Oak Park police charge boy who allegedly made sex-ranking list

This sort of First Amendment protected speech, juvenile-obnoxious though it may be, would have warranted nothing more than a parental or school principal reprimand in times past.

Now, it's the sort of behavior that is treated as a criminal offense and will, no doubt, eventually require registration as a sex offender.

The "Zero Tolerance" society now deems a schoolboy's creation and dissemination of a list ranking schoolgirl's attractiveness (or other attributes unspecified in the news piece) as a criminal act warranting criminal sanction. Why are we not surprised that the net the hysterics have cast is growing so wide as to ensnare even the kids themselves? Could it be that they are running out of victims, err.. "victimizers"?

the story:

http://www.suntimes.com/5294285-417/oak-park-police-charge-boy-who-allegedly-made-sex-ranking-list.html

DOJ: FBI digital counterintelligence weakened by focus on child porn

Cyber attacks are at an all time high but FBI spends twice as much effort fighting child porn, according to a scathing criticism by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Despite a dramatic increase in cyber attacks on U.S. public and private infrastructure and networks, and evidence that hostile foreign governments are behind many of these attacks, the F.B.I. has done little to counter these threats, preferring instead to expend twice as many resources in the investigation of online child pornography.

This criticism is being leveled by the Department of Justice itself, which accuses the FBI of incompetence and lack of commitment in countering demonstrated cyber threats while expending excessive resources on child porn.

Specific intelligence pointing to Chinese military attacks on State Department computers has resulted in a massive grab of classified material by China. U.S. corporations are also actively targeted by China and other countries seeking to acquire competitive market intelligence.

Russian and other governments are known to have active programs for penetrating U.S. computer networks with the aim of gaining strategic military and economic advantage over the U.S.

Given these demonstrated threats against the well-being and prosperity of the U.S. and its citizens, it is shocking (although not surprising) that far greater resources are instead allocated to the investigation of child pornography (much of it produced by kids themselves) and to the entrapment of those still foolish enough to fall prey to badge-wearing adults masquerading as minors.

This bizarre mis-allocation of limited tax payer dollars is the result of decades of media, government and busybody-fueled hysteria to all things having to do with kids and sex.

We are finally beginning to realize the terrible consequences which inevitably result from dangerously misguided policies brought about by a distorted perception of reality.

These consequences have become ever more apparent in the dramatic erosion of our liberty as well as in our security and prosperity.

Ironic it is that the shrill voices which proclaim as their greatest priority the protection of children are themselves the enemies of their future. And let us hope that the eventual recognition of this glaring truth will come soon.

******************************************

DOJ: FBI digital counterintelligence weakened by focus on child porn
Cyberattacks are at an all time high; FBI spends twice as much effort fighting porn

By Kevin Fogarty

April 29, 2011, 11:35 AM — Despite its growing digital surveillance capabilities and increasing responsibility for investigating and countering cyber attacks on the U.S., the FBI's core cyber security division turns out to be basically incompetent, according to a critical report from the Dept. of Justice. [PDF] http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a1122r.pdf

Part of the reason is that the 14 agencies that share some responsibility for online counter-espionage don't share information well. Another contributor is the lack of effective pressure from top managers to get agents trained in national-security intrusion topics and tactics.

Most of the reason is that the FBI spends twice as much effort investigating child porn as it does attempts by foreign governments to attack U.S. facilities or steal information that would damage U.S. national security, the report found.

To put that in perspective, the number of foreign attacks on the U.S. increased 40 percent between 2007 and 2008, according to the report, whose data are pretty old for such a sensitive topic.

An April study from McAfee showed 80 percent of utilities in 14 countries had been attacked during the previous year, an increase of almost 50 percent compared to the year before. Attacks ranged from distributed denial of services to intrusions to remove data to intrusions that attempted to take control of the utility's internal IT systems.

And that's just among civilian-run utility companies.

State Dept. documents released through WikiLeaks this month showed that years-long cyberattacks launched by the Chinese military had netted "terabytes" of sensitive data ranging from names and passwords that would give access to State Department computers, to the design of major weapons systems.

The "Byzantine Hades" attacks – and others coming from Russia and other unfriendly powers – represent a new state of cyberwar the U.S. is not yet prepared to fight.

The attacks have been so successful "we have given up on the idea we can keep our networks pristine," according to Stewart Baker, a former senior cyber-security official at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and National Security Agency.

The focus has shifted instead to more sophisticated efforts to detect and counter intrusions as they're made.

Unfortunately, those are exactly the kinds of skills the FBI cyber squads lack and the kind of crime they don't have the time or resources to investigate.

Of 36 agents with cybersecurity responsibilities the DOJ tested – from 10 of the agency's 56 field offices, each of which has at least one "cyber squad" – only 23 told investigators they had the training to investigate national security intrusions.

The other 13 "lacked the networking and counterintelligence expertise to investigate national security intrusion cases." Five said they were completely unqualified to investigate national security intrusions effectively, the report said.

In 2007 the FBI created a separate career path for digital security investigators called the Cyber Career Path, which includes a four-stage training plan covering 12 core courses and a set of elective courses agents can use to develop a specialty.

The agency's habit of moving agents to new offices or new assignments every two or three years to expand their skills or experience makes completing that training difficult, the report concluded. So does a generally inconsistent focus on both online counter-espionage and giving agents either the training or time to build experience in investigating it.

Top FBI managers are much more comfortable with agents trained to track down domestic hackers and breaking down doors than they are investigating or countering serious online attacks from overseas.

The report – some information in which was blacked out to avoid releasing sensitive or top secret information to which the public should not have access – included the total number of agents who had completed all 12 courses as of June, 2010.

The number was the only part of the paragraph explaining the program that was redacted.

Online espionage isn't the FBI cyber squads' only responsibility, however. In 2009, 19 percent of the cyber agents worked on national security intrusion investigations, while 31 percent worked on non-spy-related digital crimes and 41 percent investigated online child porn.

That's not to say child porn and domestic, non-national-security related cybercrime should not be investigated.

When you're losing terabytes of sensitive data to foreign governments who can walk freely through your most secure computer systems, however, maybe it's time to reconsider your priorities.

Maybe shift a few agents away from the wankers and point them toward the enemy?


http://www.itworld.com/security/160701/doj-fbi-cyber-security-largely-incompetent-obsessed-child-porn

Another Unnecessary Death At California's Coalinga State Hospital

Early Saturday morning, the 5th of March, 2011, Civil Detainee Victor Segovia died in California's Coalinga State Hospital. He had complained to medical staff of chest pains and difficulty breathing earlier in the evening but was left untreated and told to go to bed. Shortly before 4:00 a.m., he collapsed on the bathroom floor and, despite attempts by other Detainees to get him the timely medical attention he desperately needed, he did not receive it and died shortly thereafter.

"Homeland Security" operation offered illicit "sex tourism" trips

Ed: Let's be clear about this: at a time when the U.S. is on the brink of fiscal disaster, the American taxpayers are funding entrapment schemes such as the “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” to ensnare individuals who, although lacking the common sense they were born with, are very likely not a threat to anyone but themselves.


Once ensnared by this creepiest of enterprises brought to you be our very own Department of Homeland Security, the taxpayers are again on the hook for the cost of prosecuting and then confining such individuals for the next twenty or more years.


When the D.H.S. was formed as a "super agency" just a few short years ago, the reasons given for its massive scale and even more massive appetite for tax dollars was the exigency of combating terrorism and keeping it away from America's shores.


Instead, we find that we are paying for it to create improbably salacious sting operations having nothing to do with "Homeland Security" whatsoever.


And all of this at a time when we are being told to expect less from government but are required to give it more.


At what point will our unfounded fears and obsessions with everything having to do with children and sex be widely recognized as the ruinously expensive and bizarre misadventures they have become?


Not convinced? Let's take a look at the government's own statistics on incarceration and crime:








MARCH 9--In an aggressive bid to entice prospective “sex tourists,” the Department of Homeland Security last year launched an undercover web site that purported to arrange trips from the U.S. to Canada, where clients could engage in sexual activity with minors, The Smoking Gun has learned.


The “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” web site was active until a few weeks ago when its Massachusetts-based web hosting firm removed the site from its servers, apparently in response to a complaint about its content. Now, visitors to precioustreasureholidaycompany.com are greeted with the message, “This site has been suspended.”


After a year online, the DHS undercover site may have fallen victim to its own sleazy, overt come-on. As seen at right, the site’s front page carried three symbols that an FBI intelligence bulletin has identified as being used by pedophiles. Additionally, the site’s acronym, PTHC, is an allusion to “preteen hardcore” pornography. The site’s carefully misspelled motto--“We Help Make Your Fantasy’s Come True!”--also does little to mask its illicit intentions.


An account executive with the hosting firm, who appeared unaware that “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” was a government operation, said that following a site’s suspension an internal investigation is launched. Upon the review’s completion, a site is either reinstated or terminated. The executive, Jason Crawford, added that if a customer’s site is found to contain illicit material like child pornography, the FBI is contacted.


[Five years ago, FBI agents concocted a similar sting, launching “Wicked Adventures Travel,” a web site purporting to offer pedophiles "exotic excursions" to the Philippines and Thailand. That operation yielded at least one felony conviction.]


According to court records and several sources familiar with the sting operation, the “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” web site was operated by investigators assigned to DHS’s Cleveland office. In affidavits sworn by Agent Gabriel Hagan, the undercover web site is described as “offering ‘international travel’ from Cleveland, Ohio, to Canada for the purpose of engaging in sexually explicit conduct with minors.” While records reveal that the site was first registered in February 2010, further details about its owner (as well as administrative and technical contacts) have been carefully cloaked.


To draw visitors--and potential targets--to the site, DHS agents early last year began seeding a wide variety of sketchy web sites with mentions of (and links to) “Precious Treasure Holiday Company.” Investigators touted the undercover business on Russian and Swedish web sites, assorted chat rooms, and online destinations with words like “jailbait” in their addresses.


Using the online handle “otra,” one individual has been particularly enthusiastic in trying to drive traffic to the undercover operation. Posting on several sites, “otra” enthused that “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” was a “great place for real incest” and the “only place for the real thing.” In one online profile, “otra”--who is described as a Canadian male--opted for a profile photo (seen at left) showing a hand in a masturbatory position. Shortly after the DHS site went live, an anonymous poster on a Swedish bulletin board reported that, “I found a website where you can travel to go have sex with kids.” After including the nascent undercover operation’s web address, the poster added, “This website…is an actually thriving business that is legit.”


While it is difficult to gauge the overall success of DHS’s efforts to drum up visitors, the “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” operation has led to the conviction of at least one defendant on felony charges (he was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison), while another man is under indictment for conspiring to transport an eight-year-old girl from Canada to the U.S. with the intent of having her engage in sexual activity.


Federal court records indicate that two other individuals became targets of the DHS operation after visiting the undercover web site last year and engaging in subsequent e-mail exchanges with investigators. One subject is a former Marine now deployed in the Middle East with the Army Reserves.


In every instance, targets have visited the undercover web site and sought, via e-mail, additional information about “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” offerings. Agents responded by sending back a “brochure” with details of the sex tour to Canada. The brochure, a court filing reported, also “requested answers to specific questions so not to disappoint the customer.” These included queries about the preferred age of the minors with whom the prospective sex tourist sought to consort. The brochure also noted that a female employee would accompany customers to Canada (this role has been played by Agent Hagan).


In some cases, a target was also provided a username and password that would allow access to a section of the DHS site containing an online “catalog” of girls aged eight to 14. Two men were arrested last year when they traveled to meet a child advertised in this catalog.


The enlisted man snared by the “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” web site, TSG has learned, is Sergeant Jason Talbott, a 32-year-old Washington State native.


In a mid-June 2010 e-mail from his Yahoo account, Talbott, pictured at right, wrote that he was “interested in a discreet package” involving an eight-year-old girl. While noting that, “I have no way of knowing if you are law enforcement or FBI,” Talbott asked about rates and sought “some sort of assurance that you are a legit company. Picture of some of the services provided maybe?” An account of Talbott’s e-mail exchanges with Agent Hagan is contained in a search warrant application excerpted here.


After receiving the brochure (and being provided access to the online catalog), Talbott described one particular child as “an attractive young lady, who would more than suit my needs.” He added, however, “I will not be back in the country for another year and a half as I am abroad.” Along with asking about adoption options mentioned in the brochure, Talbott wrote, “Again, I still have no assurances that you are legitimate, and not a sting operation or scam.”


Four months passed without further contact from Talbott. Then, on October 20, he sent an e-mail seeking “an updated catalogue of your females.” Based on entries from Talbott’s MySpace page, the e-mail was sent while he was home on leave in Spokane. In an October 14 post, he told of returning in a few weeks to the “sandbox” (Talbott previously wrote of being deployed in Kuwait).


Included with the October 20 e-mail was a naked photo of a prepubescent girl. “Attached is a pic of what I like just to show that I am not FBI. I would love a sample pic of one of your girls to verify something that shows a bit more than a clothed girl that looks like one of the dateline bait girls. All I need is to find myself on dateline.” While assuring that he was not a law enforcement agent, Talbott still appeared unconvinced that the web site’s proprietors were not themselves carrying badges or NBC employees.


After identifying Talbott as a target of the DHS probe, a TSG reporter sent a series of detailed e-mails to the Yahoo account seeking comment. In an initial response, the recipient replied, “I'm sorry, why are you calling me Sgt. Talbot? And what image was sent from this email? Do I need to run another virus scan?” Subsequent e-mails noted that, “I have nothing to talk to you about” and “I don't like being accused of shit like this. You are sick.”


In one e-mail, a reporter included a link to a TSG page that contained an excerpt from a search warrant for the contents of the swlfty@yahoo.com account. Within minutes of the e-mail being sent to the Yahoo account, the particular TSG page, server records showed, was accessed by an IP address registered in Kuwait City.


Additionally, after TSG e-mails were sent last month to the Yahoo account, Talbott’s profile page on Netlog, a social networking site targeting European youth, was edited. His name and photo were removed from the page, which carried the handle “swlfty.” His date of birth was changed. And the photos and nicknames of seven female friends were deleted. Of those friends, four were 14, one was 15, and another was 16.


Talbott’s Netlog page, which described him as “a man of particular tastes,” was subsequently deleted in its entirety (though a screen grab of the original page can be seen here). But his MySpace page, which contains the exact profile photo that was deleted from the Netlog page, remains online. (3 pages)

Minnesota Sex offender program is unconstitutional

Eventually the courts will reach that judgment about what is essentially indefinite incarceration.

What do you call a forced in-patient treatment program that has never successfully treated and released a patient?

Either it is a complete and utter failure, or you call it what it really is -- a prison.

That is the problem that Minnesota faces. It has 605 sex offender inmates who have no pending charges or convictions.

They are not on probation. In fact, all of these people have already been convicted and have served their debts to society.

However, some Minnesotans feel that is not enough. Rather, Minnesota is holding them for what they might do.

While both state and federal courts have called this dubious decision constitutional, they have done so only because it is "treatment."

Otherwise, the program would be considered unconstitutional. Which takes me back to my initial point.

If there has been no successful treatment, then it is nothing but incarceration.

You doubt me?

Minnesota started its Sex Offender Treatment Program in 1994. The number of inmates is growing by about 50 a year.

They are held at the Minnesota Security Hospital in St. Peter and at a facility in Moose Lake. However, both are running out of space.

St. Peter is looking to expand its facility by an additional 55 beds, while Moose Lake is seeking to expand by some 400 beds. At a cost of about $96,000 per inmate per year, this is not a cheap proposition.

And how successful has the treatment been? Not one person forced into the Sex Offender Treatment Program has ever been released.

I repeat: Not one!

As we speak, one man is trying to be the first person ever released from the program.

Admittedly, he has done some horrible things, but he has been held for decades and has done everything -- everything -- asked of him.

However, while the Special Review Board may go along with the release, state Human Services Commissioner Lucinda Jesson opposes the release. Frankly, she is a politician, and nobody would want an albatross like this around their neck if things went south.

But that is the ultimate problem. Again, these convicts have done some pretty terrible things.

As a result, the standard refrains seem to be "lock 'em up and throw away the key" or "shoot 'em out of a cannon." Of course, these arguments are irrelevant to the point at hand.

It is not about what one should do to those who commit these types of crimes in the first place.

If Minnesota thinks they should never see the light of day, the Legislature should consider that issue. This is about what we as a society should do once people have fulfilled their obligations.

If the state continues to do as it has done with this program for 16 years, the courts will see it for what it is: a prison.

When that happens, this entire system will be justifiably shut down.

Then what do we do?

Jack Rice is a criminal defense attorney , former prosecutor and former CIA officer. He also is the former host of the "Jack Rice Show" on WCCO Radio.

The Power of Lies: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children Fans the Flames

Ed: "There are nearly 500,000 registered sex offenders across the country and at any one time about 100,000 are unaccounted for."

This particular fabrication comes from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) a private, non-profit organization which gets almost all of its money from the U.S. Justice Department. This pronouncement follows several decades of distortions and lies issued by the group as a means to re-engineer social and criminal policy.

___________________________________________________

For several years, state Rep. Peter G. Palumbo has worked to revise the way Rhode Island registers and monitors convicted sex offenders. This year he introduced legislation to consolidate the state’s sex offender registry under the supervision of the state police and revamp it to comply with federal guidelines.

A General Assembly news release announcing the new bill cites the reason such legislation is needed, attributing the statement to Palumbo: "Across the nation, there are nearly 500,000 registered sex offenders and at any one time about 100,000 of them are unaccounted for. As long as there is one sex offender out there that we cannot account for, there is the potential for great harm, the potential for another victim."

We wondered if that many sex offenders were really missing, so we asked Palumbo where he got those figures. He cited one source: The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, a nonprofit based in Alexandria, Va. According to its annual report, the center was created by Congress in 1984, following the highly publicized disappearance of 6-year-old Etan Patz in New York City.

The center created a national missing children’s hot line and serves as a clearinghouse for information on missing and exploited children. It also collects data twice a year from every state on registered sex offenders.

Carolyn Atwell-Davis, the center’s director of legislative affairs, says the group arrives at its figures by calling law enforcement officials in each state and requesting the totals. It uses the information to periodically publish a national map showing the number of registered sex offenders in each state. Using similar data, and what it calls conservative estimates, the center tallies offenders who are unaccounted for.

Atwell-Davis said the number of registered sex offenders, based on the most recent survey, in December, is actually 728,435 -- 46 percent more than the number Palumbo cited.

Atwell-Davis said the last time the total number of sex offenders nationally was close to 500,000 was about 2002.

The group’s estimate of the number of unaccounted for is 100,000 -- a number that hasn’t changed in years.

NCMEC receives nearly $50 million annually in government grants and charitable contributions to fight child pornography, track sex offenders, maintain a missing children’s hot line and train police and prosecutors. Its data on sex offenders are cited routinely by politicians and the Justice Department.

Because Palumbo’s underlying point is that a substantial number of registered sex offenders is missing, we decided to examine that premise.

First, we checked Rhode Island, where the sex offender registry lists 569 offenders. Of that total, 119 are so-called Level 3 offenders, who have been convicted of sexual assaults, child molestation or kidnapping a minor. Ten of those were identified as being deported, moved out of state, incarcerated out of state or whereabouts unknown.

Another 225 are so-called Level 2 offenders, those who had committed less serious felony sex offenses. A total of 12 were identified as whereabouts unknown.

So, 22 of the 569 registered offenders in Rhode Island are unaccounted for -- about 4 percent.

We checked with some neighbors. One problem is that many use different criteria in entering offenders on their registries.

Connecticut, for instance, does not have tiers of offenders. All are lumped together, for a total of 5,279. Rather than having various categories of missing, public information officer Lt. Paul Vance says the state uses a category of "not in compliance." That includes everyone from those who haven’t supplied their addresses to those who have fled. The total is 372 or about 7 percent.

New York State identifies 31,972 offenders in three tiers. But only 490 are identified as location unknown. That is 1.5 percent of the total.

Massachusetts has a total of 8,166 registered sex offenders. Those who haven’t properly registered or who are otherwise unaccounted for are termed violators. As of Wednesday, there were 227 violators - or less than 3 percent.

We aren’t the only ones wondering about NCMEC’s numbers.

Jill Levenson, chairwoman of the Department of Human Services at Lynn University, in Boca Raton, Fla., has been studying sexual offender registries, with other researchers from the University of Massachusetts, the University of California and the New Jersey Department of Corrections. She disagrees with the number of 100,000 "missing" offenders reported by NCMEC. Levenson said the highest number her group could determine was 17,688.

"When they (NCMEC) say missing, part of the question is what does that mean?" said Levenson. She said her group found many of the "missing" were homeless, in transit or simply the result of data entry errors. A study of the Florida registry found nearly a third of the people listed had died, moved or been deported.

Levenson said she feels it’s important to make the proper data available so that resources may be allocated most efficiently to deal with social problems such as sexual offenses. She argues the current emphasis on "publicly identifying and tracking known offenders may do a disservice to the public, since over 90 percent of sexually abused children are victimized by someone well known to them with no previous sex crime record, not a stranger found on a registry."

We asked Atwell-Davis about Levenson’s conclusions.

As for the missing offenders, Atwell-Davis said, "We’ve always said that was an estimate and that it was conservative." She said several studies suggest the true number is higher.

For example, she said she believes California is missing 20 percent of its offenders. The official figures from California, as of March 1, are 71,803 registered offenders, with 17,544 in violation of the registration law. That is 24 percent.

Atwell-Davis said she believes the discrepancy is due to the fact that Levenson gets her figures from public registries while NCMEC gets data directly from law enforcement agencies in each state and territory.

"We don’t want to create fear where it is unnecessary," said Atwell-Davis. "We believe it is important for communities to have good information."

So where are we?

* The 500,000 figure Palumbo cites for the total number of sex offenders in the United States was, by NCMEC’s count, off by more than 228,000. The last time it was 500,000 was nine years ago.

* If NCMEC’s numbers are accurate, the ratio of unaccounted for sex offenders nationwide is 1 of 7, not the 1 of 5 Palumbo’s statement suggests.

* NCMEC’s numbers are in dispute. A team of academics says they’re substantially overstated. Data from Rhode Island and nearby states supports that view.

Clearly, when even one registered sex offender is missing, that’s a serious problem -- a problem Palumbo is trying to fix. But public officials owe it to their constituents to get the facts right when they’re trying to address such issues.

Palumbo’s statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression -- the PolitiFact definition for Barely True.

http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/statements/2011/mar/03/peter-palumbo/palumbo-says-there-are-500000-registered-sex-offen/

Are Sexual Offense Laws Too Harsh? And Do They Work?

BUFFALO, N.Y. -- University at Buffalo Law School Professor Charles Patrick Ewing has added to his series of critically acclaimed books on some of the most unsavory but attention-grabbing aspects of the law, this time with a book questioning the legal logic and effectiveness of the country's increasingly harsh sex offense laws.

In "Justice Perverted," Ewing examines what he calls "radically reshaped" laws dealing with the country's sex offenders. These laws include ordering sex offenders to register with authorities, punishment for people possessing child pornography that "dwarfs" sentences for more violent crimes, including murder, and a federal law that requires a minimum 10-year prison sentence for those using the Internet to lure minors for sex.

All these dramatic changes in sex offender laws have come about at least partly from input from the fields of psychology, psychiatry and the social sciences, according to Ewing, whose extensive writing credits include several books on forensic psychology, which is the application of psychological principles and methods to legal issues, and how they play out in the courtroom. And Ewing's research and experience in many trials -- both nationally notorious as well as obscure -- conclude that enforcement and administration of many of these significantly more restrictive sex offense laws rely heavily the opinions of mental-health professionals.

Working from that conclusion, Ewing takes on an original and intellectually courageous direction of answering questions about and evaluating this established legal environment:

Are these laws supported by empirical evidence, or even by well-reasoned psychological theories? Do these laws actually work? Are mental health professionals capable of reliably determining an offender's future behavior, and how best to manage it?

"All of these laws are purportedly designed to enhance public safety by reducing the incidence of sexual offending," says Ewing, whose work in forensic psychology has involved using psychology to understand legal issues such as insanity, competence to stand trial and future danger. "Not only is there no evidence that these laws have had their intended effect, but there is some evidence that some of them may in fact lead to an increased threat to society.

"The economic costs of these laws are staggering and seem indefensible at a time when other valued government programs are being cut to avoid fiscal disaster," says Ewing. "There can be little doubt that sexual offenses bring great harm to individuals and society or that we should do all that we can reasonably do to prevent them from occurring. The question is what is reasonable. It is neither reasonable nor responsible to spend billions of taxpayers' dollars on laws with no proven value."

The questions Ewing takes on in "Justice Perverted" go beyond the arcane procedures of the nation's courtrooms to issues of justice and fair treatment of all parties. Are experts capable of providing effective treatment for sex offenders, Ewing asks, for example, treatment that actually reduces the likelihood that an identified sex offender will repeat a similar offense?

Ewing is a nationally known expert on the criminal mind, a SUNY Distinguished Service Professor who has taught at the UB Law School for 25 years. He is an expert witness who has testified or been closely involved on some of the most celebrated and often grisly criminal cases in the country.

Ewing's past accomplishments have earned him a reputation for capturing the world of courtroom drama in books both scholarly and captivating. His "Insanity, Murder, Madness and the Law" took readers inside the minds of some of the nation's most heinous murderers, including David Berkowitz, John Wayne Gacy and Andrea Yates.

His previous book, "Trials of a Forensic Psychologist," was another example of Ewing's talent to produce a work of scholarship that is informative and still retains the ability to be darkly entertaining.

"Justice Perverted" has already earned impressive kudos from law and university professionals.

"A remarkable, eye-opener of a book. Professor Ewing brings to this highly controversial subject his knowledge as both a law professor and as a practicing forensic mental health expert," according to Alan M. Goldstein, a board certified forensic psychologist and professor emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

"'Justice Perverted' is informative, readable and should be required reading for attorneys, judges and forensic psychologists and psychiatrists working in this area. Ewing's specific recommendations for public policy reform should make all of us re-think our immediate 'gut reaction' as to how those who commit these horrific crimes should be treated."

"This book is a breath of fresh air," says Michael L. Perlin, professor of law, director of the International Mental Disability Law Reform Project and director of the Online Mental Disability Law Program, New York Law School.

"It debunks the media-driven frenzy of fear, hate mongering and utterly irrational laws that do far more harm than good. Professor Ewing writes thoughtfully, carefully and persuasively. This book should be read by all who care about -- and think about -- this topic."

Scott Brown's Story Reveals America's Greatest Concerns For Child Abuse

Surprise! It isn't brutalization at the hands of parents or family members.

No, it's having been briefly fondled by a camp counselor.

Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts recently revealed that he had been horribly physically and emotionally abused (but not sexually) by several different stepfathers, repeatedly, and over years (presumably, his mother must also bear some responsibility given her failure to protect her son).

He also said that he had been very briefly fondled by a camp counselor when he was ten. Several years later, he claims to have been traumatized by being propositioned by another boy in the woods.

So guess which acts of abuse got the lion's share of coverage by our news media?

You guessed it! ALL of the major media reporting on this story ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN, NBC, Boston Globe, L.A. Times, New York Times- all lead with headlines such as "Sen. Brown Reveals He Was Sexually Abused As A Child"!

Given his own descriptions, his sexual abuse allegations are absolutely trivial compared to his abuse at the hands of his mother's various husbands or boyfriends.

How on earth could anyone (in their right mind) think that being fondled or propositioned had a greater impact on a child than physical and emotional abuse by members of his own family? Apparently, the level of common sense required to grasp this notion is now beyond the capabilities of most people.

This just tells you how far we have come in putting "sexual abuse" well before other forms of abuse in our national consciousness.

Yes, apparently, Americans do honestly believe that a boy having his genitals fondled is far more "heinous" (a word they have fallen in love with) than that same boy being beaten and emotionally tormented by his parents.

Tell me, where's the science behind that?

The answer is that you won't find it because no respected authority on the emotional well-being of children believes it.

And those authorities will also make distinctions between fondling, on one hand, and forcible penetration by violence, on the other hand, even if the government and the media automatically conflates these two very different acts.

Viewers find the combined topics of children and sex to be much more interesting as a news story than child battering. I would dare say they find it titillating; although they will be quick to proclaim their shock and outrage.

As for Senator Brown's motives in pushing America's emotional buttons, we can only speculate upon any public relations benefits he hopes to gain.

It certainly can't hurt his personal narrative or his political career, despite all the "courage" ostensibly required to bare one's soul these days in proclaiming one's childhood traumas.

Indeed, he can now be said to have established his bona fides as a defender of children; a big help in future elections.

I do have to say that I'm glad Scott Brown won that election instead of that hideous creature, Martha Coakley.

In her previous role as prosecutor in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, she destroyed the lives of innocent people in her very own day care sex abuse witch hunt. It was heartening to see her career advancement, built as it was on the destruction of others, hit an eventual brick wall.

So, it is disturbing, but not at all surprising, that her victor now weaves familiar elements of childhood sexual victimization into his publicized life story.

More disturbing yet is a public which is incapable of identifying the glaring contradictions and deranged imbalances which lie at the heart of a social policy and prejudice.

A simple fact provides the most damning evidence of all: when children are themselves increasingly being accused of child sexual abuse and losing their freedom and their futures as a result, it is becoming clear that society's stated concerns for the well-being of children have very dark and unexamined motivations having little to do with a genuine regard for their welfare.

It is long overdue that we examine the true nature of these motivations and the dubious morality shielding them from public scrutiny.

What You Must Know: "Sexually Violent Predators" need not be violent to be called "Sexually Violent Predators"

You can be branded a "Sexually Violent Predator" by our government without ever committing any actual act of "violence". In every state using the term (as well as by the U.S. Federal government) it can mean having ANY kind of "sexual contact" with someone under the age of 14 or 13 (depends on the State), and even if no force or coercion was employed in the act.

Got that? The mere act of having "sexual contact" with someone under that age is, in the government's definition, "sexual violence". No actual "violence", as most sane people would understand the term, need be employed.

Combine that with the fact that "sexual contact" can consist of just about anything: kissing, touching (even through clothes and even if what is being touched are not genitals) and the government can utterly destroy the lives and reputations of lots more men and, increasingly, women.

The States and the U.S. government, having thus committed their own violence upon the rights of their people - not to mention upon the English language - can easily deploy the term "Sexually Violent Predator" to put away decidedly non-violent offenders, effectively, for the rest of their lives!

So now, when the government wants to put someone away forever, and for what may have once been considered inappropriate behavior, they have just the weapon to do it.

Its a weapon that not only guarantees the permanent incapacitation of the offender, but also the overwhelming support from a pandering press and a paranoid public.

What a great weapon!

"When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom". -Confucius

Ohio's Supreme Court reverses an acquittal in yet another outrageous sex abuse prosecution.

Another terrific piece from Reason Magazine's Radley Balko.

Good riddance to the society of suspects

Ed: Is it possible the Brits are regaining a bit of sanity? After several decades of a spirited competition with the U.S. to see who could achieve an Orwellian fantasy soonest, it appears that there is growing concern for the costs it has exacted upon society. It would seem that they are somewhat less prone to having their motives impugned by speaking up against the witch hunt than are those of us in the States, where to decry an emerging police state is still regarded with suspicion.

You don't build a Big Society on the back of mutinous, resentful volunteers, nor in a climate in which all are treated with suspicion

"All men are rapists" was the pernicious slogan of radical feminists in the 1970s. "All adults are paedophiles" has been the governing rule of authority in the past decade. The two assertions are as false as each other and just as damaging, for they fill people with anger, fear and corrosive suspicion.

Society can't function without trust. Nor can individuals. As the sociologist Niklas Luhmann reminded us: "A complete absence of trust would prevent [one] even getting up in the morning." We generally assume that the commuter standing next to us on the platform won't push us in front of the train, or that the shopkeeper on the corner will give us the right change. A few paranoiacs have acute suspicion as their default, but most of us are more prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to others than we realise.

We might be scared, in the abstract, of a paedophile taking advantage of our child, but do we really think that the nice mother of our son's playmate is going to put her hand down his pants during a school trip? Of course not. So why should it ever have been necessary for her to undergo an expensive and intrusive Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check before she was allowed to give up her free time to help supervise the class on the bus?

It is deeply insulting to treat people as potential paedophiles when, out of sheer goodness, they want to help others. At the moment, anyone who has contact with children, even just helping out with football club or arranging the flowers in a cathedral, has to go through the CRB procedure. It was one of the most ill-thought-out and socially damaging laws that the last government brought in. Now, thankfully, the Coalition's Protection of Freedoms Bill will lift the requirement for all but those with "close or regular" contact, taking more than four million volunteers out of the net.

At the crudest level, it has hurt the very people it was supposed to protect. Adults have been deterred from volunteering, not because they have convictions for kiddy-fiddling but because they don't. The last thing most adults want to do with kiddies is fiddle with them. The assumption that they might even consider it makes them understandably livid. Why should they volunteer if they are going to be treated like dirt?

As a result, activities for children have been closing down all over the country for lack of volunteers. Who suffers? The budding football players and the children struggling with their reading. Real paedophiles can find other ways to ensnare their victims.

Even those volunteers who have obediently undergone their checks are left with a sense of grievance. A government which was asking us all to do more for others (yes, the last one was keen on it too) was at the same time impugning our motives as soon as we answered the call. You don't build a Big Society on the back of mutinous, resentful volunteers.

Nor do you build it in a climate in which we are all encouraged to treat each other with suspicion. The message the CRB checks have been sending is that we can never be too careful. That public-spirited dad who gives up his Saturday mornings for soccer coaching could be another Ian Huntley. But how many men – let alone women – really have sexual designs on children? Very, very few.

The reason child murders and sexual attacks get so much news coverage when they happen is precisely because they are so rare. To treat the innocent 99 per cent of us as potential Ian Huntleys is as grossly disproportionate as putting handcuffs on everyone who enters a bank in case they plan to rob it.

In fact, it's even worse. For this unjustified paranoia is infecting our children. They are growing up to believe that most adults are dangerous and that the world is unsafe for them. Of course they should be warned not to accept sweeties from strangers or to get into a car with someone they don't know, but beyond that, why should we poison their childhood with unnecessary fear? Only a vanishingly small minority of adults want to hurt them; all the rest of us are benign.

The trouble is that many of their parents have become infected too. That makes blameless adults scared of showing kindness to other people's children. Rush to help a child who has grazed his knee near you in the park and the mother is likely to advance on you, scowling. Smile at a cute little toddler and her father may misinterpret your motives. As a result, the paranoia becomes self-reinforcing: children encounter fewer acts of compassion from adults who aren't in their family, so they are even more inclined to view strangers as dangers.

Then, as they grow up, they suddenly become independent and find themselves exposed to far greater perils. A 16-year-old girl is much more likely to be sexually assaulted than a six-year-old one, simply because most men fancy post-pubescent, not pre-pubescent, females. And she is also much more vulnerable: six-year-olds don't walk back from the bus stop on their own or get inadvisedly drunk at a party. These are the risks we should be warning our girls against.

Instead, we are obsessed with paedophilia. Do we really want to live in a society where a teacher can't sit a five-year-old on her knee and give him a cuddle when he's crying? Do we really want to live in a Crucible-like climate in which fingers of suspicion are pointed at wholly innocent people – and by government, this time, not even teenage girls? We were shocked by the anti-Communist hysteria which swept 1950s America, yet we failed to prevent the anti-paedophile hysteria taking root in our own country.

This climate is really bad for adults and children alike. All the international studies show that countries with high levels of social trust tend to have lower crime and happier, more engaged citizens. And the more people engage, the more they come to understand that most strangers are as benevolent as they are. Yet the proportion of Britons agreeing that "most people can be trusted" has halved since the 1950s, and young people are the most mistrustful of all.

It's not a good idea to be completely credulous, but a default position of trust tempered by common sense is all we need to rub along together well. That was how my generation saw adults when we were children. Most of them meant well; a few were sadistic and a few were lecherous. We knew who the sadists and the pervs were, and we kept clear of them. You need to learn to discern; it's a useful skill for adulthood. It's a lot better than relying on a piece of paper, which might anyway clear a paedo who has never been caught by the police.

Thank goodness ministers have at last seen sense. Not much the Government does these days is popular. It can't spend any more and most of its cuts cause pain. But here is one initiative which saves money, reduces bureaucracy and – most importantly – could make a real difference to our lives. It deserves an unqualified cheer.

m.sieghart@independent.co.uk

Food For Thought

Wendy Kaminer recently asked this question and, I must say, it has me stumped. See If you can answer it:

"Can someone explain to me why it is a criminal offense to have sex with animals but entirely legal to kill and eat them? Surely laws against bestiality don't reflect concern about the rights of animals, (who would probably opt for sex over death.)"

Great question! I am reminded of the more hysterical of the satanic child sexual abuse "experts" some twenty-five years ago who frequently assured us that "child molestation is worse than murder!" Interestingly, I don't hear that claim much anymore, possibly because it was so obviously untrue and no sane person was really buying it. All we have to do is look to Oprah - a self-proclaimed child sexual abuse victim who went on to become one of the world's wealthiest entertainers - to see that it is nonsense!

Imagining the Worst: Just What Was That "Assault" Precisely?

The next time you read in the papers or, more likely, hear on television, of an adult male being arrested for the sexual assault of a juvenile male, take a moment to ponder what could possibly be meant by the term "sexual assault'' or one of several other terms, such as "rape'' or "molest".

If you're like most people, you probably imagine the worst, or something close to it, such as forcible penetration (of the youth) or forcible fellatio (of the man). In other words, a non-consensual act with a goal of sexual satisfaction for the man but with wanton disregard for the pleasure or welfare of the youth.

If these are the first possibilities that come to mind, then the government agencies responsible for investigating and prosecuting these cases are perfectly happy to have you believe so.

And, for that matter, those who pass for journalists today clearly take personal satisfaction in injecting additional scandal into any story involving "sexual assault" of a child. They are loathe to report any detail which either mitigates the circumstances or humanizes the adult "perpetrator". Getting public approval very much depends upon the level of outrage expressed by the reporter in any case involving children and sex.

But the reality is that simple "touching" of the youth of any part of his body-shoulders, arms, back, legs, hair- can and frequently do qualify as "sexual assault" or "molestation". Both parties can be fully clothed with all touching occurring over the clothes. It can still be charged as "sexual assault".

In their own assault on civil liberties, the grand alliance of sex-hating religious conservatives and sex-hating gender feminists have been wildly successful in defining "sexual assault" ever more widely. Indeed, they are still doing so. What was once considered to be affectionate became "inappropriate" and finally, "abusive" and "assaultive" and can now be prosecuted as a crime.

In addition to being distinctly inconvenient for the authorities to release those details constituting a "sexual assault", there is also a long-standing social taboo against openly discussing specific sexual acts in detail, especially when they involve children. This cultural prudishness further serves to obfuscate the true nature of a "sexual assault".

It should be obvious that any detail shedding light on the true nature of an alleged "assault" is necessary in forming an opinion upon its veracity. The media-consuming public seems unaware and unconcerned that they are being robbed of this opportunity.

So, the next time you read or hear of a case where an adult has been charged with "molesting" a child (or adolescent), ponder for a moment how little was actually communicated about the alleged "crime".

If Oprah's Lying About Being Sexually Abused As A Child, Who Else Might Be?

I want to be clear at the outset, I have no idea whether Oprah is lying about being sexually abused as a child or not. I have no way of knowing.

It has been alleged by her cousin, however, that she made the story up, as well as the story about growing up amongst filth, in order to help advance her career. Indeed, one could argue that Oprah's life-narrative of abuse and deprivation was essential in catapulting her to stardom and beyond.

Her cousin claims that, when asked why she had lied, Oprah replied "because that's what people want to hear" and that the abuse story "helped make me what I am today.''

But of course, I really don't know if she was abused or not. And I cannot know, since we only have Oprah's words asserting that she was abused and her cousin's words saying that she's a liar.

And that's just my point: hundreds of thousands of individuals, the great majority of them men, have been tried and convicted in this country for sexual abuse of children on the basis of their accuser's testimony and nothing else.

And often, the child accusers have themselves been arm-twisted into giving incriminating testimony by others, usually the police and prosecution team or even, perhaps, by one of their own parents.

Few people realize just how little evidence is needed to successfully convict someone of child sexual abuse.

After the Michael Jackson trial ended in an acquittal, many journalists, who should have known better, attributed his success in beating the conviction to "a lack of evidence.''

Actually, no. They're wrong. The evidence presented at his trial would have been plenty to convict him had he not had a defense "dream-team" and an adoring fan base who would have been scandalized to discover that it is really very easy to be convicted of sexual abuse in America.

Virtually everyone else of less-than god-like fame and fortune would be languishing in prison today with little hope of getting out within their lifetimes had they faced identical charges supported by identical victim testimony.

All it takes are words, painstakingly extracted from a kid on the stand, to convict. Testimony resulting from days of coercive coaching, cajoling and arm-twisting send men to prison in this country, in this day and age, for the rest of their lives. And it forever brands and marginalizes them should they ever be so lucky as to get out.

Let that truth sink in.

Family Extorts Paedophile of more than £50,000

THREE members of a family extorted more than £50,000 from a convicted paedophile by threatening to expose his sordid past.

Liverpool crown court heard their victim had turned his life around and had a good job after serving a jail sentence for indecently assaulting young boys in 1983.

But his life was thrown into turmoil after social services revealed his criminal past to his new “friends” – parents-of-six Kerry Edwards, 31, and her husband Leslie Johnson, 32, in June 2007.

Keith Sutton, prosecuting, told how over the next year the couple, and Johnson’s brother Edward Lawler, 38, threatened, intimidated and blackmailed him into handing over his life savings.

During the conspiracy, the scheming relatives sent “sackfuls” of threatening letters, warning their victim he would “leave in a body bag” if he refused to pay up.

Mr Sutton also told how he was marched to a cash machine in the middle of the night to hand over cash, while on another occasion he was assaulted and ordered to pay for a flat-screen TV and a child’s motorbike.

Judge David Boulton said when their victim eventually ran out of cash, a “wholly put up” allegation of child sexual abuse was made against him to police and he was arrested. It was only when he was released without charge he finally revealed the plot against him.

Judge Boulton said: “It was only when he was released he had the courage to produce sackfuls of letters which showed precisely what you had been up to over that year or so.

“It was little short of despicable.

“The threats were not only to reveal his previous convictions, which he had managed over the years to put behind him, but to threaten him with violence.

“One graphically put it that if he did not pay he would ‘leave in a body bag’.”

Judge Boulton told the gang blackmail was one of the “most vicious crimes in the calendar of criminal offences”.

He jailed Edwards, of Rappart Road, Wallasey, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to blackmail, to five years and four months.

Johnson, of Naples Road, Wallasey, and Lawler, of Balls Road, Prenton, who were convicted by jurors, were put behind bars for eight years each.

Barristers defending the men told how they maintained their denials, with Johnson putting the blame on his wife.

But Judge Boulton said they were found guilty on the “most powerful of evidence”.

Hand-writing analysis revealed Edwards had written many of the threatening letters, but Judge Boulton said he suspected she was not the “instigator”.

Mr Sutton told the court how a statement from their diabetic victim revealed how their crimes had left him financially ruined and afraid to leave his house.

He had become friends with Johnson and Lawler after moving to Merseyside in 2003 and had even loaned them up to £10,000.

But Judge Boulton said the family had “no prospect whatsoever” of repaying the cash and then, after learning of his background, used it as a “weapon” against him.

Gareth Bellis, defending Johnson, who has 20 previous convictions, said: “He denies any involvement in this offence as per his interview and his evidence-in-chief during the trial when he said this was Kerry Edwards’ doing.”

David Watson, defending Lawler, said his client only became involved at a much later stage, adding: “It seems clear Edward Lawler was not present at the inception of this offence.”

Lawler has 84 previous convictions, including 46 for theft.

Words Are Weapons -- Salem Revisited

This, from Norm Pattis' legal blog, www.pattisblog.com

There will come a time in which our incredulity about the words of children looks as troubling as the manner in which we treated accused witches in Salem, Massachussetts. In 1692, 19 men and women and two dogs were convicted and executed for consorting with the devil. These deaths were the product of the words of children who claimed to have been seduced by a Satan-worshipping household servant named Tituba.

Arthur Miller wrote a play about the trials in 1953, The Crucible. He viewed the Salem trials as a parable through which the activities of the House Un-American Committee's prosecution of Americans for disloyalty could be viewed. What gives so much power to mere accusation?, he wondered. Why are some times ripe for an hysteria that is so easily seen to be false in a calmer time?

I wish Miller were writing now. I'd like to see what he would make of the moral panic present in our courts whenever the state chooses to adopt the words of a child as a truth worth fighting for. We do not permit children to make contracts and regard them as incapable in most of life's serious affairs. But yet, if the state chooses to take the uncorroborated claim of a child as truth, to treat it as a disclosure based upon which it can and should deprive a man or woman of liberty, then a defendant is left often as helpless to combat the claims as were the true victims at Salem.
I re-read The Crucible a few weeks ago to prepare for a civil trial in which a client sued the mother of a child who made extravagant claims. The mother defended by saying that it was her job to believe and support her child. I asked the jury to conclude that it was also the mother's job to behave responsbily, and to provide guidance to her child. Treating children as oracles is always dangerous. We won, proving defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, known in some states as outrage. It was an encouraging verdict.

I read the following words from The Crucible to the jury during my opening statement and closing argument. "Is the accuser always holy now? Were they born this morning as clean as God's fingers? I'll tell you what's walking Salem -- vengeance is walking Salem. We are what we always were in Salem, but now the little crazy children are jangling the keys of the kingdom, and common vengeance writes the law."

Children do not deserve privileged status in our courts. Perhaps it is time to reinvigorate the Mosaic "two witness" rule, once required in homicide cases, and apply it to child sex cases. In those cases in which liberty hangs solely on the word of a child, and in which there is no other witness or any physical proof of harm, it should simply be too risky to prosecute merely on the word of a child. Massachussetts learned that the hard way in Salem; why do we need to learn the lesson all over again?

"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us".
- William O. Douglas

"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
- Noam Chomsky

"If you're uncomfortable about Blacks, you're a racist; uncomfortable about Jews, you're an anti-semite. But today, if you're uncomfortable about sex, you're a civic leader."

-Marty Klein

"We have reached a point in our history where lies are protected speech and the truth is criminal".

- Electronic Frontier Foundation co-founder John Perry Barlow

"It is awful" to prosecute a 15-year-old girl who told a rape lie that got a boy arrested, says women's rights advocat

In the news story posted below, at the end of this post, a 15-year-old girl was convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice for telling a rape lie that caused the boy she accused, who was just 14, to be arrested. She claimed she was raped, but the court rejected her defense, and she was convicted. Yet, according to the news story: "The decision to prosecute the girl, now 16, was criticised by anti-rape campaigners. Lisa Longstaff, of the campaign group Women Against Rape, said: 'It is awful that a girl so young has been prosecuted in this way.'"

Read that again, and let it sink in.

If the girl's lie had its intended effect, would anyone have objected if theboy had been tried (and in many jurisdictions, he might have been tried as an adult) for the rape of an innocent young woman? Would anyone have said "it's awful" that a boy so young should be prosecuted?"

The question scarcely survives its statement.

So, why the double standard, Ms. Longstaff? Why are you intent on treating 15-year-old young women -- who, on average, are more mature in every measurable way than 14-year-old boys -- as if they are infants and not free moral agents who ought to know better? Why is the sexual grievance industry so intent on shielding false rape accusers from the responsibilities of their vile acts?

For every other criminal act, our society believes that punishing the wrongdoer, among other things, has the effect of deterring other would-be criminals. Why is that not a concern when women lie about rape?

When anti-rape campaigners inject themselves into cases where there was no rape, when they advocate on behalf of rape liars, they aren't helping rape victims. In almost every false rape case, judges and police officers bemoan the harm done to actual rape victims by the lies told by false rape accusers. The advocacy here by Women Against Rape trivializes rape by conflating rape victims with false rape accusers; by enabling would-be false rape accusers to spin their lies and possibly hurt other flesh-and-blood men and boys; and by diminishing the integrity of every woman who legitimately cries rape. In short, this unconscionable advocacy hurts not only innocent men and boys but actual rape victims.

Somehow, it seems they don't care that their advocacy is having the opposite effect of its stated intent to help rape victims. How could that be, and what, exactly, is really going on here?

When anti-rape crusaders advocate on behalf of rape liars, they are pursuing what can only be described as a politicized, gender-divisive agenda that seems intended to announce to all that world that the victimization of our sons is not worthy of society's attention. When it comes to even far-fetched claims of rape, men and boys have no entitlement to the mantle of victimhood.

This mentality, of course, smells of feminist bloodlust, an ugly desire for payback for the purported past sins of the "patriarchy." Even though the 14-year-old male victim in this case is a real victim, and even though he had nothing to do with any past sins of the "patriarchy."

Shame on you, Lisa Longstaff. Your advocacy here is disgraceful.

I hope that Ms. Longstaff doesn't have a teenage son who someday might be falsely accused of rape. Perhaps then she will understand that the falsely accused are treated no better than flotsam, collateral damage in the "more important" war on rape. In "he said/she said" rape claims involving two teens, even though either one of the parties might be guilty of a crime (rape for him, perverting the course of justice for her) the boy alone is routinely arrested and charged, while the girl is treated as a "victim." Boys are often subjected to indignities in detention, inflicted either by the staff or other inmates. Even when they are exonerated, they are expected to just "take it like a man." The experience of being falsely accused of rape is inhumane generally, but doubly so when it happens to a teenage boy.

The district judge concluded that the girl knew that claiming she had been raped would get the boy into trouble. It was possible, the judge added, that the girl had lied because she feared she was pregnant or it could be that she had lied to "cover her tracks."

In other words, just another day in our false rape society.

(If you want to read more about how false rape claims are treated in 21st Century America, with all its supposed enlightenment, see here.)

Virginia lawmaker wants to castrate sex offenders, as alternative to costly state treatment programs

Ed: The underlying assumption behind all such hysterical and hateful legislation is that:

1. All of those sex offenders convicted and sent to prison are guilty.
2. Of those who are guilty, their crimes were "sexually violent", "heinous" or otherwise "castration-worthy". (please do see previous pieces defining "sexual violence")

Those sane individuals who understand this issue in sufficient depth to hold a rational opinion do not believe either of those assumptions.

They know that every aspect of the laws and social zeitgeist surrounding sex hysteria are informed by ignorance and an atavistic hatred of "other".

They know that the term "sexually 'violent' predator" is a complete perversion of language and a baldly cynical attempt to inflame the fires of hysteria, invariably with a hidden agenda of gaining power, funding, or influence.

The ultimate goal of those propagating such laws and ideas is TOTAL, SOCIAL COMPLIANCE, and it will NOT stop with sex offenders.

This can only get worse as society's ignorant and brutal classes organize and act while the rational and the intelligent sit on the sidelines merely observing.

DAILY NEWS
Virginia State Sen. Emmett Hanger has proposed a bill that would have Virginia state agencies study whether castrating sex offenders would save the state money.

Republican State Sen. Emmett Hanger's bill would have state agencies study whether Virginia should start castrating sex offenders instead of confining them to treatment programs after they get out of jail.

Former Gov. Timothy Kaine vetoed a similar bill in 2007.

Hanger's critics call the idea barbaric, but he said it would save the state money and could provide a cure.

"I don't think it's radical at all," Hanger told the Associated Press. "It's just something that's not typically the thing you want to bring up in polite conversation, but again the whole subject area is not for polite conversation.

"We're talking about people who are so driven because of the tendencies from the chemicals and the hormones inside their body to perform heinous acts."

Virginia is one of 20 states with a civil commitment program, whose purpose is to keep violent sex offenders off the streets by allowing the government to keep them in custody – in psychiatric hospitals, for example – after they are released from prison.

The state's commitment program ballooned to $24 million this year, up from $2.7 million in 2004, and Gov. Bob McDonnell wants to spend $70 million over the next two years.

Hanger's bill wants state agencies to study the option of physical castration – cutting off a man's testicles or removing a woman's ovaries. Louisiana and Texas have legalized physical castration, while six other states allow for some form of castration of sex offenders, including chemical, which uses pharmaceuticals to stop a person's sex drive.

The bill doesn't only aim below the belt, though.

It also would require the state to consider changing the criteria for entering the civil commitment program, as well as creating housing options for those released, who are forbidden from halfway houses.

Some critics argued that castration would not be effective because it would not address the motivation that causes sexual predators to act on their impulses.

"When abuse and mutilation of a human being is presented as an acceptable alternative to responsible treatment and housing for those deemed as sexually violent predators, there exists a fault of reason," Mary Devoy, founder of Reform Sex Offender Laws of Virginia, told the AP.

When A Boy Wants To Be A Man

Ours is not a time and place in which a man can easily wax rhapsodic about his childhood sex with married men and priests; but Sergio - an accomplished, handsome and quiet middle-aged resident of Wilton Manors, in a fifteen year relationship - wanted his story told, albeit anonymously. What happened to Sergio is not unique, but his conclusions constitute a confession usually never given voice. Over dinner, I recorded that story and deliver it to you in his own words. Without judgment. Without commentary.

“I grew up in a city on the Italian Riviera that had been devastated by World War II. It was rebuilt but it had lost its soul and its prosperity. My father struggled to find work to support his family of seven. In the 1960s, he took a second job running the movie theater owned by our parish church. My mother was the cashier and I sold candy in the lobby. My father was a deeply religious man. When the canisters of film arrived on Fridays, he would pre-screen them and if he saw a kiss or even a bedroom, he would cut and splice them. He didn’t know that I was downstairs in the theater watching the uncut versions. My job was to clean up the projection room for him. I would save the scraps he had cut and hold them up to the light in my bedroom. Very Cinema Paradiso.

“Parents dropped their kids off at the theater on Saturdays because it was safe. Before the movie started, the priest would get up on stage and make us say ten Hail Marys. The church was the center of our life and I was leader of the altar boys. We each had a card that the priests would sign every time we served Mass. After twenty times, we got a prize, like candy or a soccer ball. If you didn’t go to Mass on Sunday, you couldn’t play soccer on the church team or use the church recreation field.

“Even as a small child, I learned that sex was a sin. I confessed it all the time. There were seven priests in that parish. Each one had his own confessional with his name on it and a bell. When you rang the bell, that priest would come to the church and hear your confession. I went all the time because of sex and because they taught me that in confession I could wipe the slate clean. I had to lie in each confession because I didn’t want to admit I had just gone the day before. Each day I rang a different bell and confessed to a different priest so they wouldn’t know it was me again so soon, and I never said that I masturbated, only that I had ‘done bad things behind my mother’s back.’

“One of the altar boys who was my age took me alone into a room at the church youth center. He put my hand on his dick and taught me how to rub it. I loved it and wanted to do it every chance we got. Soon there were other altar boys in our group. This kind of fun is how we ended all our Catholic activities until one time, one of the boys ejaculated and that scared the shit out of us.

“When I was about ten years old, I was in the movie theater in the back row on the aisle. One of the priests was sitting next to me. He was the youngest of the seven, maybe 25 or 30, and he was in charge of the youth groups. The other altar boys were spread throughout the theater. I felt his knee against my leg. I didn’t move away. It felt very nice, all through the movie. Next week, the same thing, only I put on a lot more pressure. I started leaning against him. He took my hand and drew it into his robes and into his pants and I grabbed his dick, and I have to say it was the best thing I ever felt in my life. I didn’t want to let it go for the rest of my life. I didn’t move it. I just held it. I felt that either I had died and gone to heaven or that I was home. Next day, I went to the church and rang his bell. Instead of the confessional, he took me into the storage basement of the church where we were surrounded by statues and all the stuff used on feast days. The only thing I wanted was to take out his dick. I was really the aggressor. We did it frequently. I only knew that it felt good. He never asked me not to tell. He never forced me to do anything I didn’t want to do. Sometimes it was with the priest and three altar boys. Never kissing or hugging. Just the sex organ. No incentives offered, just my own pleasure. If I did not have that experience with the priest, I would have found it somewhere else.

“One time, my father kicked a man out of the theater because a boy said he had been touched by him, and my father chased him down the street yelling insults at him. The only thing I wanted to do was to run after that man, grab him by the hand and say, ‘Take me with you.’ I had fantasies about our family doctor, that he would take me away and we would live on an island where everyone was just like us. No wonder I live in Wilton Manors which is exactly that kind of island.

“After the priest, I started seeking other opportunities. There were always several married men at the church who I was having sex with. With one I had a code. If his wife was not home, there was a white towel on the door. With another one, I would go to the cemetery with him when he bought flowers to place on his wife’s tomb in the little chapel over the family vault, and that is where we had sex. In my little head it began to click that I should get married like them but still do this forever. The other altar boys I had sex with all got married. I did not want to be a priest. I hated the priests who came into our church to recruit for the seminary. They would take me for a walk and put their arms around me and say that Jesus was calling me.

“Also in my head it began to click that sex was forbidden by the church but that everyone did it anyway. We were strictly forbidden even to watch when the bull was brought to a neighbor’s house to stud the cows; but every time we saw the truck go by with the bull in it, all of us boys would say, ‘Okay, we know where we’re going later.’

“When I was 18, the pressure was on me to get married. For two years, I had a girlfriend who broke off our engagement because I would not have sex with her. I left the country and went to London where I joined a huge gay community. I met mostly older gay men and one friend brought me to an Anglican church that hosted gay nights with dances and raffles and events. My friend said, ‘Honey, you’re home.’ I went home with someone on my first night there. It’s funny that some church is always involved in the milestones of my sex life. The experience of religion is the experience of the erotic, and that is something people won’t talk about.

“They say we repeat our early sexual experience, but I would never have sex with a boy. I shy away from young people. I’m not comfortable. I don’t know why. I owe a lot to what some older guys did for me. Maybe I should be helping younger guys.

“I was absolutely not abused. After the first contact with his knee, I was going after that priest more than he was going after me. That is the truth. There is no doubt in my mind, that I wanted it more than he did. I have a very difficult time with these people who are suing priests because for me, there was no coercion. He didn’t even offer candy or gifts. There was no incentive but my own pleasure. All these years when all of these abuse stories came out, I never felt sympathy for those who brought charges against priests. I know that I was very young when it happened to me but I could have stayed with it or walked away. Some of my friends walked away. I didn’t. I went back. I rang that bell. I liked it.

“Today kids don’t have the same opportunity. Those married men would today be classed as predators. It never occurred to me, never crossed my mind that I would turn in any of them. I believe that now kids 12-16 are a lot more aware of things than I was. I think they have some malice that I didn’t have. I believe that what I was doing was not wrong. It was consensual. Some would say that you can’t have consensual sex when one of the parties is a kid. That’s bullshit. I was the aggressor. I had to ring that bell. I had to go up the stairs. I had to seek it out. Either I am a freak or there is something else that I either can’t explain or don’t understand.

“Sex comes with the baggage of guilt. The fact is that when I was a kid, I couldn’t talk about sex with anybody, and this sense of sin screws you up with your whole life. I think I am a better person because of what happened to me. That’s how I was able to understand who I was. That so many people in the church did what I did, there is not anything wrong with it. We are sexual beings. We can control our urges as we get older only because they diminish. The church gave me not just my sexual identity but my whole identity. It showed me that what they preach is not the truth, and I think the priests wanted me to know that. My experience freed me from big baggage.”

Comments

#4 Martin D. Goodkin 2011-01-24 13:39
JP, there is a difference--I, and in most cases Sergio,did the pursuing--we knew what we wanted and went for it.
I knew I was gay by the time I was 10--hey I played 'doctor' with the older boys of 12-13, not the girls--but didn't act on it til I was 12.
I was VERY active in NYC as a teenager going to the baths, bars, Rockefeller building 8th floor tearoom, the subway restrooms, etc. but, again, I did the pursuing.
I am sure some of the guys I picked up were predators but I didn't care--I got what I want.
I am, and always will be, indebted to those older men who taught me so much including not to be ashamed of who I am.
Sorry you had a 'bad' time and it sounds as if you are still carrying the baggage of what happened that long ago time.
Maybe I was lucky because all I have 50+ years later are kind warm thoughts and memories, including remembering many names, of those 'old' men.
Quote


#3 JP 2011-01-24 13:08
Marina Fontanascura's story rang several bells for me since there were aspects in the narrative concerning my own pursuit of adults when I was a teenager. But I have to say that there were also aspects that disturbed me a little. As an eight year old I was sexually abused by the verger of the church where I was a choir boy and it was a very unpleasant experience. For someone that age, I truly did not have the ability to say "no' and although it would be wrong to say that the encounter coloured the rest of my life, it did awaken my sexuality at much too early an age which brought its own problems. The other important point is where the person telling the story says he has a difficult time with the people who are bringing cases against the priests. I think it's worth pointing out that for a heterosexually inclined boy, being molested by a man would have the same adverse effect as a homosexually inclined boy being molested by a woman. It is a trifle naive to believe that all children have the ability to resist. Recently there was a TV program concerning four middle-aged men who had been systematically abused by a school master. As they recalled the abuse, their distress was absolutely genuine and very hard to watch. One man said that the worst thing about it was that he felt terribly guilty for enjoying the attention the abuse was giving him. I think when young, it is extremely difficult to sort out emotions aroused in these sort of encounters. We are all different and we all react to situations in different ways which is why I sincerely believe that adults have an absolute responsibility concerning the way they treat young people and therefore no form of sexual abuse of the young should be tolerated.
Quote


#2 sam 2011-01-21 20:44
I have to agree. When I was a kid of about eleven or twelve I started actively pursuing older men. I remember one man I knew liked me, he was my father's friend, but he kept turning me down. Finally one weekend I knew his wife was out of town I went over to his house and succeeded in my quest. I was thirteen at the time. Those are the best memories of my life.

Because of the hysteria, the gay community of America has become extremely hostile to boys who want to express their sexuality. It's really sad, and I think very damaging.
Quote


#1 Martin D. Goodkin 2011-01-21 11:38
At the ages of 12-13 in the late 40s I was cruising 'old men' of 20, 21 in the Bronx at the local movie theatre. By the time I was in my mid-teens I was going to the bars and baths in Manhattan going after the older men in their 30s-40s.
I looked older, was never questioned about my age, and agresively pursued the older man. I have many tales and in fact wrote a book called "The Free Prisoner", published a couple of years ago telling the story.
Having always gone for older men now at 75 I am not finding too many!!! LOL