Monday, July 14, 2014
ahh look Derek and his "words of wisdom" attempts to coach his minions
Derek Writes: You don't seem to understand the difference between a red herring and a talking point.( they should try not "cookin the books", if thats the goal) There are instances where we have to use examples to counter generalizations.(oh really? Yea I notice the "pissin on a tree works real well Derek) In this case, we use examples of people landing on the registry for petty actions as a counter to the generalization that all registrants are unstoppable and predatory in nature.(yea God forbid you should land on a forum and make any disclaimers against child rapist)
You should consider the fact that we have a far more difficult task to prove our points, and we don't prove them by shrinking away from challenges.(cute yea just keep denying who you are and what your crime was when the cats let out of the bag) The other side can make generalizations and rely on dubious stats or anecdotes.Umm Derek how dubious is the criminal conviction? Oh silly me Your all innocent) We have the burden of proof because of our status alone. It is our STATUS that gives us difficulties with credibility, not our message.( No numbnut its your conviction) We are dehumanized. No matter what we say, people assume what they want about us. We waste far too much time trying to cater to those people (even those of the reptilian persuasion) than we do sticking to our message.(rally your warriors Derek, Your message becomes toast when your CRIME is exposed)
If you understand anything about propaganda and persuasion, you should realize that consistency in our message and mission is key.(nice to hear you admit your message is propaganda and your persuation to minimize sex crimes are your goal) We have not been consistent because we waste time airing out our grievances with each other's philosophies in a public venue rather than a private forum. (does that mean YOUR minutemen are on unemployment)
In regards to our reptilian admirer, the upside is few people pay much attention to her, even other vigilantes. (its not the vigilanties you have to worry about Derek, its the bullshit you feed the public, and I am very GOOD at EXPOSING that bullshit)
However, the Internet has also changed the landscape of propaganda. Anyone, even an alcoholic reptile with a criminal record, can say anything online, and the victim then has to address the claim lest people assume it to be true. Most people are susceptible to believing anything they read on the internet.(you just now gettin that idiot? Thats why I exist)
Poor Derek is starting to see his kingdom crumble under dissent and loss of spirit, what he doesnt get and the others refuse to have the backbone to Tell him is HE is their biggest disavantage, He is the biggest detriment to their efforts on reform, what this level three angry predator refuses to acknowledge is when you have a POINT man like Derek and other ANGRY OFFENDERS attempting to play this pathetic armies General? YOUR ALREADY DOOMED.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
What do you mean by "they should not be cooking the books"?
How can a registered sex offender affect statistical evidence coming from the Bureau of Justice statistics? Does Derek also pay university professors to side with him, because as a RSO he is rolling in the dough?
-Independent2014
"Oh silly me, you are all innocent"
Most RSO's admit they committed a crime and are not innocent. What we are saying is that there should not be a one size fits all punishment, because there are different varying levels of crime that land you on the registry. And with different levels of crime come varying recidivism rates.
My argument is that we have more registered sex offenders now than we can ever hope to keep up with and it's growing because we live in a depraved, fallen world, and politicians are trying to one up themselves up get re-elected. At what point does the information become meaningless because of so many data points in the system? Who is truly dangerous and who is not?
What I propose is taking off all Romeo and Juliet, public urinators, and other like minded crimes right away.
Allow people on the registry to prove in court that they are no longer threats to society to be able to get relief from public ridicule and shame. But go back to the original Wetterling act and allow LE to have access to all people convicted of a see crime even if they are off the registry.
Allow people on the registry to "tier down" and tier off public registry if they are tier 1.
5 years after probation or parole ends, allow tier 1's to prove in court that they are not a threat to society.
10 years after probation and parole has ended, allow Tier 2's to go to court and prove they are not a threat and tier down to tier 1. Then 5 years after that they can get off the registry if they prove they are still not a threat.
10 years after probation or parole ends, tier 3 can petition the court to get to tier 2, 10 more years to get to tier 1, 5 more years and off.
-Independent2014
" What we are saying is that there should not be a one size fits all punishment," There isnt,,, there are a multitude of varying punishments depending on the crime and or the circumstances and the age of the victim. Try reading your states statutes for various sex crimes, it will keep you busy for days.
" And with different levels of crime come varying recidivism rates." Not true ..different levels of OFFENDERS according to the voodoo doctors and many escalate in their crimes and never get convicted.
""My argument is that we have more registered sex offenders now than we can ever hope to keep up with and it's growing because we live in a depraved, fallen world, and politicians are trying to one up themselves up get re-elected""
Which is it, our world is getting more depraved and fallen or its the politicians fault? My money says often the abused grow into abusers, not always but often, Keep the abusers away from a CLEAN generation of kids and we may catch a break on depravity manifesting itself on future generations. The policitians are only doing what people like me DEMAND they do.
""At what point does the information become meaningless because of so many data points in the system? Who is truly dangerous and who is not?""
You get no argument from me about the complexities of any given "government" system, but from where I sit? Its much too leniant and gives the offender less jail time than deserved. The repercussions of having SO status is a christmas present compared to sitting in a cell and the public agrees. No one to date can determine who is capable of being dangerous or not. Unless you have a Crystal ball, but society "KNOWS" past behavor is a good indicator of Future behavor, thats human nature, not some manufactured punchline of Law Enforcement.
""What I propose is taking off all Romeo and Juliet, public urinators, and other like minded crimes right away"" Boy thats a mouthfull and pretty slippery throwing urinators and "like-minded" crimes out the window. TRUE Romeo and Juliets YES, the other NO. Do you have any concept how many exhibitionist just swear they pissed on a tree? NO again NO. If a guy takes a leak and the (only) person who saw him was a cop? Maybe, but thats not how these guys are busted and you know it. They are reported by the public for EXPOSING themselves.And what the hell is "like-minded" crimes? Thats a can of worms and makes no sense.
""Allow people on the registry to prove in court that they are no longer threats to society to be able to get relief from public ridicule and shame. But go back to the original Wetterling act and allow LE to have access to all people convicted of a see crime even if they are off the registry""" ???
not clear at all on that one, but if your saying registry is for LE only? NO DICE. In countries where this is done its a dismal failure and the numbers arent in on the states who do not list Level ones and their failure to re-offend or their propensity to re-offend. Hopefully someone is watching the store on that one, somehow I doubt it, but not enough info is out on the level one's not disclosed to the public and probably wont be for years. If they do well and are followed for longer than three pathetic years perhaps more states may implement it.
""Allow people on the registry to "tier down" and tier off public registry if they are tier 1
."" Here is my thoughts on Tiering down :(after release from prison or probation)
1) Tier 1 10 years on registry and released from registration period done
2) Tier 2 15 years on registry, then released from registration period done
3) Tier 3 25 years on registry then released from registration, done.
If the offender re-offends either during or after of a sexually based crime 25 years in prison and lifetime registration, Lifetime registration and longer jail sentences should be mandatory for "sexualy violent assaults" My preference is the death penalty for certain sexually violent crimes, but it seems they arent handing those out as often as I would like. I happen to believe my suggestion is more than generous.
Cooking the books on recidivism:
How do you cook the books on recidivism? You follow tiny pools of offenders. You pick offenders who have already shown initiative by enrolling in a program or being admitted into one — self-selecting, ideal participants. You use partial information: convictions instead of arrests; post-plea sentencing instead of pre-pleaded charges. Mostly, you follow offenders for very short periods of time after they are released, like, down the street to the first stoplight.
Such studies are usually designed by people who have a vested interest in proving the program a success — either the program directors themselves or some professor or consulting firm hired to evaluate their outcomes.
It’s sort of like telling a bunch of ambitious eleventh graders to grade their own performance on the SAT’s . . . based on effort.
Unfortunately, there is no graveyard where skewed studies go to die: they live on in debates about recidivism, sentencing, and crime. This is how myths like “sex offenders almost never re-offend” seep out into the conventional wisdom.
http://crimevictimsmediareport...
This is the fact plain and simple. A DOJ recidivism report done over a period of 3 years is not an accurate reflection of true recidivism. Nor does the DOJ recidivism report address the percentage of new sex crimes committed by either an RSO or a non-RSO.
Numbers on recidivism depend on who is doing the study? How many offenders are followed and a myriad of other factors. YOUR groups constant copying and pasting of blanket recidivism is tiring and not true. The common lie you use is Recidivism for all sex offenders is 3 "bullshit" percent. that was based on 4800 offenders and only followed for three years. But of course you people cant USE those numbers becuase they arent very comforting to the public RIGHT?
In 1991
• Incest offenders ranged between 4 and 10 percent.
• Rapists ranged between 7 and 35 percent.
• Child molesters with female victims ranged between 10 and 29 percent.
• Child molesters with male victims ranged between 13 and 40 percent.
• Exhibitionists ranged between 41 and 71 percent.
In 2014 those numbers have jumped..
PS I know what your trying to do Independent. It appears to me your at least trying to make a more rational and compelling argument for your group. You will never make it with the criminal histories of those "calling the shots" and being the front people for your message. Derek has the "audacity" to be vocal with anyone who will listen, Tv shows, interviewers etc..so your groups hold him in some High postion, too afraid to disagree with him, same with Vicki Henry and many others, these people do your cause not one bit of damn good. Having audacity is the dumbest criteria for allowing these people to be front men/women ..Think about it, if YOU wouldnt allow some of these people or their spouses to be left alone with your kids? WHY would you allow them to be the the spokespeople for your cause? Never made any sense to me.
So this may get confusing because I am quoting you quoting me, so I will use brackets, to show both of what was already said for people who may be reading who do not feel like going back through everything.
[" What we are saying is that there should not be a one size fits all punishment," There isnt,,, there are a multitude of varying punishments depending on the crime and or the circumstances and the age of the victim. Try reading your states statutes for various sex crimes, it will keep you busy for days.]
So yes there are different statutes for every crime, I am well aware that people get charged and sentenced differently. However, once everyone has finished serving their time in jail/prison and/or probation/parole, all end up on the same registry. Everyone on the registry has the same restrictions even though we agree that there is a wide gap for recidivism among all the different crimes on the registry. This is more what I mean when I am saying a one size fits all punishment, it is not the actual sentencing itself, it is the sentence after the sentence, the registry.
-Independent2014
[" And with different levels of crime come varying recidivism rates." Not true ..different levels of OFFENDERS according to the voodoo doctors and many escalate in their crimes and never get convicted.]
Research shows that there is a wide disparity in recidivism between previous exhibitionist offenders, rapists, molesters of boys versus molesters of girls, incest offenders and R&J offenders. That is what I meant when I made this statement. You in fact also highlighted this point later on when you pointed out the recidivism rates for different crimes.
-Independent2014
[""My argument is that we have more registered sex offenders now than we can ever hope to keep up with and it's growing because we live in a depraved, fallen world, and politicians are trying to one up themselves up get re-elected""
Which is it, our world is getting more depraved and fallen or its the politicians fault? My money says often the abused grow into abusers, not always but often, Keep the abusers away from a CLEAN generation of kids and we may catch a break on depravity manifesting itself on future generations. The policitians are only doing what people like me DEMAND they do.]
I guess my question would if keeping abusers away for a full generation really worked, then why do we have abuse in the first place? There had to be a point where there was no offenders, and the cycle had to start somewhere. My answer to that is we live in a fallen world, I do not want to get too theological here, because that is not the point of this discussion. I believe though that we have all fallen short of the glory of our creator, and that comes out in depravity in abusing ourselves and abusing others. I personally do not see that changing even if all offenders were removed from the equation, the cycle would start back up again.
I believe the politicians are selfish and are not making these laws necessarily for any greater good, other than for that of themselves. Let me back up for a second and say this, research shows that some of these programs that politicians are installing to “protect the public” are actually making it more difficult for sex offenders to re-integrate back into society (Levenson, D’Amora, & Hern 2007). Why we want to make it more difficult for sex offenders to re-integrate back into society is beyond me. If they are going to be out of prison, we might want to help them to be productive citizens, the better they integrate into society the less likely they are to commit more crimes and the less likely we will have to pay for them. We pay for people on the registry now if they can’t get a job, they are on welfare, guess who pays for that? Or if they go to jail again, John Q taxpayer pays 50k a year for them.
This is all a longwinded way of saying politicians are not setting up sex offenders to succeed once they get out of prison or off probation or parole. These politicians make us believe that crime is on the rise, that we need to do something right now or you could be next. Nothing could be further from the truth, look at the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is a measure of what victim’s report, not what police catch. In 1993 the violent crime rate per year was 79.8 (this means that 79.8 people out of 1,000 were victimized), however in 2010 that rate drops to 19.3! That 4 times less victims in 2010 than in 1993, yet our perception is that violent crime is on the rise, we must do something about it or we are all going to die (Lauritsen & Rezey, 2013).
-Independent2014
h[""At what point does the information become meaningless because of so many data points in the system? Who is truly dangerous and who is not?""
You get no argument from me about the complexities of any given "government" system, but from where I sit? Its much too leniant and gives the offender less jail time than deserved. The repercussions of having SO status is a christmas present compared to sitting in a cell and the public agrees. No one to date can determine who is capable of being dangerous or not. Unless you have a Crystal ball, but society "KNOWS" past behavor is a good indicator of Future behavor, thats human nature, not some manufactured punchline of Law Enforcement.]
When it comes to sex offenses I do not think it is a fair statement to say that past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior. Regardless of arguing whether the recidivism is 5 or 25% (I will talk more about this later), it is still lower than most all other crimes. But let’s say that I grant you that your assumption that past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior. Why then are we only holding sex offenders feet to the fire? My best friend was killed by a drunk woman driving her car, she was convicted 2 years before for DUI, but she got her license back and liked to drink. According to the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, there was 33,561 motor vehicle deaths in 2012. Just under a third of them, 10,322, were caused by people driving drunk. DUI is a serious crime, and it has more deaths every year than sex offenses do. Police arrest around 900,000 people every year for drinking and driving, and approximately one third of those are repeat offenders. If past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior, why do not have a registry for DUI offenders? Why not all criminals?
-Independent2014
[""What I propose is taking off all Romeo and Juliet, public urinators, and other like minded crimes right away"" Boy thats a mouthfull and pretty slippery throwing urinators and "like-minded" crimes out the window. TRUE Romeo and Juliets YES, the other NO. Do you have any concept how many exhibitionist just swear they pissed on a tree? NO again NO. If a guy takes a leak and the (only) person who saw him was a cop? Maybe, but thats not how these guys are busted and you know it. They are reported by the public for EXPOSING themselves.And what the hell is "like-minded" crimes? Thats a can of worms and makes no sense.]
I agree like-minded crimes can be too broad. I was more referring to Derek’s list of ridiculous and true things people have done to get on the registry, http://www.oncefallen.com/youmightbersoif.html How some of these people can be on the same list as violent rapists is beyond me, it is not only unfair to these people on it for bad reasons, but it also dilutes the people we need to be looking out for. I don’t want to hide behind these people, I want them off the registry. I agree that a lot of exhibitionists claim things like you are saying, so I would only put them on the registry if they have more than one conviction for such behavior. I would rather err on the side of caution than put someone in jail that just had to go to the bathroom. If these people really have as high as a recidivism rate as you say they do, true exhibitionists will make their way back onto the registry.
-Independent2014
[""Allow people on the registry to prove in court that they are no longer threats to society to be able to get relief from public ridicule and shame. But go back to the original Wetterling act and allow LE to have access to all people convicted of a see crime even if they are off the registry""" ???
not clear at all on that one, but if your saying registry is for LE only? NO DICE. In countries where this is done its a dismal failure and the numbers arent in on the states who do not list Level ones and their failure to re-offend or their propensity to re-offend. Hopefully someone is watching the store on that one, somehow I doubt it, but not enough info is out on the level one's not disclosed to the public and probably wont be for years. If they do well and are followed for longer than three pathetic years perhaps more states may implement it.]
I am saying that keep the registry public until registrants have proven that they are not a threat, IE the Tier down system. Then still allow police to keep a list if they so desire of former registrants, that cannot be given out to the public even under the freedom of information act.
And there are many studies done of all offenders, studies don’t differentiate between tiers, and many studies are done for more than just 3 years.
-Independent2014
[""Allow people on the registry to "tier down" and tier off public registry if they are tier 1
."" Here is my thoughts on Tiering down :(after release from prison or probation)
1) Tier 1 10 years on registry and released from registration period done
2) Tier 2 15 years on registry, then released from registration period done
3) Tier 3 25 years on registry then released from registration, done.
If the offender re-offends either during or after of a sexually based crime 25 years in prison and lifetime registration, Lifetime registration and longer jail sentences should be mandatory for "sexualy violent assaults" My preference is the death penalty for certain sexually violent crimes, but it seems they arent handing those out as often as I would like. I happen to believe my suggestion is more than generous.]
My only hesitation with a system like this is the original tiering to begin with. My fear would be you would get people that are uneducated and would say that system is fine, EVERYONE IS A TIER 3. As much as you like to bust Derek’s chops about his crime, (and I may lose you here because I know your hatred of him) I don’t think he fits the bill of a sexually violent predator. I think he was originally tiered correctly in Alabama as a tier 1 offender.
The number of years can be debated, I would not see too much wrong with what you are suggesting other than the death penalty. I am not a bleeding heart liberal, but I am convinced by the statistics that the death penalty has been unfairly leveled on people based on socio-economic status. The poor people who get left with bad public defenders get killed, while the rich people who can afford good attorneys will not be sentenced to death. Though again I am getting off topic here.
The biggest thing is you need to give people on the registry and their families hope. Their needs to be light at the end of the tunnel or why would they want to stay offense free? Right now there is no light, and politicians are piling on more and more restrictions and registrants have the lowest recidivism rate other than murderers.
-Independent2014
As far as you saying there are only studies looking at recidivism going only as far as 3 years, that is just not true.
The static-99 even has a predictor going out to 10 years with 95% confidence interval. http://www.static99.org/pdfdocs/static-99RViolentRecidEstimates2010-04-29.pdf
Jill Levenson and Ryan Shields at Lynn University in Florida looked at recidivism rates at 5 and 10 years out, here is what she found:
-Five-year sexual recidivism rates for offenders and predators were 4.5% and 8.2% respectively. Ten-year sexual recidivism rates for offenders and predators were 11.9% and 22.7% respectively.
-Five-year recidivism rates for AWA Tier 2 and Tier 3 offenders were 6.5% and 4.1% respectively. Ten-year recidivism rates for AWA Tier 2 and Tier 3 offenders were 17.3% and 10.9% respectively.
-There were no statistically significant differences between the recidivism rates of AWA Tier 2 and Tier 3 offenders. The recidivism rates were in the opposite direction from what might be expected, with Tier 2 offenders sexually recidivating at higher rates than Tier 3 offenders.
-AWA Tiers did a poor job of classifying offenders into relative and hierarchical risk categories.
-Offender/Predator status did a better job of classifying offenders into relative and hierarchical risk categories, with predators re-offending more frequently than offenders.
-Actuarial risk assessment (Static-99R) did a better job of discriminating between recidivists and non-recidivists, with sexual recidivists having slightly higher scores than non-recidivists.
This study can be found at:
http://www.lynn.edu/about-lynn/news-and-events/news/media/2012/11/sex-offender-risk-and-recidivism-in-florida-2012
I can go on listing more if you would like,
-Independent2014
And as far as Derek goes, I respect him for what he does. I think he could be more effective, though you already know my views on that from DS. He is letting people know that there is problem that needs to be fixed, and we are on the same side. I do not think his crime warrants a tier 3 rating like he is now, and I think it is unfair how that happened to him.
-Independent2014
""I do not think his crime warrants a tier 3 rating like he is now, and I think it is unfair how that happened to him"""
we will have to agree to disagree on that one. Your basing your opinion on (his) version of events, not court records. That is being gullible and paving the road for more abuse.
First off you need to be very very clear about my feelings on Jill Levenson. That is who I coined the term "voodoo doctors" from. She and I have had many face to face interactions on this issue and I trust her "observations" about as far as I can throw them. Throwing her name around for weight is useless and defeating in any point you attempt to make with me and your quote by her, "-AWA Tiers did a poor job of classifying offenders into relative and hierarchical risk categories" a poor job according to who? YOU? Levenson is notoriously generous with offenders and predators and the numbers you "drop-kicked" on that post indicate and re-enforce what I have been saying ..recidivism goes UP the further out from the original conviction so according to any methodolgy used..you still dont have a leg to stand on in the eyes of the public.
"" My fear would be you would get people that are uneducated and would say that system is fine, EVERYONE IS A TIER 3.""
almost spit my coffee out on that one, Is that anything like attempting to educate the public into thinking they all "pee'd on a bush or Accidently fell on a child porn site? C'mon its me your talking too and your groups as a collective are famous for insinuating the public is "uneducated" in fact count the number of times that description is used by pro-offender advocates. Nothin for nothin but with all things being equal, how "educated" does one need to be to land on a registry? The public is not as stupid as you give them credit for. If anything the public was conditioned at one time to "give the benefit of the doubt" to offenders, its the offenders themselves that decimated that little fairy tale with the daily onsalught of heinous crimes profiled in the daily paper and hit them in the face that the public started to recognize and realize the Majority of sex offenders are a BLIGHT on humanity, not the minority.
"" If past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior, why do not have a registry for DUI offenders? Why not all criminals?""
This rational always slays me. You people spend your days with the never ending drone of how damaging the registry is to registrants, yet if you cant be removed from it, then why not throw every other criminal under the bus and make them register also.I liken it to spending weeks and weeks of propaganda driven dialogue on HOW damaging public exposure is to offenders and then poof, a policeman, or prominant person goes down for some such sex crime and YOUR GROUPS are like flies on rotten meat, exposing that same person on every and any blog you can land on with your two cents, never once extending the scenarios of their circumstances to your own..if indeed the registry was everything you attach to it, why would you dance with glee when these people go down? Its no secret persons from every occupation and station in life commit these crimes. Again, its an argument that flies in the face of your stance on this issue. Kinda like you adhere to the anaolgy of two wrongs NEED to make a right?? And your wrong about every convicted sex offender has the same restrictions. Thats just not true, Only offenders who have crimes committed against minors have residency restrictions. At least thats how it is in Florida. Yet your groups love to infer that EVERY sex offender has the same terms and conditions as every other offender.
Post a Comment