried at a veterans or national cemetery. A Tier III sex offender is one whose offenses against a child might include the crimes of aggravated sexual abuse or abusive sexual contact.
"While veterans guilty of capital crimes have justly been denied burial in our national cemeteries, veterans guilty of sexual abuse of children are still entitled to these honors," Hartzler said. "Allowing these offenders to rest in fields of honor is an insult to America's military heroes. Furthermore, it is an outrage to the victims and their families."
http://www.semissourian.com/story/1739345.html?response=no
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
