WA - Bothell detective (Dione Thompson) charged with sexual misconduct with minor

Dione Thompson

Original Article

02/04/2015

By Natalie Swaby

A Bothell police detective faces charges of sexual misconduct with a minor.

The Bothell Police Department confirms that recently Det. Dione Thompson was responsible for keeping the public informed of sex offender notifications. Before that she was assigned to the Bothell High School campus as a school resource officer.

During her time there, in 2010, a female student, age 17, says she was befriended by Thompson. They began to message each other on Facebook and eventually engaged in a sexual relationship with one of their encounters happening in a marked police car in a library parking lot, according to court documents.

The documents also said the student, who was dealing with turmoil in her personal life, even moved in with Thompson for a period of time.

Read the entire article

CA - Peaceful Protest to be held in the City of Carson on March 7

Original Article

02/17/2015

California RSOL will lead a peaceful protest in the City of Carson on Saturday, March 7, in order to highlight the harm done by the city’s sex offender ordinance. That ordinance bans registered citizens from being present in or within 300 feet of public places including the library, parks and swimming pools as well as private places including fast food restaurants that have a children’s playground.

The peaceful protest will begin at Carson City Hall at 10 a.m. near the water fountain. Registered citizens, family members, and all who support them are invited to join the event. Refreshments will be served.

“This is a unique opportunity for registered citizens and those who support them to show up, stand up and speak up,” stated California RSOL vice president Chance Oberstein.

The event will include a march to John D. Calas Sr. Park near the intersection of 223rd and Cluff Streets. The current city law prohibits registered citizens from visiting this park, however, family members and supporters are welcome there. Registered citizens will be served lunch at a distance outside the 300-foot limit.

See Also:

• Monthly Meeting April 11, Lobbying April 10/11 in Sacramento

Let the Burden Fit the Crime: Extending Proportionality Review to Sex Offenders

Original Article (PDF)

03/2014

By Erin Miller

Draconian restrictions on the activities and privacy of convicted sex offenders are a new, and troublesome, trend. In 1994 and 2006, following a national dialogue about crimes against children sparked by several high-profile incidents, Congress passed two laws requiring states to register and regulate sex offenders residing within their borders. States and municipalities soon caught on, and deepened restrictions. In the last five years alone, local governments have forbidden sex offenders to live within 2,000 feet of schools; “be” within 500 feet of parks or movie theaters; enter public libraries; drive buses or taxis; photograph or film minors; and use social networking websites like Facebook. Others have required sex offenders to advertise their status on driver’s licenses or social networking profiles; wear GPS bracelets at their own expense; notify local police when present in any county within the state for longer than ten days; provide notice to all new neighbors within a roughly quarter-mile radius when they move; and pay up to $100 annually to maintain sex offender registries. These burdens typically last for a decade or for life, depending on the jurisdiction and the type of crime committed.

Read the entire story here

CA - Sex offenders sue over ordinances that ban them from places

Original Article

07/03/2014

By Jose Gaspar

BAKERSFIELD - Wasco and Taft are among a group of California cities being sued by a civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders.

In 2006, state voters approved Jessica's Law (Proposition 83), which bars sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

Shortly after, numerous cities adopted much more restrictive local laws that prohibit sex offenders from being present in any "children's facility," such as a public library, school bus stop, or "any location that facilitates on their property classes or group activities for children."

"We believe it is a misguided and unconstitutional effort to do that," said Santa Maria attorney Janice Bellucci, president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws.

Bellucci said the group was created to give a voice to registered sex offenders.

In addition to Wasco and Taft, Shafter, Delano, Tehachapi and California City also passed similar sex offender ordinances. So far, Wasco and Taft are the only two cities in Kern County served with a lawsuit by the civil rights group.

In June, the Tehachapi City Council voted to repeal its ordinance rather than risk litigation.

"For us, it's going to be a point where we're going to be spending a lot of money on attorney fees," said Tehachapi Mayor Phil Smith. "And we will not win that battle."
- And that is why all states and counties must fight these laws!

In May, Shafter Mayor Jon Johnston wrote a letter to Bellucci stating Shafter would stop enforcing its ordinance pending further review. The city of Wasco is currently reviewing its response to the lawsuit.

For people such as _____ of Grover Beach, he said the ordinances and restrictions placed on his life have made it extremely difficult to continue with his life. According to the Megan's Law website, in 1979 _____ pleaded guilty to lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14. He served six months in jail and was given two years probation. _____ went on to make a new life and opened a small business. He never committed a new sex crime again.

"The city of Pismo Beach awarded me volunteer of the year for a project I worked on for them," said _____.

But when word leaked about his past, _____ said his landlord terminated his lease and he was forced to lay off five employees and run his business from his home. His gross earnings fell dramatically, he said. He came home one night to find a man waiting for him inside his house. The man took a hammer to _____, who managed to fight him off, but _____ said he suffered numerous injuries. The assailant was arrested and is now in prison.

The way Bellucci sees it, not everyone on the sex offender registry should be on it.

"We have a boy on the registry because he streaked at his high school. That's a sex offense. We had a 16-year-old girl who took a nude selfie and shared it with some students at her high school, she's on the registry," said Bellucci.

And because cases like these are on the registry, they are subject to all sex offender restrictions. According to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, less then 2 percent of sex offenders on parole committed a new sex crime between 2007 and 2009. The vast majority of children who are sexually molested suffer at the hands of someone known to the family.

California Reform Sex Offender Laws is lobbying for the state to create a tiered registry that distinguishes between the severity of the offenses.

"There are people on the sex offender registry who have raped a child or an adult, and they certainly would be at the highest level," said Bellucci.

For _____, his 1979 conviction will never go away. California law requires him to register for life as a sex offender.

"That was 35 years ago I did something. That's not who I am today," said _____.

CA - Santa Fe Springs City Council repeals sex offender restrictions

Original Article

06/14/2014

By Mike Sprague

SANTA FE SPRINGS - The City Council Thursday voted 5-0 to repeal a 2010 law that doesn't allow registered sex offenders to come within 300 feet of day-care centers, libraries, schools and parks.

City Manager Thaddeus McCormack said the council didn’t have a choice after a state appellate court in January ruled that state law preempted a city of Irvine law prohibiting registered sex offenders from entering city parks without written permission from its police chief.

The state Supreme Court later declined to review the case.

In his opinion striking down the Irvine law, Justice Richard Aronson wrote, ”We conclude the state statutory scheme imposing restrictions on a sex offender’s daily life fully occupies the field and therefore preempts the city’s efforts to restrict sex offenders from visiting city parks and recreational facilities.”

Santa Fe Springs hasn't enforced its law for about a year while awaiting a decision from the court, McCormack said.

The city still has Jessica’s Law (Proposition 83), which was approved by California voters. The law bans registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any public or private school or park, McCormack said.

“It’s a bit regretful that we can’t add our own restrictions,” McCormack said.

“(But) “I think the health and safety of residents of Santa Fe Springs are still going to be maintained and protected,” he said. “It’s an area where the state had weighed in and we defer to the state.”

McCormack said the city was threatened with a lawsuit from California Reform Sex Offender Laws if it didn’t repeal its law.

Janice Bellucci, president of the group, praised the city for its action.

“We are very encouraged and commend the city for repealing the ordinance that violates both the state and federal constitutions,” Bellucci said.

Bellucci said ordinances like Irvine’s and Santa Fe Springs are unfair and don’t make people safer.

The laws restricting where sex offenders can go also give families a false sense of security, Bellucci said.

“Less than 2 percent (of registered sex offenders) will commit another sex crime, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,” she said. “(Sex) offenders are more likely to be a family member, a coach or a member of the clergy.”

Whittier Police Chief Jeff Piper, whose city provides police services for Santa Fe Springs, said he understands the rationale for repealing the law and doesn't expect any problems because of the presence of Jessica’s Law.

He also couldn't remember anybody in past years being charged with a violation of the Santa Fe Springs law.

CA - Wasco sued over sex offender ordinance

Original Article

05/16/2014

By Jose Gaspar

WASCO (KBAK/KBFX) - A lawsuit filed Thursday in federal district court in Los Angeles by a group called California Reform Sex Offender Laws challenges a Wasco ordinance that restricts sex offenders.

"We allege that the Wasco sex offender ordinance violates both the federal and state constitutions," said Santa Barbara attorney Janice Bellucci, president of the nonprofit legal group.

Wasco approved the ordinance in 2007. It prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any "children's facility."

But, it also bans registrants from being within 300 feet of a wide range of public and private locations, such as libraries, day care centers, parks and other places.

Bellucci said registrants have a right to access a library.

"There's a constitutional right to access to information. That's part of the 1st Amendment to the U.S. constitution, and that is being abridged by this city ordinance," said Bellucci.

She said the goal is to get rid of "presence restrictions" in every county in California in 2014.

Wasco city officials defend the ordinance, saying it was adopted with the intent of protecting residents and most of all, children.

"My intent is to protect the welfare and the safety of our children in our community," said Wasco Mayor Tilo Cortez.

According to Megan's Law website, Wasco has 15 registered sex offenders living within the city limits.

"Whenever you have registered sex offenders around small children, it's a concern for any parent," said Cortez.

The lawsuit is asking the federal court that it strike down the city's ordinance as null and void, and that Wasco pay all attorney fees and costs associated with the suit.

Five other cities in Kern County have similar sex offender ordinances in place: California City, Delano, Shafter, Taft and Tehachapi.

Just two weeks ago, the city of Shafter agreed to stop enforcing its ordinance after being informed by California Reform Sex Offender Laws that it, too, could be sued.

Cortez said he could not comment on the suit as the city has not yet been served.

"Obviously, we're just finding out about this, but we'll see where the law takes us," said Cortez.

CA - Santa Maria attorney files sex offender lawsuit against Lompoc

Original Article

04/23/2014

A Santa Maria attorney has filed a complaint in federal district court on behalf of a Grover Beach resident against the city of Lompoc over a sex offender ordinance the city adopted, claiming it violates both the federal and state constitutions.

Attorney Janice Bellucci, who also serves as president of the California chapter of the nonprofit organization Reform Sex Offender Laws, filed the complaint on behalf of registered sex offender _____, 61, who serves as a board member for the chapter.

In 1979, _____ was convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14, according to the State of California Department of Justice, Megan’s Law sex offender database. He has no other subsequent felonies within the state of California, according to the database.

“We filed the lawsuit because we are protecting the Constitution. That is what’s important to us,” Bellucci said.

Lompoc Mayor John Linn said the city’s ordinance, titled “Registered Sex Offender Residency Prohibitions,” was put in place in an effort to “strike a balance between letting registered sex offenders live their lives while still protecting the women and children in our community.”

According to Linn, the Lompoc Police Department and the City’s Attorney’s office worked together to devise an ordinance to best fit the city.

“State law allowed us to put the ordinance in place,” Linn said.

In her complaint, Bellucci argues the ordinance bans sex offender registrants from residing in “vast parts of the city of Lompoc by virtue of 2,000-foot ‘residential exclusion zones’ surrounding the perimeter of certain locations.”

The complaint alleges that the ordinance also significantly restricts registrants’ access to public facilities and bans them from loitering near any privately owned business with the “child safety zones” around certain establishments and facilities.

Registrants are prohibited from loitering anywhere on the grounds or within 300 feet of schools, parks, day care centers, public libraries, school bus stops, playgrounds and any location that holds classes or group activities for children.

Sex offenders who violate the ordinance are subject to punishment including incarceration up to one year and a fine of up to $1,000 for each day of violation, according to Bellucci.

“The Lompoc ordinance violates the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution,” she said.

In the complaint, the attorney has asked that the ordinance be declared null and void as “unconstitutionally vague” and request the Central District court allow _____ to recover all reasonable attorney’s fees, cost and litigation expenses from the city of Lompoc.

“This is a civil rights issue. Our hope is that the city of Lompoc will do the right thing and repeal their ordinance,” Bellucci said.

Linn said he and the Lompoc City Council will address the merits of the complaint once they are served with the lawsuit and they have had the opportunity to review it.

“Apparently, we are not alone. Other cities have been sued from what I understand,” Linn said.

Bellucci has sent out warning letters to more than 70 cities within California to let them know they could be sued if they did not repeal their ordinances. El Centro and Costa Mesa have repealed their ordinances, while cities including Anaheim, Grand Terrace and South Pasadena agreed not to enforce their ordinances at this time. Pomona, South Lake Tahoe, National City and Carson have been sued.

CA - Do Ex-Sex Offenders Have Civil Rights?

Original Article

04/14/2014

By Dennis Romero

They are the most loathed convicts on the planet. Even other criminals hate them. Cities in recent years have targeted them with laws that limit where and when they can be certain places, particularly on Halloween, when children are out.

But ex-sex offenders do have rights. At least that's the contention of a group called California Reform Sex Offender Laws.

It's at it again, taking the SoCal city of Carson to federal court.

The group says rules adopted by Carson in 2008 violate the constitutional rights of convicts who have paid their debts to society by serving sentences.

The organization has been suing municipalities (Carson is fourth city to sued in four weeks) that it says violate the rights of sex offenders.

Carson's law, like that of other towns, prohibits such convicts of coming within 300 feet of schools, parks, libraries, swimming pools, and bus stops.

California Reform Sex Offender Laws states:

The Carson ordinance is based upon two myths: (1) that registered citizens have a high rate of re-offense and (2) that strangers commit sexual assaults. The true rates of re-offense, according to state and federal government reports, are 1.9 percent for registrants on parole and 5.3 percent for registrants overall. More than 90 percent of sexual assaults upon children are committed not by strangers but by family members, teachers, coaches and clergy.

The group won similar cases at the California Court of Appeals level and has warned 70 cities in the state that their local ordinances limiting the movement of sex offenders are illegal under the precedents sent by the appeals panels.

Group attorney Chance Oberstein:

The presence restrictions within the Carson ordinance are inconsistent with recent decisions of the California Court of Appeals which invalidated two ordinances - one by the City of Irvine and the other by the County of Orange - as being preempted by existing state law.

Some cities reversed their laws and others agreed to put them on hold, the organization says, but Carson, after negotiations with California Reform Sex Offender Laws, stuck to its guns. The group's president, Janice Bellucci, says:

Future legal challenges by sex offenders can be expected of cities that have failed to either repeal their sex offender ordinances or agree in writing to stay enforcement of those ordinances.

CA - City of Carson sex offender ordinance challenged in federal court

Original Article

04/11/2014

A sex offender ordinance adopted by Carson, a city located within Los Angeles County, is the subject of a lawsuit filed today in Federal district court. This is the fourth lawsuit to be filed in four weeks challenging a city’s sex offender ordinance that includes restrictions regarding where more than 105,000 individuals can be present.

Specifically, the Carson ordinance prohibits registered citizens from being present in or within 300 feet of a wide range of locations including schools, parks, library, swimming pools, and bus stops. A registered citizen who violates the ordinance is subject to incarceration for a period up to one year and a fine of up to $1,000 for each day of violation.

“The lawsuit filed against the City of Carson is the unfortunate result of two failed attempts to reach a settlement agreement,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “The City offered to stay enforcement of the presence restrictions in the ordinance, however, that offer was made available to some, not all, registered citizens. The lawsuit was filed in order to protect the state and federal constitutions by restoring the civil rights of all registered citizens.”

The sex offender ordinance was adopted by Carson in 2008 and is in violation of both the federal and state constitutions. The provisions of the ordinance directly affect all registered citizens in the state of California as well as indirectly affect an additional 400,000 individuals who are family members.

The Carson ordinance is based upon two myths: (1) that registered citizens have a high rate of re-offense and (2) that strangers commit sexual assaults. The true rates of re-offense*, according to state and federal government reports, are 1.9 percent for registrants on parole and 5.3 percent for registrants overall. More than 90 percent of sexual assaults upon children are committed not by strangers but by family members, teachers, coaches and clergy.**
- More studies can be found here and in our archives.

“The presence restrictions within the Carson ordinance are inconsistent with recent decisions of the California Court of Appeals which invalidated two ordinances – one by the City of Irvine and the other by the County of Orange – as being preempted by existing state law,” stated CA RSOL board member and attorney Chance Oberstein. “The court held that the state statutory scheme imposing restrictions on a sex offender’s daily life fully occupied the field.”***

California RSOL sent a letter to Carson and more than 70 additional cities within California on January 20 notifying them of the recent Court of Appeal decisions and that the sex offender ordinances the cities had adopted were inconsistent with those decisions. California RSOL requested in those letters that the cities repeal their ordinances within 60 days or face a potential legal challenge.

Subsequent to issuance of the California RSOL letter, the cities of Costa Mesa and El Centro repealed their sex offender ordinances. Several additional cities, including Anaheim, Grand Terrace, and South Pasadena have agreed in writing not enforce their sex offender ordinances pending a decision from the California Supreme Court whether to grant review of the California Court of Appeal decisions.

“Future legal challenges by sex offenders can be expected of cities that have failed to either repeal their sex offender ordinances or agree in writing to stay enforcement of those ordinances,” stated Bellucci.

The first in a series of legal challenges to city ordinances was filed on March 24 against the City of Pomona; the second on March 31 against the City of South Lake Tahoe; and the third on April 8 against National City. All lawsuits have been filed in Federal district courts.

---

1. (*) See 2013 Outcome Evaluation Report, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation dated January 2014 at page 26 and Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994, U.S. Department of Justice dated November 2003 at page 24.
2. (**) See Homelessness Among California’s Registered Sex Offenders, California Sex Offender Management Board dated September 2011 at page 10.
3. (***) See People v. Nguyen, 222 Cal. App. 4th 1168 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2014) and People v. Godinez, Case No. G047657, Cal. Court of Appeals, January 10, 2014 (unpublished)].

IN - Frigid temperatures leave ex-offenders out in the cold

Original Article

02/12/2014

By David MacAnally

MUNCIE - There's controversy in Muncie over where convicted sex offenders should be allowed to live and the issue is becoming more heated because of the bitter cold.

Mark called the city's Jackson Street bridge home after his release from prison, where he served time for a sex offense involving a minor.

When temperatures turn dangerously cold, Mark and four to eight other child sex offenders came to Christian Ministry Shelter, until the director got the news they must all leave.

"I was shocked, because it was something that we haven't been questioned about before," said shelter director Becki Clock.

Bridges become shelters partly because many defenders cannot find a place to stay. Especially in cases involving sex against minors, with laws barring them from being 1,000 feet from things like schools, libraries and parks.

Near the Muncie shelter there is a library, which is closed for repairs, and a small park by the fire station. It has no playground equipment.

"They really got frightened. They had a lot of agitation," Clock said.

"Where am I gonna go?" Mark said.

"My faith compels me to do something," said Rev. Steve Graves (Email) of Fountain Square Methodist Church (Facebook).

Graves and others convinced the state to let the men stay during the cold crisis, but after that they must leave. For neighbors, it's a tough issue.

"I would be concerned about that, too," said one man. "But they deserve a chance, too, they've done their time."

"I'm kind of torn between the good and the bad of it all," said another Muncie resident.

"They ought to have a place to stay," said a third man. "But I don't agree with sex offenders."

The pastor and others will now try to come up with a long-term housing solution for sex offenders. He knows lawmakers are just trying to protect the public, but "to say that there is no place for them to go to lay their head, it's not right."

Ex-offender Mark, who says he won't offend again, says "we're denied a place to live."

See Also:

• Homeless sex offenders to be out in the cold

13 WTHR Indianapolis

IN - Homeless sex offenders to be out in the cold

Homeless Shelter

Original Article

02/06/2014

By Douglas Walker

MUNCIE - A Muncie pastor is seeking the public’s help in trying to find shelter for a small group of convicted sex offenders who are soon to lose their nightly home.

Steve Graves, pastor at Fountain Square (Facebook) and Industry United Methodist (Facebook) churches, said Thursday the men have been told they can no longer stay at a Christian Ministries shelter at 401 E. Main St.

That’s due to state law that forbids those convicted of some sex-related crimes from living within 1,000 feet of places frequented by children. In the case of the Main Street shelter, that would apparently apply to a small downtown park, the Carnegie Library and a daycare facility, Graves said.

“We don’t question the law,” the pastor said, adding he was “baffled” as to why state officials apparently feel they have no responsibility to help the men survive.
- If the law is wrong you should question it!

The edict that effective Sunday, the men can no longer stay at the Main Street shelter came not from Christian Ministries, but from state officials.

Graves said he is aware of the low regard many citizens have for convicted sex offenders, and that their proximity can be troubling, especially for families with children.

“But we’re a society that believes in redemption, and second chances,” he said. “We’re still human beings.”
- Not anymore!

Graves said because of the stigma of their crimes, the men have difficulty finding work, and that the residency restriction complicates their efforts to find lodging. In recent weeks, weather conditions have made the pursuit of overnight shelter a life and death proposition.
- We wonder if that is their goal, to have ex-offenders die?

“Desperate people will do desperate things,” Graves said.

The pastor at first thought as many as eight offenders would be left without lodging beginning Sunday, but four of the men have since found at-least temporary lodging.

That leaves Graves — and those who have come to his assistance, including Paula Justice, Mayor Dennis Tyler’s administrative assistant — two more days to find a place for four men to stay.

Graves is asking anyone with a property that could be used — essentially any structure with heating that would not violate the 1,000-feet restriction — and where cots could be set up to give the men a place to sleep.

The pastor can be contacted at (765) 228-7404.

“They don’t expect the Taj Mahal,” he said. “Just a roof over their head.”

Graves became aware of the men’s plight through a convicted sex offender he met through his church, _____.

_____ was convicted of child molesting in Grant County in 1995. The former Marion resident has since returned to prison for parole violations, and two convictions — also in Grant County, in 2003 and 2008 —for failing to register as a sex offender.

He became a Muncie resident through the efforts of the state Department of Correction, who allowed him to stay at a “DOC Assist” facility — for recently released sex offenders with nowhere else to go — in the Old West End neighborhood. (A DOC official said recently the department was no longer operating any DOC Assist homes in Muncie or Delaware County.)

After his eligibility to stay at the Powers Street house ended, _____ for a time lived under the East Jackson Street bridge. The church congregation later bought him a tent to live in, but this winter has not been conducive to tent residency.

He has done some part-time work at the two churches where Graves ministers, and is hopeful his Social Security pension — for a mental disability — will be restored.

For now, though, his primary concern is having a place to sleep on Sunday night.

“The system is messed up, big time,” _____ said on Thursday.

While Graves’ priority is finding a place for _____ and the other three offenders to stay in the short term, he said efforts must be made to solve the residence issues for offenders on a long-term basis.

“This is a community problem,” said Graves.

The Muncie pastor is no stranger to trying to solve government-related problems — or to dealing with convicted criminals, for that matter.

Before he entered the ministry seven years ago, Graves worked both as an administrative assistant to then-Gov. Evan Bayh, assigned to health and human services, and as a probation officer.