Jessica Lunsford is Dead According to Sheriff.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:23 am

i wonder if its time our justice system moved to sentencing based upon recidivism rates. silly, mandatory sentencing laws have screwed up our criminal justice system. three strikes laws, while based on good intent, have wound up being used to put petty criminals and minor drug abusers behind bars for decades - crowding out violent offenders. we have enough people in prison, and enough who've 'graduated' out of prison, to have a TON of statistics on recidivism rates. why not have basic formulas that, rather than requiring mandatory sentences of arbitrary amounts of time, rather the juries in such cases are advised of the statistics related to a particular offense or pattern of offenses, and the likelyhood that the person convicted will re-offend, and at what rate and time-frames involved. then juries could generate sentences based upon the reality of recidivism. the worse the recidivism rates relative to the harm committed, the longer the sentence advised.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:34 am

Mary, couey had 24 arrests on his sheet. mostly burglaries. that's pretty significant as far as jackets go. ....Anastrophe, your premise is sensible and reasonable, and actually we have habitual offender statutes that do address recidivism. the judges can make the sentences much longer than the statute provides for an initial offense.

legaleagle · Post by **legaleagle** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:43 am

Anastrophe,

Are we supposed to accept that just because you and a few of your close friends don't go out and commit mayhem when on a bender that you are the standard and not the exceptions of all drug users?

As far as Couey's record is concerned, I believe that he was prosecuted for kissing an older teen girl during a burglery, indecent exposure (was that urinating on a public street somwhere while dazed on drugs or flashing an old lady or --not defined anywhere) and apparently some other minor offense somewhere which apparently wasn't prosecuted so whatever it was couldn't have been very serious given that authorities knew he had kissed the girl during a robbery. Nothing there screams child molester.

I can't speak for your pristine group of druggies but around here the papers are full of crimes against property and people committed by people driven to get money to satisfy their drug habits. You may be financially well off to support your habits out of earned income. Many people aren't that lucky.

Everyone isn't as well balanced as you. There are lots of people out there who may have tendencies, weaknesses which under normal circumstances people are able to keep under control. Drugs are enablers for many people only what gets enabled sometimes isn't very pretty.

I know medical research shows profound and permanent changes in brain chemistry and genetic makeup in many heavy drug users. Alcohol just kills brain and liver cells. Drugs add another dimension with many people resulting in permanent personality changes - none of them for the better according to the medical research (not to mention screwed up offspring).

Nowhere did I say that Couey should face leniency because of diminshed capacity because of the drugs. What I did say was that had he not been totally slammed on drugs, this might never have happened.

Quite true that most people on drugs do not kill anyone but the notion that they only harm themselves like you and your friends is drug induced delusion.

As far as the affluent white kids doing drugs, we won't see at alot of the damge done for years. Couey didn't fry himself over night. The initial difference with the affluent white kids is they don't have to rob and maim people to get their drugs just yet.

The argument that you do drugs and don't do anything horrific therefore any other person that does drugs would not do anything like this (or go shoot someone, .....) is pure delusion on your part. You are fortunate that you are "in control" when shooting the moon. That does not make you the general rule.

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:04 am

Nothing changes the fact that this child is dead. I dont care WHAT excuse there is. To me, there is no excuse. I dont believe in all that 'dimished responsibility' crap. He confessed he killed her, so should he be proven that in fact he DID, by a jury of his peers, then he should be sent to prison at LEAST for the rest of his natural life, to prevent him from doing it again.

Beth · Post by **Beth** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:01 am

Funny, I had to consent to a background check just to be able to volunteer at my children's schools. I am amazed that all who work on school grounds do not have to undergo the same scrutiny.

Beth · Post by **Beth** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:15 am

3kidzforme wrote: I think it is probably a school districts decision on that. I was a Daisy Girl Scout Leader a year ago and had to undergo a background check including references that I know were contacted (my landlady & best friend both told me they were contacted). I was a member of the PTO and volunteered from time to time when my daughter was in kindergarten and I never had to even fill out an info form.
Ah, I see. Well, when I first started volunteering (about six or seven years ago), I never had to have a background check. I had to fill out a form, but never had to supply a photo copy of my license, or my social. When I was a Cub Scout leader, however, I had to go through an intense check with references, as you mentioned.

Last year was the first time that I had to supply references as to my stability and character references. I listed several of my children's past teachers as character references because I became close and was very reliable with them.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:18 pm

legaleagle wrote: Anastrophe,

Are we supposed to accept that just because you and a few of your close friends don't go out and commit mayhem when on a bender that you are the standard and not the exceptions of all drug users?i'm not surprised you make such assumptions - typical of bigotry in all it's manifold forms.

i'm not a druggie, friend. the last time i partook of major, illicit drugs was back in the 1980's. i've confined myself since then to strong coffee and halfway decent red wine.

and yes, you *are* supposed to accept that i'm not the exception, because the facts and statistics show it to be the case.

As far as Couey's record is concerned, I believe that he was prosecuted for kissing an older teen girl during a burglery, indecent exposure (was that urinating on a public street somwhere while dazed on drugs or flashing an old lady or --not defined anywhere) and apparently some other minor offense somewhere which apparently wasn't prosecuted so whatever it was couldn't have been very serious given that authorities knew he had kissed the girl during a robbery. Nothing there screams child molester.
yeah. all he did was kiss a teenage girl while burglarizing a house. no big deal. why, doesn't that happen twice a day in everyone's neighborhood? heck, i wouldn't be the slightest bit alarmed if i had a teenage daughter, and while we all slept, a man broke into our home, then entered my teenage daughter's room, and tried to kiss her. (note, the specific incident states that he "covered her mouth while he tried to kiss her" - that means he wasn't just trying to give her a gentle peck on the cheek goodnight!)

yes, that's normal behavior, and frankly, i think he should have been given an award for not raping her.

sigh.

I can't speak for your pristine group of druggies
mmm. your bigotry is showing.

but around here the papers are full of crimes against property and people committed by people driven to get money to satisfy their drug habits. nice rhetorical trick there. "full of crimes against property and people". dear sir, what are the actual stats regarding *crimes against property* versus *crimes against people*. it's a dandy trick to lump them together.

did you know that hundreds of millions of people die or get sick from the flu every year?

You may be financially well off to support your habits out of earned income. Many people aren't that lucky.

financially well off? :yh_rotfl

Everyone isn't as well balanced as you. There are lots of people out there who may have tendencies, weaknesses which under normal circumstances people are able to keep under control. Drugs are enablers for many people only what gets enabled sometimes isn't very pretty.
indeed, i agree. but far more violent crime is committed by people who are not high, but in fact are in disputes about drug *sales* and related gang activity. its the black market that generates the crime, far more than the drug use itself.

I know medical research shows profound and permanent changes in brain chemistry and genetic makeup in many heavy drug users. Alcohol just kills brain and liver cells.
"just"? "JUST"??? did you really write that? "just kills brain [...] cells"????

you are aware that alcohol abuse causes far more deaths than all other drug use combined, both to the abuser him/herself, and to innocent people due to drunk drivers? you're aware of the costs to society of alcohol abuse?

apparently not. yeah, alcohol 'just' kills brain cells. and jumping off the golden gate bridge 'just' causes a big splash.

Drugs add another dimension with many people resulting in permanent personality changes - none of them for the better according to the medical research (not to mention screwed up offspring).
sorry, bogus. first off, just a blanket term of "drugs" is a lot of BS. some illicit drugs cause health and mental changes. many do not. marijuana, except in the most heavy abusers, doesn't cause health or mental changes. methamphetamine? serious health and mental changes. "drugs" encompasses both, and so it's disingenuous at best to just say 'drugs'.

oh, speaking of screwed up offspring, ever heard of fetal alcohol syndrome? widespread. terrible damage to the child. legal drug. oh - please, do bring up 'crack babies' - i'd love an opportunity to absolutely QUASH that myth - there has never been a 'crack baby' - *all* of them, despite the breathless hysteria about them more than a decade ago - were *fetal alcohol syndrome* babies.

Nowhere did I say that Couey should face leniency because of diminshed capacity because of the drugs. What I did say was that had he not been totally slammed on drugs, this might never have happened.
perhaps. of course, for more than 40% of those convicted of murder, *alcohol* was reported to be a factor in the crime. most of the remainder there was no drug or alcohol use implicated.

Quite true that most people on drugs do not kill anyone but the notion that they only harm themselves like you and your friends is drug induced delusion.
mmm. once again, bigotry induced delusions. i never said that they only harm themselves, and never harm others. but do feel free to put words in my mouth then attack me for them!

As far as the affluent white kids doing drugs, we won't see at alot of the damge done for years. Couey didn't fry himself over night. The initial difference with the affluent white kids is they don't have to rob and maim people to get their drugs just yet.
that's a dandy bedtime story. but that's not what is under discussion or dispute. are you suggesting that couey kidnapped, raped, and murdered jessica in order to get drugs? and, if those affluent white kids are doing drugs, why aren't *they* out kidnapping, raping, and murdering little girls? who said anythign about damage done in later years? if the drug use is a major factor in this crime, what difference does it make in terms of the age, affluence, race, religion, whatever of the user? why would affluent white kids be less predisposed to randomly kidnapping, raping, and murdering little girls than someone like couey?

The argument that you do drugs and don't do anything horrific therefore any other person that does drugs would not do anything like this (or go shoot someone, .....) is pure delusion on your part.
never said that. but again, do feel free to put words in my mouth then attack me for them! it's a hallowed rhetorical trick of the person whose argument can't stand on its own.

You are fortunate that you are "in control" when shooting the moon. That does not make you the general rule.
take off your 'bigotry glasses' for a few minutes, would you please?

Beth · Post by **Beth** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:39 pm

Excellent points, Anastrophe.

legaleagle · Post by **legaleagle** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:18 pm

anastrophe wrote: i wonder if its time our justice system moved to sentencing based upon recidivism rates. silly, mandatory sentencing laws have screwed up our criminal justice system. three strikes laws, while based on good intent, have wound up being used to put petty criminals and minor drug abusers behind bars for decades - crowding out violent offenders. we have enough people in prison, and enough who've 'graduated' out of prison, to have a TON of statistics on recidivism rates. why not have basic formulas that, rather than requiring mandatory sentences of arbitrary amounts of time, rather the juries in such cases are advised of the statistics related to a particular offense or pattern of offenses, and the likelyhood that the person convicted will re-offend, and at what rate and time-frames involved. then juries could generate sentences based upon the reality of recidivism. the worse the recidivism rates relative to the harm committed, the longer the sentence advised.

I have no beef with your assessment of sentencing and that we load our jails with people that don't belong there.

What you have in this country now is politicians creating a culture of smoke and mirrors. They create "strawman" issues like getting the "druggies" off the street in an effort to draw peoples attention away from real issues which they don't address or hide their sell outs of their country and constituents to large corporate interests for personal gain.

Putting repeat weed users and other offenders of that type in jail is a joke. We waste millions upon millions prosecuting medical marijuana users and people who grow small quantities for personal use. But the public eats that crap up when its fed to them on a spoon. Bluntly , this is done by politicians and some law enforcement officials to make themselves look good but the hard issues like wiping out the producers of the more exotic drugs which have no theraputic value and which destroy people, that doesn't get done and is hidden behind this straw man. In addition, by putting these people in the slam with "real criminals" probably nets you a person when released more likely to spiral downward further as now he can't get a job because of his drug record or is limited to menial lifetime opportunities.

Pardon my cynicism but the use of the Republicans of the Terri Shiavo case is just another example to take attention away from real issues like developing alternative energy sources so we aren't dependent on foreign oil ( that would cost them campaign contributions from big oil and might get them opposition at the next election from an "oil" sponsored candidate) or moving social security money to Wall Street where the financial firms can rake in billions by charging you 6% a year to "manage" your social security funds in an environment where long term growth doesn't earn much more and may lose it all. GW's plans don't involve saving Social Security, its about giving Wall Street a big payday at the expense of the average person.

So while I agree with you about the "dumb" sentencing guidlines, until America wakes up and sees that the real problems are not being addressed, this sort of smoke and mirrors stuff will continue. What I don't agree is that Jessica died simply because Couey was a child molester who should have been off the street. His priors for that category would not have kept him off the street. You can however say that because of his 28 burglery convictions(who knows how many he didn't get charged with), he should have been off the streets as a career criminal and you can attribute Jessica's death to the fact that a career criminal completed his demise as a human being into a subhuman state with the application of lots of mind destroying drugs.

I believe that in most states, people with rap sheets this long are now being kept incarcerated and are not getting out based on laws passed over the past few years. That will help, it just didn't happen soon enough for Jessica which is the tragedy here.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:00 pm

legaleagle wrote: sell outs of their country and constituents to large corporate interests for personal gain.
yawn. let me guess...you're a democrat.

moving social security money to Wall Street where the financial firms can rake in billions by charging you 6% a year to "manage" your social security funds in an environment where long term growth doesn't earn much more and may lose it all.
i get really, really sick of this sort of absolute, patent, lie. the stock market, as a long term investment, has *always* and *historically* outperformed all other investments besides real estate.

if you had invested every spare dime you had in the stock market on the day before the 1929 crash, and invested for the long term, you'd be a filthy rich person. the economy, and the stock market, have cycles, up and down, but LONG TERM which is precisely what investing social security funds would be for, the money would net MORE than it would under the government's precious control.

but this has absolutely nothing at all to do with jessica. so, once again i've contributed to a thread being hijacked by an ideologue. darnit.

GW's plans don't involve saving Social Security, its about giving Wall Street a big payday at the expense of the average person.
yawn. start a topic elsewhere about the evil dr. bush.

robinseggs · Post by **robinseggs** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:15 pm

Oh nooooooo........first we were talking about Jessica'a situation and then.....................it turned into a drug discussion...(yawn..) and now it's gone political!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HELP!!!! lol

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:43 am

http://www.petitiononline.com/jlaw/ In honor of Jessica Marie Lunsford we ask that a better sex offender tracking system be implemented

Post by **kensloft** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:48 am

Peg wrote: I'll tell you what. If my child attended the school where he was working, the school board would have some MAJOR questions to answer.

Some people such as lc have the ability to see (from familiarity with these types) a potential abuser whereas people who are not in lc's position never think ill of people who seem to be legitimate.

This happened because a lot of people were fooled. let's not try and blame one person but look at the problem as a whole where there are many little things that add up to the whole.

Post by **kensloft** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:15 am

anastrophe wrote: i wonder if its time our justice system moved to sentencing based upon recidivism rates. silly, mandatory sentencing laws have screwed up our criminal justice system. three strikes laws, while based on good intent, have wound up being used to put petty criminals and minor drug abusers behind bars for decades - crowding out violent offenders. we have enough people in prison, and enough who've 'graduated' out of prison, to have a TON of statistics on recidivism rates. why not have basic formulas that, rather than requiring mandatory sentences of arbitrary amounts of time, rather the juries in such cases are advised of the statistics related to a particular offense or pattern of offenses, and the likelyhood that the person convicted will re-offend, and at what rate and time-frames involved. then juries could generate sentences based upon the reality of recidivism. the worse the recidivism rates relative to the harm committed, the longer the sentence advised.
I agree with what you say and suggest is needed for the Justice system to take into account when sentencing offenders. Too many non criminals are weighing down the system and allowing the real criminals to walk the streets. Not only are they weighing down the system but it is proving to cause the respect of the principles of law to be brought into disrepute in the eyes of the ordinary person.

Post by **kensloft** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:24 am

legaleagle wrote: Anastrophe,

Are we supposed to accept that just because you and a few of your close friends don't go out and commit mayhem when on a bender that you are the standard and not the exceptions of all drug users?

As far as Couey's record is concerned, I believe that he was prosecuted for kissing an older teen girl during a burglery, indecent exposure (was that urinating on a public street somwhere while dazed on drugs or flashing an old lady or --not defined anywhere) and apparently some other minor offense somewhere which apparently wasn't prosecuted so whatever it was couldn't have been very serious given that authorities knew he had kissed the girl during a robbery. Nothing there screams child molester.

I can't speak for your pristine group of druggies but around here the papers are full of crimes against property and people committed by people driven to get money to satisfy their drug habits. You may be financially well off to support your habits out of earned income. Many people aren't that lucky.

Everyone isn't as well balanced as you. There are lots of people out there who may have tendencies, weaknesses which under normal circumstances people are able to keep under control. Drugs are enablers for many people only what gets enabled sometimes isn't very pretty.

I know medical research shows profound and permanent changes in brain chemistry and genetic makeup in many heavy drug users. Alcohol just kills brain and liver cells. Drugs add another dimension with many people resulting in permanent personality changes - none of them for the better according to the medical research (not to mention screwed up offspring).

Nowhere did I say that Couey should face leniency because of diminshed capacity because of the drugs. What I did say was that had he not been totally slammed on drugs, this might never have happened.

Quite true that most people on drugs do not kill anyone but the notion that they only harm themselves like you and your friends is drug induced delusion.

As far as the affluent white kids doing drugs, we won't see at alot of the damge done for years. Couey didn't fry himself over night. The initial difference with the affluent white kids is they don't have to rob and maim people to get their drugs just yet.

The argument that you do drugs and don't do anything horrific therefore any other person that does drugs would not do anything like this (or go shoot someone, .....) is pure delusion on your part. You are fortunate that you are "in control" when shooting the moon. That does not make you the general rule.
Spoken like a true irrational being. I don't think anastrophe is only talking about 2 or 3 close friends but millions upon millions of people that have done drugs other than smoking pot. With your rationalization we should ban milk because all drug users had that as the beginning of their drug lives. Milk should be banned and milk drinkers should be barred from ever walking the streets. If we stop drugs at its source then we will stop the scourge.

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:54 am

lady cop wrote: Mary, couey had 24 arrests on his sheet. mostly burglaries. that's pretty significant as far as jackets go. ....Anastrophe, your premise is sensible and reasonable, and actually we have habitual offender statutes that do address recidivism. the judges can make the sentences much longer than the statute provides for an initial offense.

LC: I agree.......

The longer sentence is a good idea but all I could find out about how judges are using it is that the average sentence increase since 1994 is 7% (about 93% short of what it should be in my opinion)

From what I have found the re-hab rate is quite low and instead of taking a chance when they are "LOOSE" we need to inform the people that they have a predator in their midst. Be it level I or level III

I think a lot of these crimes could be prevented if we exposed them on the FIRST offense. (an X branded on their forehead comes to mind :yh_ghost )

I wanted to share how as a nation we have evolved in how we responded to these crimes.

Background

In order to understand the significant support for community notification laws, it is important to examine the history of these laws in the United States. Horrific events in Washington, Minnesota, and New Jersey were the impetus for the creation of notification and registration laws for sex offenders. These new statutes provided guidance for the rest of the country as new states enacted their own registration and notification legislation.

Washington State

In Washington State, a series of highly publicized sex crimes occurred during a very short period of time. In May 1987, Earl K. Shriner, a man with a long criminal record, completed a ten-year sentence in Washington for kidnapping and assaulting two teenage girls. Two years after his release, he raped and strangled a seven-year-old boy, severed his penis, and left him in the woods to die. In 1989, Gene Raymond Kane kidnapped and murdered a young Seattle businesswoman. He was on work release after serving a 13-year sentence for attacking two women. In another incident in 1989, Wesley Allen Dodd was apprehended during an attempted abduction of a six-year-old boy from a movie theater in southwest Washington. Following an investigation, Dodd confessed to the killings of two young boys who had been riding their bikes in a park and the kidnapping and murder of a four-year-old boy he found playing in a school yard.

In July 1989, Mountlake Terrace Chief of Police John Turner learned of the imminent release to his community of a person who, while in prison, had documented plans to sexually molest school children. Because he did not want a repeat of the Shriner case, Chief Turner weighed the potential for harm against the offenderÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s right to privacy and decided to notify the community. This was the first instance of community notification in Washington and was widely publicized throughout the state.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Washington StateÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s community notification law applies to adult and juvenile sex offenders, regardless of conviction date. Notification is dependent upon the level of risk an offender poses to public safety. An end-of-sentence review committee was established to assess, on a case-by-case basis, the public risk posed by sex offenders who are preparing for their release from confinement or are accepted from another state under the Interstate Compact. All sex offenders are classified into tiers of risk for the purposes of public notification. A model policy was developed for law enforcement agencies to follow when disclosing information about sex offenders to the public:

Tier I, Low risk: Notice is made to law enforcement agencies who may disclose information, upon request, to any individual community member who resides near an offender.

Tier II, Moderate risk: In addition to the above, information may also be disclosed to schools, child day care centers, family day care providers, businesses, and organizations that serve primarily children, women, or vulnerable adults, and neighborhood groups.

Tier III, High risk: In addition to the above, information may also be disclosed to the public at large.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to significant public outcry from these crimes and increased attention on the need to better protect communities, Governor Booth Gardner appointed a task force to recommend changes to the state laws. The task force held public hearings throughout the state and considered numerous ways to strengthen the stateÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s statutes concerning sex offenses. The task forceÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s recommendations became an omnibus bill enacted by the 1990 Legislature, outlining sweeping changes in the penalties for sex offenses, including civil commitment, registration, and community notification (Lieb, 1996).

Minnesota

In October 1989, a masked man abducted 11-year-old Jacob Wetterling at gunpoint near his home in St. Joseph, Minnesota. Neighbors, friends, and strangers rallied to the Wetterling familyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s aid and worked diligently to search the area and distribute flyers across the country. That outpouring of support led to the establishment of a nonprofit foundation in JacobÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s name to focus national attention on missing children and their families. Jacob remains missing to this day.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like Washington State, MinnesotaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s community notification process is dependent upon the offenderÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s assessed level of risk to reoffend:

Low risk: Information is maintained within law enforcement agencies and is provided to victims;

Moderate risk: In addition to the above, law enforcement agencies may disclose information to agencies and groups that the offender is likely to encounter; and

High risk: In addition to the above, law enforcement agencies may disclose information to members of the community whom the offender is likely to encounter.

End-of-confinement review committees assess the public risk posed by sex offenders on a case-by-case basis and are utilized at each state correctional facility and each state treatment facility where sex offenders are confined.

A model policy was developed to address and recommend the contents and form of community notification, methods of distributing community notification, methods of educating community residents at public meetings on how they can use the information to enhance their safety, and procedures for educating sex offenders on the nature and scope of the notification process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1991, the Jacob Wetterling Foundation recommended a legislative initiative that resulted in the passage of MinnesotaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s sex offender registration act. Prior to this act, law enforcement agencies lacked resources to identify known sex offenders residing in the state, which could assist in the investigation of these types of crimes. The Wetterling Foundation also worked to have this initiative passed on the federal level. In 1994, Congress enacted the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sex Offender Registration Act. The Act mandated that each state create a program to register sex offenders and authorized discretionary community notification.

New Jersey

Seven-year-old Megan Kanka was raped and murdered in 1994 by Jesse Timmendequas, a twice convicted child molester who lived on her block in Hamilton, New Jersey. MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s parents believe that if they had known that a pedophile lived nearby, this heinous crime would never have happened. MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s death gave new momentum to the concept of community notificationÃ¢â‚¬that residents should be warned when a sex offender moves into their neighborhood.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New JerseyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s community notification law is similar to Minnesota and Washington laws, in that the notification process is dependent upon the degree of risk an offender presents to the community:

Low risk: Notice is provided only to the victim and law enforcement agencies likely to encounter the offender;

Moderate risk: In addition to the above, notice is given to community organizations including schools, and religious and youth organizations; and

High risk: In addition to the above, community members who are likely to encounter the offender are notified.

County prosecutors, together with law enforcement officials, assess the risk of reoffense by each released sex offender and determine the appropriate means of notification. Some methods of notification include community meetings, speeches in schools and religious congregations, and door-to-door visits in the community.

In November 2000, voters in New Jersey approved a measure to amend the state constitution to allow sex offender registration information to be posted on the Internet. Previously, the New Jersey Supreme Court had ruled that broad release of this information violated offendersÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ privacy rights.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Residents of MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s community held rallies and signed petitions in support of community notification. MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s parents served as leaders to the cause, beginning a very public campaign to protect children. In 1995, this campaign led to the enactment of community notification legislation in New Jersey, known as "MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Law." New Jersey politicians helped carry the issue to a national level. President Clinton signed the MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Law amendment in May 1996, changing the discretionary language in the Jacob Wetterling Act regarding community notification to a requirement.

Federal Requirements

Congress passed the Jacob Wetterling Act (Title XVII of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994), requiring states to create registries of offenders convicted of sexually violent offenses or crimes against children and to establish more rigorous registration requirements for highly dangerous sex offenders. While states did not receive any additional federal funding to fulfill the ActÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s requirements, they are penalized if found not in compliance. The U.S. Department of Justice issued guidelines (January 5, 1999) to assist states with complying with the Act and its amendments.

The Wetterling Act has been amended three times, by the following:

MeganÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Law was added in 1996, requiring community notification;

The Pam Lychner Sexual Offender Tracking and Identification Act was added in 1996, heightening registration requirements for repeat and aggravated offenders; and

Section 115 of the General Provisions of Title I of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (CJSA) was added in 1998, increasing sexually violent predator requirements and requiring the registration of federal, military, and non-resident students and workers.

In addition, the 1998 CJSA amendments require states to participate in the National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR). The NSOR will interface with state registries to identify, collect, and properly disseminate relevant information that is consistent, accurate, complete, and up-to-date. The NSOR was established so that state registry information could be tracked between jurisdictions. The NSOR was launched in July 1999, as part of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC 2000).

Characteristics* of recidivists include:

multiple victims;

diverse victims;

stranger victims;

juvenile sexual offenses;

multiple paraphilias;

history of abuse and neglect;

long-term separations from parents;

negative relationships with their mothers;

diagnosed antisocial personality disorder;

unemployed;

substance abuse problems; and

chaotic, antisocial lifestyles. :yh_ghost

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:19 pm

In most of these cases it could have been avoided..!!

I read the article they are looking for a caller that say COUEY claimed to be having sex with a little girl..

Does that mean he did this before with Jessica..

What a slime ball... !! I hope he gets killed in jail.. useless human being.. :-5

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:24 pm

this is a whiney crock...he was just trying to get sympathy from the investigator, we hear this crap all the time. .....also, Carla, click on at the bottom "more about couey" to see the story you heard about.

A cry for help

Thursday, March 24, 2005

John Couey was picked up by Kissimmee police in 1991.

There is new disturbing information revealed about self-confessed killer John Couey.

Jessica Lunsford's death is not the first time he's confessed to a crime against a child.

In 1991, Couey was picked up by Kissimmee police after a mother said she saw him fondling himself in front of her daughter.

Kissimmee police released his taped confession. After confessing to the crime, Couey made a plea for help, saying he might commit a similar crime if he didn't get counseling.

More about Couey

Click here to see a story about an anonymous phone call made to Citrus County deputies."I feel that prison ain't gonna help 'cause I done 10 years in prison," Couey said. "I got out in three years. That ain't gonna help. I feel like I need help for myself and that's why I've confessed to the crime I've committed tonight. I want help for myself so I will never have to do this again. I feel bad about it, really."

Couey spent two years in prison for that crime.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 7:46 pm

This is disturbing, is this so called caller saying COUEY was having sex with Jessica for a while..??? Just makes me angry.. this guy should have never been allowed the freedom to move among children... ANIMAL :-5

Police seek caller regarding Lunsford case

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

John Couey is charged with murder in the case.

The Citrus County Sheriff's Office is looking for a man who made an anonymous call to them last Friday.

The sheriff's office said the caller claimed John Couey, Jessica Lunsford's accused killer, told him 2 1/ 2 to three weeks earlier that he was having sex with a little girl.

So far the sheriff's office has been unable to trace the call. They're asking the caller to step forward and help build the capital case against Couey in Jessica's abduction and murder.

Police are asking the man to call Sgt. Dave Wyllie at (352) 726-1121.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:29 pm

Photo by: Pool photo

Mark Lunsford, left, is comforted by his brother, Tony, at his daughter's memorial service. He thanked the community and the sheriff for their support.

LECANTO - Her pastor said she had spunk.

The sheriff worried he'd failed her.

And an audio-visual presentation helped this shocked and grieving community learn some of the joys of her short life.

An estimated 1,000 mourners ignored severe thunderstorms Saturday to say goodbye to 9-year-old Jessica ``Jessie'' Lunsford at an emotional memorial service at Seven Rivers Presbyterian Church.

Few who were touched by her story will forget her bright- eyed smile, sometimes captured in pictures of her in a Kangol cap her dad bought for her at the Florida State Fair days before she was raped and killed.

It was the photograph so often seen on the missing posters distributed when there was still hope.

Jessie is gone from our world, said her pastor, Laverle Coats.

But her memory will burn for a long time in her hometown, which never before saw such horrific crimes on a child.

``Jessie Lunsford ... loved to go shopping,'' said Coats, whose own church, Faith Baptist in Homosassa, was too small for an outpouring so large. ``She wanted to be an Olympic swimmer and a fashion designer.

``She didn't want to see anyone hurt. ... The person who took her will pay by Christ the Lord.''

Two miles away, the man accused of killing her, John Evander Couey, 46, remained in isolation at the Citrus County jail.

Charged with first-degree murder, sexual battery and kidnapping, he's scheduled to be arraigned April 12.

If convicted on the murder charge, he could be sentenced to death.

But the 90-minute service was all about Jessie.

The audio-visual presentation offered a collage of still photographs of her life: Jessie as a baby conked out with a pacifier in her mouth, cuddling a puppy, flashing one of her face-stretching grins, mugging for the camera and giggling as her grandfather Archie pushed her on a swing.

Citrus County Sheriff Jeff Dawsy, as emotional as he was at the news conference announcing Jessie's body had been found, said her Feb. 24 disappearance and the subsequent discovery of the crimes forever changed this community, state and the nation.

He called the Lunsfords his new family.

``This really shattered everything,'' the sheriff said.

``I took into question all that I thought was right. It caused me to question my abilities.''

Then, addressing the Lunsfords, he said in a breaking voice:

``I'm sorry I didn't bring her back home to you alive.''

Her father, Mark, thanked the community.

``You all worked so hard to help someone you didn't know,'' he said.

``I've raised kids all my life, and someone has taken that from me.''

He also thanked the sheriff's office and Dawsy, who he joked was ``my older, older brother.''

Coats closed the service by saying, ``I don't know what happened in the last hours of her life.''

But he said he wanted to believe a verse from Philippians 4:13 that she recently memorized.

``I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me,'' Coats recited as he scanned the mourners.

``Then a bank of angels came down and took her.''

At the close of the service, children released 500 balloons. ``Balloons are closure,'' said Joanie West of the Eternal Ascent Society, which supplied the balloons.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:32 pm

Sheriff Dawsy was in tears. i really respect that man as a sheriff, my sheriff makes me proud to be a florida sheriff's deputy, and so does Sheriff Dawsy. i am proud of the florida 5-pointed star, a badge of honor because of people like him. :yh_star

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:08 pm

REST IN PEACE SWEET JESSICA.. YOU HAVE YOUR WINGS NOW.. FLY HIGH.. YOU ARE A SWEET ANGEL...

legaleagle · Post by **legaleagle** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:32 pm

CARLA wrote: This is disturbing, is this so called caller saying COUEY was having sex with Jessica for a while..??? Just makes me angry.. this guy should have never been allowed the freedom to move among children... ANIMAL :-5

Has this been verified or is this some a..hole just trying to add to the family's pain? You really need to know all the time where your kids are and what they are doing and who they are hanging with. Maybe Jessica had too much freedom like many other kids and that does not just mean being victimized by a predator, that can mean drugs, alcohol, shoplifting, ... you name it!

If this is true, it would explain some of the questions still unanswered like how did he get her out of the house without a ruckus. Unfortunately maybe she did know him after all.

Couey's past confession just illustrates that just locking people up does not solve the problem. What he did previously was going to have him back on the streets in short order anyway. If he had been subject to psychological testing and treatment while incarcerated, he might have been labeled as a risk to re-offend upon examination and could have at worse kept incarcerated after his sentence was served on a civil committment like what is done here. From his own words, he did seem to acknowledge that he had a problem that needed attention. Civil committments are done here all the time.

I am not saying that Couey would have necessarily been kept in custody, but just maybe. If FLA does not have a civil committment procedure, they should look at laws already in effect elsewhere. They do work.

Unfortunately, you can lock up as many people as you want and the problem will never go away. You have to know where your kids are and who they are with all the time. Even though many of these crimes are committed by people with past records, many more are not. If you are a parent, you really have to be in on what your kids are doing constantly.

Post by **kensloft** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:22 pm

legaleagle wrote: Has this been verified or is this some a..hole just trying to add to the family's pain? You really need to know all the time where your kids are and what they are doing and who they are hanging with. Maybe Jessica had too much freedom like many other kids and that does not just mean being victimized by a predator, that can mean drugs, alcohol, shoplifting, ... you name it!

If this is true, it would explain some of the questions still unanswered like how did he get her out of the house without a ruckus. Unfortunately maybe she did know him after all.

Couey's past confession just illustrates that just locking people up does not solve the problem. What he did previously was going to have him back on the streets in short order anyway. If he had been subject to psychological testing and treatment while incarcerated, he might have been labeled as a risk to re-offend upon examination and could have at worse kept incarcerated after his sentence was served on a civil committment like what is done here. From his own words, he did seem to acknowledge that he had a problem that needed attention. Civil committments are done here all the time.

I am not saying that Couey would have necessarily been kept in custody, but just maybe. If FLA does not have a civil committment procedure, they should look at laws already in effect elsewhere. They do work.

Unfortunately, you can lock up as many people as you want and the problem will never go away. You have to know where your kids are and who they are with all the time. Even though many of these crimes are committed by people with past records, many more are not. If you are a parent, you really have to be in on what your kids are doing constantly.
Still think that global positioning implants are the way to go.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:36 pm

GPS and ankle bracelets have an inherent problem...who is going to monitor them 24/7? nobody. there is a common misconception that people are "watching" where the wearers are, not so. a computer keeps track, and if there is any question about where someone has been, their probation officer can check back. think of the sheer numbers of microchip implants proposed for sexual offenders...there is no way they can realistically be monitored all the time. if one snatches a kid, by the time it is determined which offenders might be in the area, the kid is usually dead. it simply isn't practicable. and once again, stranger abductions are statistically/ relatively quite rare. the usual molester, who is known to the family, may well not be someone with a prior conviction, i.e., implanted. and i can forsee constitutional problems with the "invasiveness" of an implant. the ACLU would go nuts.

legaleagle · Post by **legaleagle** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:24 pm

John Couey is charged with murder in the case.

The Citrus County Sheriff's Office is looking for a man who made an anonymous call to them last Friday.

The sheriff's office said the caller claimed John Couey, Jessica Lunsford's accused killer, told him 2 1/ 2 to three weeks earlier that he was having sex with a little girl.

So far the sheriff's office has been unable to trace the call. They're asking the caller to step forward and help build the capital case against Couey in Jessica's abduction and murder.

Police are asking the man to call Sgt. Dave Wyllie at (352) 726-1121

I would tend to think that this person if he is legitimate would not reveal himself for several reasons:

1. He would face public condemnation for not having dropped a dime when he first heard of the activity from Couey

2. I wonder if he would be legally (criminal and/or civil) in jeapordy by not having reported this information

3. You have to wonder about a person who Couey would have been talking freely with about this sort of activity - another potential/actual abuser - scrutiny a problem here

Anyone know anything additional about any actions that may be taken against the other residents of the trailer where Couey was living?They seem to have fallen into a "black hole" here

Maybe LC would know about the above points.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:19 pm

Hi Eagle, i don't have any information on the alleged phone call. it may well be a hoax. if couey did say something like that, it would probably have been to another crackhead, someone without a lot of credibility. they have plenty to seek death on the guy. he meets several criteria for death penalty. as to liability of the caller, not really, unless he were a person mandated to report, not likely among couey's circle. as for the other residents of the trailer...IF it is true couey kept her alive a day or two, and they were present, they are accessories. but so far they have only been charged with obstruction of justice, for which they could get a year in jail.