Chelsea King's parents pushing "Chelsea's Law" nationwide: What you need to know

Chelsea King's parents: bringing bad laws to a state
near you!

It should go without saying that the Chelsea King murder was one of the largest high profile kidnapping – murder case in recent memory. We also know that when a pretty, young, white girl is the victim of one of these rare tragic crimes, it has become commonplace to bastardize this person's memory by naming a bad piece of legislation in her "honor". It is also a good way to make money in the ever-growing victim industry.

Not content with passing a bad law in their own state, the King family is pushing Chelsea's Law nationwide. Texas, Illinois, Utah, Ohio, and Massachusetts are the first states to be targeted. Since many of these states have very active groups of sex offender reform activists, I thought I would take a moment to review Chelsea's Law.

RSOL has already published an analysis of Chelsea's law, but I felt it was incomplete because it only addressed the mandatory minimums provision (it is still a good read so I suggest you read it). According to the Chelsea's Law official website, there are seven key elements of the law has passed in California. This means some of the elements may be altered when it appears in your state. Still, it is a good idea to review the seven points so that they may be addressed when the time comes.

(1) "A new one-strike life without parole penalty for those sexual predators who commit the most heinous violent sex crimes against a child, as well as increases in other penalties for sex crimes committed against minors by use of force, violence, duress, menace, and fear." 

Mandatory minimums take away discretion in relatively minor/petty cases. The primary concern I have is that the language we choose the use in discussing sex crimes does not differentiate between serious offenders and petty offenders. For example, if a 17-year-old and a 13-year-old had consensual sexual relations with each other ( a "Romeo and Juliet" Offense, or R&J), the legal language we use to describe this would be "sexual assault" or "child molestation". Thus, it is considered a "violent" act. While the RSOL article points out that only eight individuals in two years have fallen under the mandatory minimum provision for Chelsea's law, it is only a matter of time before a relatively petty offender gets a life sentence under this law, if it has not happened already. In addition, the law also increases penalties for a large variety of offenses, which of course fails to take into account mitigating circumstances. As we have already seen with Megan's law, the net will be cast wider with each passing year and legislative session.

(2) "Increases in parole periods with active GPS monitoring for those convicted of felony sex crimes involving physical contact with children, as well as a new prohibition against loitering in parks where children congregate for parolees convicted of most sex offenses against children."

In recent years, GPS has been promoted as some kind of quick fix solution, but instead it has become a costly and ineffective method of monitoring registrants. In addition to a number of false alarms, those determined to reoffend can do so while wearing a GPS or simply cutting it off. Since most registrants are unemployed and cannot afford the $10-$20 a day cost of GPS, it is up to the taxpayers to pay for GPS. Let's not forget the language argument from earlier; the term "children" can mean anybody up to age 17. Thus, a 20-year-old having consensual relations with a 17-year-old in a state with only a two-year age allotment would be eligible for GPS monitoring.

Perhaps an even greater concern is the so-called prohibition against "loitering in parks where children congregate". In addition to violating the constitutional right to travel and associate with others in public places, anti-loitering laws are subject to abuses. The term loitering means being in any place with no particular reason to be there. I am sure some states will interpret this to imply that sex offenders cannot enter parts at all. The term loitering means that the police would have to prove, at least in theory, that a person cannot have a legitimate reason to be at a particular place that particular time. But there are a number of things a person can do to be legally at a place. After all, people go to a park to walk their dogs, exercise, eat their lunches, or just sit on the bench and stare at the sky or watch the other people going by. These are all legitimate reasons to be at a park.

In the late 1990s, the city of Cincinnati made a similar proposal where drug offenders could not enter a particular community, which was struck down in higher courts because it was not narrowly tailored and criminalized a number of activities that are otherwise legal to do. [Johnson et al. v. City of Cincinnati, 2002 FED App. 0332P (6th Cir.), cert. denied, US Supreme Court case no. 02-1452]

(3) Implementation of the “containment model” approach to sex offender management proposed by California’s Sex Offender Management Board, including increased oversight, psychological evaluations, and polygraph testing for all sex offenders on parole or probation."

Every time I hear the term containment model, my first thought is the containment unit used by the Ghostbusters. Since we are on the subject of science fiction, let's talk about polygraph testing. The polygraph was invented by the same guy who created the Wonder Woman character and her infamous "Lasso of Truth". The polygraph is not an actual lie detector; it merely detects changes in bodily functions such as heart rate. It is still up to the polygrapher to interpret these bodily changes. The polygraph relies on deception, and the polygraph is inadmissible in a court of law. But we all know that sex offenders are always the exclusion to the law, so Chelsea's Law promotes this junk science as part of the containment model.

The containment model has recently come under fire in Colorado as ineffective and expensive.

The containment model should not be confused with the treatment model, because the containment model does not offer actual treatment for the offender; it is nothing more than an overpriced monitoring system where treatment of the offender is not a priority.

(4) "Implementation of a Dynamic Risk assessment model to improve evaluation of sex offender’s potential for new sexual violence."

The reason I did not spend much time discussing psychological evaluations until now is because this point merely repeats part three. It is true that most actuarial tests like the Static-99 rely primarily if not exclusively on static (i.e., unchanging) factors such as age of offense or characteristics of the victim. A small number of tests, including a revision of the Static-99, are attempting to point out dynamic (life-changing) factors for recidivism. 

Unfortunately, researchers are ignoring a huge dynamic factor. The stress of living under the myriad of sex offender laws, including many of the provisions included in Chelsea's Law, are primary factors in sex offender recidivism. I am willing to bet that those factors are not added to any actuarial test. However, they are serious factors that must be addressed. Those forced to register experience a number of acts of discrimination, ostracism, and even vigilante violence. There are a number of laws that push registrants into a degraded class. That is one dynamic factor that the state can change by repealing most punitive sex offender legislation.

(5) "Authorization for various upgrades to the Megan’s Law website so as to include more useful and informative data to law enforcement and the public on the actual risk of sex offenders in our communities."

I can't imagine what more you could possibly add to the public registry to make it more understandable to the ignorant public. The public has already proven itself unable to differentiate between a drunken mooner, a Romeo and Juliet offender, and a multiple rapist. It does not help that legal definitions like molestation or violence can equally apply to consensual acts between two people close in age but not close enough by legal standards. Since many states do not have statutory definitions, what we would consider a statutory offense is simply called rape or sexual assault.

Even in the early days of the registry, studies were already finding that community notification meetings actually serve to heighten public fear rather than appease it. In one Wisconsin survey, where community notification meetings are held consistently in the community, two thirds of respondents left a meetings more concerned for their safety and before. The public simply cannot digest the truth. The registry was never intended to be public in the first place, so if we are to insist on having a registry, it should return to its original purpose, a private list for law-enforcement only.

(6) "Funding for victims’ services and outreach, as well as resource-development for SAFE (Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement) teams in rural, regional areas."

Since most of the money would goes toward law enforcement in big-name victim industry advocates (like the Kings), the actual victim services can forget about collecting a big payday for their cause. Unfortunately the few organizations that collect a large amount of funding will abuse this privilege by wasting it on maintaining states a perpetual victimhood rather than healing for those who are actually victimized.

What is it with all these acronyms? The real purpose of this so-called "SAFE" team is to further harassment ostracize offenders by constantly verifying their address unnecessarily. Millions of dollars are being wasted to have over a dozen law enforcement agencies, state, local, and federal authorities, knocking on doors just to get some guy to sign a sheet of paper. 

(7) "Changes in the state MDO (Mentally Disordered Offender) evaluation process to ensure that offenders deemed by at least two psychologists to be too dangerous to be released are properly detained."

This provision sounds sensible at first, until you consider there are few individuals in this country that have any degree of certification to evaluate those convicted of sexual offenses.The Kansas v. Hendricks 1997 SCOTUS decision greatly lowered the standards and the burden of proof by which one could be considered a "sexually violent predator" (SVP) and a prime candidate for civil commitment. The whole issue of civil commitment in general has been very controversial, especially in Minnesota, where not one individual has been released as a graduate of the MN-MSOP. We have a tendency to err on the side of caution, and in doing so we cast too broad of a net. 

You can be sure that I will take this fight to the Ohio State legislation, and if it passes, I will be fighting it in court. Named laws are terrible laws because they bypass any ounce of reason or evidence of effectiveness. As far as I am concerned, the Kings can pack up their silly law and take it back to the state of California where it belongs. Actually, the state of California needs to grow a brain and repeal this law. This law has been a waste of resources already, and it is time that we stop the trend of naming laws after rare high-profile cases to justify blanket provisions that destroy the constitutional rights and opportunities for redemption for a large number of individuals that had nothing to do with Chelsea's murder.

More corrupt than the BCS: Parents for Megan's Law and the “victim industry”

More corrupt than the BCS: Parents for Megan's Law and the “victim industry”

                In the popular book “Death to the BCS,” the authors contend that Division 1-A college football bowl games exploit many legal loopholes to make massive profits. Unless your football fanaticism goes far beyond the actual game, you may not even be aware that the “Bowl games” are actually considered nonprofit organizations. Obviously, when we think nonprofits, we may think of the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, or perhaps your local food bank and soup kitchens. Who would have guessed our federal government had given one of the most corrupt systems in our culture nonprofit status?

                In chapter 6 of “Death to the BCS”, the authors reveal the compensation for the CEO of a number of bowl games. For example, the CEO of the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl (formerly the Emerald Bowl) made $377,475 in salary, about 11.2% of the expenditures for running the game. A political action committee known as the “PlayoffPAC”, whose investigation helped spur government intervention, found the average CEO pay for nonprofit organizations with budgets between $10 million-$25 million was $185,270. Yet the Sugar Bowl CEO was paid $451,674 in 2007, and received a 42.9% raise two years later. The Outback bowl CEO made even more, nearly 4 ½ times the average.

                These numbers are important because the impact of these high salaries ultimately impact tuition rates at universities. Despite the alleged payouts of the bowl games (between $300,000 and $17 million depending on the game), most universities barely break even on their athletic budgets, and of course the losses are compensated by raising tuition. In the end, whether or not you are a football fan, you are paying the price for this corrupt system. There are few organizations more despised in our culture than the BCS, which has an approval rating of less than 10%, far worse than even President Bush at his worst.

                However, there are organizations in existence that make the BCS fatcats look like street-corner peddlers by comparison.

                Victim industry advocates know they have found the proverbial goose Lane the golden eggs. With so much focus on sexual abuse and the sex offender registry and our media, a number of entrepreneurs have found a way to turn this fear into profits. It has become a lucrative industry, with a number of organizations making substantial profits while offering little in return. Just as with the BCS system, a small number of people are making huge profits.

                For the sake of simplicity, my focus will be on a single organization as my example – the controversial New York-based “Parents For Megan's Law”, run by Laura Ahern.

                In PFML’s 2007 tax records, the group describes its organization this way:

                “PFML is dedicated to the prevention of childhood sexual abuse through the provision of educational advocacy policy and legislative support services. PFML maintains a website where information can be found on Meagans Law [sic] nationwide, childhood sexual abuse prevention and links to other resources for advocacy and prevention information.”

                So how much does an organization whose primary function is running a website that consists of a few resources and referrals to other advocacy groups need to stay afloat? Apparently a lot -- In 2007, $1.1 million, with just under $880,000 coming from government contributions (your tax dollars at work), in 2009, $1.15 Million, and in 2011, $1.07 million, all to fund an organization with roughly 20 members, most of them volunteers.

                As executive former director of PFML, Laura Ahern collects $120,000 per year, about 11.2% of the organization's total budget (comparable to the CEO of the “Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl” in terms of percentage of expenses going to a single salary), and that is before other perks that typically go with such a job. Compare that salary to a far larger organization with a larger worker base, the New Orleans area Habitat for Humanity, who spearheaded construction for people displaced by Hurricane Katrina; in 2009, the Executive Director of that organization was paid $97,500. It is interesting to note that Ahern is the only listed employee in the tax forms with a salary. In addition, $170,000 was listed as “compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees” with another $575,000 for “other salaries and wages.” That is roughly 81% of the budget going into employee salaries and compensation alone. Only about $205,000, or 19% of the budget, goes into the logistics of running the organization (they aren't the only culprits: Mark Lunsford's defunct JMLF gave nearly al proceeds to Lunsford himself, while the NCMEC spends roughlt the same amount on operating costs, including lobbying for the Adam Walsh Act, while Ernie Allen makes nearly roughly $1 million in salary and benefits).

                Also of interest, considering the condition of the PFML website, with its many errors and myths, and its simple format, I find it hard to believe the organization spends roughly $10,000 a year to keep such a poorly devised website up and running.

                These numbers are especially troublesome considering that the vast majority of income for this organization comes in the form of government grants. It will be interesting to see how much the salary increase Ahern will give herself once she receives the $1.1 million per year fee to be assessed to the people of Suffolk County, NY, for the purpose of “monitoring” the homeless registrants currently being shuffled from shelter to shelter.

                While the BCS system is corrupt and exploited by a small number of corporate fatcats, at least some small argument can be made that bowl games have benefited the communities through tourism and at least job creation on a temporary level. With PFML, you see similar big payouts to a CEO, with compensation going to a far smaller number of individuals, and virtually no benefit to the community by way of job creation and tourism.

                Like advocates for the BCS system (who claim a playoff would “kill tradition and stifle the economy), people who are made rich by the victim industry, like Ahern, have fed us a healthy diet of lies and distortions of the facts in order to protect their livelihoods. In 2002, PFML released impromptu findings of an alleged survey of the state registries, which has given us the prevailing myth of “100,000 missing sex offenders”. This myth has been prevailing in the media, even in the face of research thoroughly dispelling the myth. To this day, PFML has yet to publish the methodology and data to justify the assertions of their “research”. In addition, PFML gives each state a “report card” of their states registries. Of interest is PFML’s insistence the state of Florida's registry is the gold standard for Megan’s list. Of course, Florida has padded their stats with thousands of dead, incarcerated, deported, and out-of-state registrants. Like the previous study, there is little information given to help determine how they came to these conclusions.

                This is the most famous of PFML’s myths, but their website is full of lies, deceptions, and distortions of the facts (such as the “sex offenders have hundreds of victims” myth). In 2008, I critiqued a number of victim industry advocate sites, and came to the conclusion that PFML offer decent prevention tips, but was clouded by a large number of sex offender myths and reliance on fear mongering tactics.

Ahern and PFML is only one of a huge number of victim industry advocates out there. Many of the smaller organizations ultimately benefit only the few people at the center of the group. Having a six figure salary in an economy where benefits are going down, unemployment is going up, and the government is looking for ways to trim expenses even in previously untouchable areas is no small feat. Ask yourself how an organization consisting of roughly 20 employees can possess a million dollar budget and a CEO with a six-figure income, putting her in the upper echelon of American earners.

The authors of “Death to the BCS” liken the bowl fat cats to “drug cartels”. If we can make such comparisons to individuals profiteering from a corrupt sports game schematic, then what can we say about an organization whose existence is justified by exploiting the fear of sex crimes in our culture? At the least, we can state that groups like PFML are more corrupt than the BCS.

There is always more to the story

A newly released study by a professor at Arizona State University is suggesting that people deemed “high risk sex offenders” are more likely than low risk sex offenders to live in what he called “school zones”. The media will certainly milk this story for what it's worth, accepting its implications at face value. But there is more to this study than meets the eye.

                This geographical study tracked the movements of registered sex offenders in Hamilton County, Ohio (Cincinnati) from 2005 to 2007. The study found that people forced to register were far more likely to move than the average person, and that people who were considered “Tier 3” offenders, the so-called high risk category, were 3.9% more likely than Tier-1 (“low risk”) offenders to live in a school zone. Obviously, the research study is implying that high risk sex offenders are somehow violating the law and are intentionally living closer to schools for the purposes of reoffending.

                I know better.

                I know because for the past 10 years (with the exception of my 14 months living in Alabama), I have lived in Cincinnati, Ohio. Around the time the study began, I was classified as a “Tier 1” offender, and arbitrarily reclassified as a “Tier 3” offender on the basis of moving from a state where everybody registers for life. In June 2004, when I was still considered a tier 1 offender, I moved into a slum property that allegedly met the residency restriction laws of the state of Ohio, 1000 feet from schools and day care centers. For nearly a year, I lived a quiet life, working, paying my bills on time, and keeping to myself as much as possible.

                In the spring of 2005, when I was arbitrarily reclassified, the city determined I was living to close to a business called the “Life Skills Center”. This place offers GED courses for individuals aged 16 to 24, but for the purposes of the state’s residency restriction laws, the Life Skills Center was considered a school, and I fought unsuccessfully to keep my residence. As I stymied the city's case against me as long as I could, I called well over 100 places to try to find a new place to live. After nearly a year, I stumbled upon a new apartment (much bigger than my meager sleeping room at $150 a month) that met the current residency restriction laws.

                Just after Thanksgiving 2006, I moved into my new apartment. I had not even finished unpacking when the city of Cincinnati was debating a new ordinance that would increase citywide residency restrictions to include a number of places not covered by state law – YMCA centers, boys and girls clubs centers, swimming pools, parks, and recreation centers. My first true taste of advocacy was addressing the Cincinnati city Council against the new ordinance. I fought successfully to keep my current residence. The city still passed the ordinance, but dropped parks from its list of banned locations, while grandfathering register citizens so long as they lived in their current residence.

This move was undoubtedly inspired by my personal circumstances. My new residence was close to a place called Triangle Park. It is a city run Park maintained by the Cincinnati Parks and Recreation Commission, but it is not a part in the traditional sense of the word. Triangle Park is nothing more than a stone wall with a small flower garden and a couple of trees, a half-acre peninsula extending at the far corner of the block in which I reside. It is not the kind of Park someone takes her children to play, but to take their dogs to poop. In fact, when I was in the Cincinnati Restoration Church (where we raised funds for the church by selling candy), we referred to that location as the “doo-doo spot”. The park is still a part, no matter what it is called or what purpose it serves. If not for the grandfather clause or the removal of parts from the ordinance, I would have been forced to move again.

                We are too quick to take media accounts or even research at face value without questioning how we came to certain conclusions. This study would have you believe that all sex offenders move to elude detection. That is simply untrue; as a result of social ostracism, threats made against sex offenders, or at times, legal actions from overzealous city prosecutors all play roles in forcing registered citizens to move on a more frequent basis. I am sure this study did not take into account the negative effects of the postcards the city of Cincinnati sends to individuals when a sex offender moves into the neighborhood.

                The implication of this study assumes sex offenders move close to schools for the purpose of obtaining victims. This is simply untrue. When Cincinnati sought to pass their own ordinance in December 2006, they passed out a color-coded map of restricted zones within the city. There were a number of overlapping circles which gobbled up potentially available housing in the vast majority of areas where sex offenders could afford to live. In places like Over-The-Rhine, where many of the poorest residents tended to live before the urban renewal project started, there were no spaces where a registered citizen could legally live at all under the new ordinance.

                Cincinnati was not the only city in Hamilton County to have an increased residency restriction law. The city of Reading, for example, is an independent suburb of Cincinnati with its own police force in city Council. The city passed a 2000 foot restriction which made virtually the entire city off-limits to any person forced to register as a sex offender. Another suburb, Norwood, also had its own residency law restrictions. Did the study take these ever-changing laws into effect when asserting that sex offenders move more frequently in the average citizen?

                In my personal case, I did not move by choice, but by law. My motivation for choosing a new residence was necessity coupled with affordability. I simply looked or a place I can afford to live that met the legal requirements of the law.

                In recent months, there have been a number of questionable studies. A few months ago, a study from Utica College in New York claimed a large number of sex offenders were intentionally lying about their residents, allegedly based upon computer software used to determine credit card fraud. To this date, the researchers have never formally published the results including methodology in any peer-reviewed publication, yet the story spread like wildfire and accepted as fact. Nobody questioned the validity of this study or how they came to this conclusion. I can understand the reason why, as many research studies use complex algorithms and algebraic formulas to come to their conclusions. Sometimes reading a research paper requires an advanced mathematics degree to understand the conclusions they arrive at based upon the numbers they crunch.

                If independent research was not bad enough, influences from the victim industry Advocates with no formal training offer more misinformation to further confuse the uninformed public. A very recent example is a much publicized graphic from the Enliven Project which suggested that roughly 9 of every 10 sex crimes are unreported, with a very small number of falsely accused. This graphic is very inaccurate. The people who created this graphic claim they used reports like the national crime victimization surveys (NCVS), yet the current NCVS states that only about half of sex crimes are unreported. However, there are some major flaws even with the NCVS surveys-- they rely on self-reports and include the broader term “attempted rapes” which are broadly defined as any situation in which a person feels that they were in danger of being raped. Even Anna Salter, a longtime victim industry advocate, has stated that self-reports are notoriously unreliable and lead to incredibly inflated statistics. The NCVS is indeed a self-report survey.

                Unfortunately, these results of these studies are easily misinterpreted, or in many other cases such as the graphic from the Enliven Project, the studies are flat-out false. Who is going to take the time to critique these assumptions? It is obvious the average citizen is not going to question the media. We are all too eager to accept something as fact when it is attuned to our personal belief systems, especially when it involves something or someone we particularly hate.

                However, in order for true conflict resolution to take place, we must look beyond our preconceived notions and questioned the things we have been taught to believe with an open mind. It is difficult, but not impossible to look outside of our own way of thinking. Only by looking at the issue from all sides can we have any hope of coming to a true solution rather than a mere Band-Aid for a long-standing societal issue.

Update on the “Beyond the Label” Documentary, Dec. 15th, 2012

Update on the “Beyond the Label”  Documentary, Dec. 15^th, 2012

Derek W. Logue

                First, I wish to thank the dozens of people who have invested their time, energy, and support of this landmark documentary. I promised a formal update upon my return from Port Angeles, WA, so here is the trip in a nutshell. But first, the technical aspects. I had raised $700 in the raffle for this project, which paid for the trip and other expenses. It is divided as follows: Round trip bus ticket, $260, hotel fare $100, video editing software $40, extra memory cards to handle all the filming $60, gas $25, new travel bag $20, and sending out the raffle prizes $20, so that’s $525 accounted for thus far. I don’t count food and personal expenses as production costs. (I already own a tripod, and an HD Camcorder was already donated to the cause).

                Long distance bus rides are always interesting and unpredictable. My ride to Port Angeles was quiet and uneventful until I reached Missoula, Montana for our layover. The bus was four hours late due to a snowstorm, and after it arrived, it had a wiper malfunction, and thus we were delayed two more hours. It served as a harbinger of things to come.

                I arrived at Seattle six hours late so I missed the shuttle to Port Angeles. Thus, I had a 14-hour layover. The station was locked down and I was one of only five people who spent the night in the station. Greyhound fed us some pizza and sodas and I slept in the terminal for a few hours. Sunday morning, with eight hours left to kill, I decided to do a little sightseeing. I visited the Space Needle and the Pike Street Fish Market to watch the famous fish-throwers. After a lunch of fried Calamari, I headed back to the station to await the shuttle.

                The shuttle ride was great. We rode across the Kingston Ferry and instead of going all the way to Port Angeles, I got off at “Discovery Bay.” I ate a fried oyster po’boy while I waited on Erik Mart from monstermartorg.blogspot.com. I spent Sunday night with Erik and his girlfriend and toured his quaint little Pacific paradise with envy.

                The next morning I began my work at Port Angeles, setting up interviews and collecting information for the documentary. I spent the evening with Leslie, who was to be my liaison with the Blanton family, but I was receiving little cooperation from her in this matter. As my time went on, Leslie became less cooperative and as communication broke down, I became a target of her anger. Eventually, she took it upon herself to cross a certain line and at that point I found it prudent to permanently sever a working relationship with Leslie.

                This ending of our business partnership, of course, means there will be some slight changes to the premise and direction of the film. For now, I am still referring to the film as “Beyond the Label” but without Gary Blanton Jr.’s name in the title. It is even possible the project will be renamed. There will still be a documentary but since the majority of the footage revolves around the murder, most of the film will revolve around that. This changes my original premise of the film, which was intended to be largely a portrait of Gary Blanton himself, whereas now it is more a traditional journalism piece.

                This is not to say this was a wasted trip. There still successful interviews from one of Gary Blanton Jr.’s friends as well as audio from the DA who handled the case. In addition, I received the case files from the county prosecutor’s office, which has answered many questions I had about the murders themselves, in addition to some extra stock footage of the city.

                So at this point, I feel there is enough footage to proceed to the next step. I will have to revise a few things at this stage, including the instructions to some of my narrators.

                Once Fallen Productions, Inc. is still dedicated to producing a quality product for the sake of all those impacted by these laws. 

ANNOUNCEMENT: The winners for the Beyond the Label Raffle

First off, I wish to thank the two dozen wonderful individuals who contributed to the Beyond the Label documentary.

I have notified the winners by email they have won. For the sake of anonymity here are

1st prize -- Initials B. K. (raffle #155)
2nd prize -- Initials L. R. (Raffle #15)
3rd Prize -- Initials L. A. (Raffle # 75)

To all those who didn't win, I still thank you for supporting the Beyond the Label documentary, and I wish to reward you by adding you to the credits at the end of the film. If you wish to be added to the credits, please contact me at iamthefallen1@yahoo.com as soon as possible.

Once Fallen Fundraising Drive: Raffle to raise funds for the "Beyond the Label" Documentary"

It takes a fair amount of money to create a documentary, more than I first thought. Unfortunately I've been in need for newer equipment and travel expenses as there is still a little fundraising left to do. So I have an idea.

Between now and Nov. 30, every dollar donated to Once Fallen will give you one virtual ticket towards any one of the three items below, so if you donate thirty dollars you have thirty chances to win. The drawing for the items will be December 1st. I will post the winning numbers rather than names on my sites and notify the winners personally.

TO ENTER, donate to the following--

By Paypal: derek_logue@hotmail.com (don't forget the underscore)

By US Mail:

Derek W. Logue
2559 Eden Ave. #14
Cincinnati, OH 45219

Be sure to include your email address. I will send you your ticket numbers in the return email, verifying your entry. Every bit helps, and ALL the proceeds will go to covering the expenses.

If you have any questions, email me, iamthefallen1@yahoo.com or call me at 513-238-2873

On to the items.

ITEM #1

Toshiba DR430 DVD Recorder: This device records TV, VCR and camcorder footage onto DVDs. Everything you see here is included, guaranteed to work, and includes 5 unused DVD+R discs to get you started. For full specifications, visit the following link: http://us.toshiba.com/video-electronics/dvd-players/dr430/

ITEM #2

Item #2 is a huge collection of mostly family oriented DVDs. Most are Christian/ Religious but not all. Below is the full list of movies:

1. DC Talk: The Movie
2. Karen Kingsbury's Dandelion Dust documentary
3. The Pistol (Pistol Pete) 
4. The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman
5. The Christmas Blessing
6. Mandie and the Secret Tunnel
7. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed Documentary
8. Billy; The Early Years of Billy Graham
9. Steve Harvey: Don't trip- God's not through with me yet
10. Natalie's Rose
11. WWJD: What Would Jesus Do?
12. Believe In Me
13. The Wild Stallion
14. The Last Adam
15. The Courage To Love 
16. Come What May
17. Comedy: The Road Less Traveled (documentary)
18. Relative Stranger
19. The Gospel
20. Blessed and Cursed
21. Angels Love Donuts
22. The Cross and the Towers (Documentary)
23. A Greater Yes
24. The Time Changer
25. Come Dance at my Wedding
26. Secret at Arrow Lake
27. Daniel's Lot
28. Change of Plans

Since someone begged me for the Chonda Pierce DVDs I will replace them with two more movies of my choosing. 

ITEM #3

Item #3 is a very good pair of amplified computer speakers. If you are a bit hard of hearing, like I am, you won't have much trouble hearing these. 

Two Once Fallen-created videos from the RSOL Conference

I created two video clips from the RSOL Conference, giving two people the opportunity to promote their projects, as well as give me some experience with film making.

Lynn Gilmore, SOSEN CEO, promotes www.sosen.org

Jon Cordeiro of New Name Ministries promotes his new book, "Unprecedented"

Of all the residency and proximity restrictions I've seen, this one takes the cake.

"White man says, 'Pass AWA or your federal aid and sovereignty go away.'
White man smoke too much crazy weed."

You may have heard about it by now, but during the RSOL conference some Native Americans brought their own tribal law they recently passed, and once I've seen it, all I could do was shake my head. I don't know whether to laugh or to cry, this is the most ridiculous residency restriction I've ever seen ever. Ever.

This is from the Laguna tribe of New Mexico, retyped verbatim as it is written on paper:

____________________________________________________________
Other requirements
section 15 – 17 – 10

I. prohibited areas for tier 1, two, and three sex offenders
a. Schools, public library, parks/village playgrounds, bus stops
II. prohibited areas for tier 2 and tier 3 sex offenders
a. The following is a list of social events that are considered prohibited areas, including but not limited to:

Public ( a.k.a. general public) means a population of individuals in association with civic affairs, or affairs of the village or villages..

1. Social events open to the general public
2. Village feasts
3. Craft shows
4. Fundraisers
5. Sporting events
6. Traditional and ceremonial activities
7. Organized walks or runs
8. Church
9. Grab days
10. Cultural enrichment classes at the Kawaika center
11. graduation ceremonies
12. Events advertised at the village meeting where everyone is invited
13. dances with in the villages
14. Plaza dances
15. Social dances at recreation halls

**Note: Sex offender participating in village meetings, grave digging, ditch work will be at the discretion of the village officials and communicated to the compliance officer.

The following opinion was drafted and approved by the sex offender compliance committee.
____________________________________________________________________

Now, let that soak into your mind for a minute.

I have seen many crazy laws over the years, but this one takes the cake. This law was hastily passed for the purpose of coming into full compliance with the Adam Walsh Act. The federal government has threatened Native American tribes with not only a loss of federal grant money, they threatened to take away their sovereignty in handling their own criminal justice affairs. But this is still overkill. It is sad to see a once proud nation of people debase themselves for the sake of a few American tax dollars.

Choosing what to do with sand

In just a couple of days, a number of us are going to the 2012 RSOL Conference in Albuquerque. There has been a lot of publicity, some good and some bad, about the upcoming conference. Many of those who are involved in the efforts to fight the myriad of American Sex Offender laws are relatively new. There are a lot of fresh, new faces in the movement. So to them, the fear of negative publicity is a brand new experience. But to a seasoned activist like myself, the threat of confrontation and negative publicity is nothing new.

*****

On December 1, 2007, a group of reformists descended upon the city of Columbus, Ohio. Members of groups like SOClear, SOSEN, Roar 4 Freedom (now RSOVA), and others attended and participated in what was called the "Silent No More Rally." The intent was to protest Ohio's version of the Adam Walsh Act.

Vigilante groups like Absolute Zero United got wind of this rally early in its creation and staged their own counter rally. They mocked and threatened would-be attendees, even posting private info, in hopes of scaring us. But it didn't work.

There were individuals within our cause, like the SOHopeful Board of Directors, who opposed a public showing. They felt we should keep a low profile and work "behind the scenes" to propagate changing of the laws. In fact, SOHopeful went so far as condemn the rally, which led to a mass exodus of activists from the SOHopeful forums to the SOSEN and Roar 4 Freedom forums.

Sure enough, when I arrived at the rally, the counter-protesters were there -- Judy Cornett from Predator Patrol, Bikers Against Child Abuse (BACA) and AZU, under the banner of "Women Against Sexual Predators" (WASP)-- holding derogatory signs and looking menacingly at the rally attendees. Some took pictures, others yelled obscenities. The only thing keeping the peace was a row of uniformed members of the State Patrol, paid for by the rally committee.

That didn't deter the dozens of us who came to the rally, despite the counter-protestor's efforts. This rally was the catalyst for a major growth of our cause, and from it sprung the concepts of state affiliate websites and, of course, the annual RSOL Conference.

*****

Nearly five full years after the Ohio Silent No More Rally (the official name of the 2007 Event), we are going to a conference which has received a decent amount of publicity. The city of Albuquerque has even gone so far as to hold a town hall meeting to address the public's fears about RSOL coming to their city. A few vigilantes have spread propaganda claiming the group is full of evil pedophiles or are advocating sex with children in an attempt to discredit the conference. Despite the allegations being completely false, we recognize some members of the general public will listen to the trolls or the misinformed media. To some, it may even feel like you're walking into a lion's den.

It won't be my first time.

New Mexico is known for deserts and sand, among other things. We have two metaphors about sand. It is up to you to decide what you want to do.

BURYING YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND: Some in our cause feel it is better to keep a 'low profile' until the conference blows over. It would have been easier for Rosa Parks had she kept a low profile by scooting her butt to the back of that bus. Some of us feel we need to be politically correct in our speech and actions. We can't get "angry" in public. We can't say words that burn virgin ears. Some of us even want those of us with records to stay in the stands and not participate in the game at all. I'm so glad Martin Luther King decided to sit on the the civil rights movement and waited for some great white savior to come in and speak on his behalf, aren't you? [sarcasm, of course]

This cause needs to recognize there is a need for us to stand our ground. I understand there is a time to be politically correct, but not within the confines of our own groups. Censorship of ideas and words within our groups is wrong.

In regards to worrying about external interference in the conference, do you think any group with an unpopular agenda never had the threat of outside interference? MLK and others in the civil rights movement knew they were going to be targeted; rallies were met with resistance, members were threatened or attacked, and danger loomed behind every effort. Not every saboteur rode into town in a pointy hat and matching white sheet.

It is scary. But greater and lesser people have been hurt or even killed for their beliefs. Jesus was hung on a cross, MLK was killed, and thousands of their followers were ridiculed, teased, and harassed. "But Derek," some will say, "they did nothing wrong." That's what what their enemies believed. So what if I'm on the list? I have served my time. I apologized to the victim's family. I fulfilled my obligations to the state. Now I'm a reformed individual forced to live a label that does not define who I am. just like those before me judged by a label and a stereotype, I can either bury my head in the sand, or....

DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND: MLK wasn't a "violent" man, but he drew a line in the sand, and was willing to stake his stand. Rallies, marches, and sit-ins were held. They marched in the faces of their enemies, some here hurt or killed, and some were arrested. But they were willing to do what they felt was necessary to achieve their goals.

We should be willing to have that same mentality.

Some of us have things to lose-- they have families, jobs, and creature comforts. I imagine MLK did too. He was a preacher man, after all. He had a wife and kids. He had a home. He had a life. He had freedom. He had a lot to lose.

He also risked that for the sake of a greater good. Even his peaceful approach made him a target. I imagine there were times of anger, doubt, and sadness. He was a human being.

Even Jesus wept, lamented for Jerusalem, and drove the money changers from the temple, and seemingly felt doubt while on the cross. Emotions are part of the human nature. Jesus never told us never be angry, the bible said to be angry but not to sin while in anger. Anger can be used for a greater good.

I have been loyal to this cause no matter how many despair, have philosophical differences, get angry with me, or reject me, both outside the cause and from within. But until some of you pull your heads out of the sand and instead draw a line, don't expect much in the way of change.

You don't have to see this cause as a "war." War, after all, has casualties and innocent victims caught in the crossfire. Are we under siege? Do we resort to caving into the enemy because we're getting desperate? Are we at the point where we eat our horses and dogs out of desperation and have defections? I don't think so. We are a far bigger movement since 2007. We are more organized, have more members, and have made great strides since that time.

But at the same time, there is a lot of fear, and we are still a small grassroots campaign. We should have EVEN MORE members, more active members, more rallies and conferences, and more meetings with the media and legislators.

When you go to the conference, decide what you want to do while in Albuquerque. Bury your heads in the sand? Or draw a line in the sand.

There is plenty of sand to do either one.

Why I "chose" to be an activist

What you are looking at is my very first post on a forum about sex offender topics. The day I found this website, I had been homeless for about three months, and decided to Google the topic of finding employment and housing for someone forced to register as a sex offender. I had stumbled across this particular website back on April 15, 2004 and I found this poll asking what we should do with homeless sex offenders. Some of the individuals there were in favor of indefinite incarceration, and one even suggested castrating homeless offenders simply for being homeless. It sickens me to see how heartless individuals could be.

My comment: "How CAN you punish someone who is trying to comply with registration laws but can't because he has no place to live? I am speaking from experience. I did all my time, got out and I'm homeless. Every day I go out looking for a job in vain, I'm not allowed to stay in shelters, and I'm supposed to be able to find a place to live without assistance. So am I supposed to go to jail because circumstances are beyond my control?"

The first responder to my question was a probation officer from FloriDUH using the screen name DP1. I felt her response was very condescending. She expected me to understand that the laws more important than the pain I was experiencing from being homeless and jobless. From that moment on, I began researching the impact of these laws. This website I had stumbled upon had a decent amount of information, and I learned over the Internet how difficult it was truly going to be to be given a second chance in an unforgiving society.

About two months later, I finally got a job and a place to stay. While neither job nor residence was ideal, it was better than nothing. Slowly, I moved away from the online community, kept to myself, and continued working. I was doing everything that society expects of a person who has served his time, and in return I expected to be left alone.

Society had other ideas. The county had reclassified me for no reason at all, then they determined I was living to close to a place where people can go get a GED, and soon they were going to force me to move. I had nowhere to turn for help. My girlfriend at the time got scared and broke up with me. Not long after, I lost my job. I had done everything right, yet society chose to ruin my life on a whim.

Eventually I was forced out of my home. Luckily, I had found a new residence, but no sooner than I had moved in, the city of Cincinnati decided they were going to increase their local residency restrictions, putting my new home in jeopardy. Again, I was faced with homelessness, so I went to City Hall and fought back. As a result, I was able to keep my apartment.

From that moment on, I dedicated my life to fighting Megan's law and other oppressive sex offender laws. And it all began with a simple question that received a heartless answer. I never really chose to be an activist; I was forced into it. But if we don't fight back, who will do it for us?

On April 1, 2013, I will celebrate my 10th year of my release from prison, however, I never proclaim it my 10th year of freedom, because I am not truly free. I was not allowed a second chance. Rather than wither and die, I choose to fight back. a fellow registrant I've known for years but is not an activist asked me why I put myself in harms way. I asked him why he didn't. He didn't want to make waves or be targeted. Like me, he wanted to be left alone. He was also homeless. Still, our local TV station targeted him in an exposé about homeless sex offenders, and claimed he was not homeless but was circumventing the law. He asked me when all this would end. My response was it would end when enough of us takes a stand against all the abuse and oppression we face on a daily basis. 

I still live in the apartment I fought for. My friend is still homeless. When I feel like I'm fighting an uphill battle, I just look around at my apartment, and I remind myself how far I have come since that April day when I found a random poll on a long forgotten website.

__________________________________________________________

 Feel free to read the other answers that people left on that very same question. If you have a heart, you'll be as angry as the hate as I was that day.