On Monday August 30th, California’s state assembly passed Chelsea’s Law unanimously, 72-0. Chelsea’s Law calls for mandatory life sentences for violent sex crimes committed against children in California.  The bill will now be sent to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has already agreed to sign it.

The law received its name from slain San Diego teen, Chelsea King, who was murdered and raped by John Gardner III in late February of this year.

Back in February, I found out from a bagger at my local grocery store that the body of Chelsea King had been uncovered.  For days before, her picture had been splashed all over the local papers and her story was a staple on all the local news stations.  She had been missing since going for a morning run at a local park.

My daughter was searching for the perfect candy bar when the pimply-faced teen asked the cashier “Did you hear they found Chelsea Kings remains near Lake Hodges?”  In unison, the cashier and I let out a sigh.  The woman behind me voiced her disgust with a colorful array of words.  My instinct was to reach down and swoop up my daughter, as if to protect her from some unseen and menacing force.

(more…)

For a long time, there was this misguided belief that associating with Christians gave a reassured implicit message of safety, serenity, and high moral ground. Not so much anymore, where a game of word association starting with “priest” goes almost immediately to “pedophile,” where televangelists rack in millions in the name of God while their constituents barely scrape by.

I’m not a religion-basher like Pamela Geller—and I do consider myself a Christian—but I think the fact that so many people buy into the supposed safety offered by the mere mention of “We’re a Christian organization” and learn, to their grief, that this really means very little since people are people is an issue worthy of discussion.

Bottom line? An autistic teenager working at a Christian camp allegedly tried to engage in sexual acts with a third-grader.

From WMUR:

Prosecutors said a worker at a New Hampshire Christian camp tried to lure an 8-year-old girl into a secluded area and sexually assault her.

Stephen Tecce, 19, of New Jersey, was indicted on a charge of attempted sexual assault. Police said he was working at Camp Spofford, a Christian family camp in western New Hampshire, when the assault took place.

(more…)

Craigslist hasn’t always been good to me, although, I’ll admit we’ve had our moments.  There was the $700 table and chairs set that I scored for a measly $125 and my beloved mint conditioned red couches that I purchased for a song, also my pottery barn coffee table that was a mere 25 bucks.

But there was the incident with the bicycle.  After meeting the completely sketchy seller at a fast-food joint 40 minutes from my house (stupid move on my part) he insisted that I pay $10 more than what we agreed to.  It was rusted and gross and not at all like picture but I found him really intimidating and a little menacing so I agreed for the sole purpose of getting the hell out of there.

That’s not even the worst of it, there was the woman.  The one with the shifty eyes that my father-in-law met on a Craigslist singles ad and dated briefly.   There were red flags upon meeting her when she paid more attention to my dog than anyone else (she even carried on a one way conversation with my chocolate lab).  They joked about getting t-shirts that read “we fell in love on Craigslist.”  She starting calling me to talk — and we’re talking lengthy phone calls in which she discussed the intimate details of their shared love life.  I’m not sure if I will ever be able to erase the mental images, and needless to say, I was creeped out.  When they broke up I begged my father in law to lay off the Craigslist’s singles ads. He didn’t, and we’re just waiting for the next bomb to drop.

(more…)

When I picture a pedophile I imagine a leathery-looking man sporting a terrible spray tan, with a creepy mustache, wearing sweat pants while driving an ice cream truck — not a middle-aged English teacher. Perhaps that’s why Melinda Dennehy is getting off so easy for sending multiple nude photos and racy texts to a 15-year-old male student.   Maybe it’s because she doesn’t fit the societal mold of who a pedophile is supposed to be, and I think this is largely the problem when it comes to treating sex offenders equally.

The forty-one year-old high school English teacher and single mother of two will not be serving any jail time.  Instead of facing a trial with felony charges and the seven years in prison that her actions suggest, she has been ordered to stay away from the teen and his family.   She has been given two years probation.

The boy who received Dennehy’s provocative photographs informed police that she also sent him text messages offering to perform explicit sexual acts on him.  He also added that she kissed him on the mouth in a classroom at least two times.

What I find most interesting about this story …

(more…)

It was only a matter of time, I suppose.  It seems like every sensationalized news story ends up being made into a usually cheesy film of some sort.  Heck, I can remember three separate films about “Long Island Lolita” Amy Fisher coming out in rapid succession.  Well, Dutch director Paul Reuvens is doing it again with a rehash of Natalee Holloway’s disappearance.

Oh, and you’ll love this … Reuven’s is using the incredibly original idea of telling the story from the point of view of a fictionalized journalist. Freaking brilliant!

From Al.com:

The journalist goes to great lengths to solve the disappearance of the Mountain Brook teen. He even breaks into Joran Van der Sloot’s house to gain evidence of his involvement in the case.

Filming was done quietly in Aruba due to the sensitivity of the case. The movie, which will be in English, is set to be released in 2011.

Well, this should be interesting.  I mean, there was already a Lifetime original creatively entitled “Natalee Holloway” which, according to Alabama news outlets, was pretty bad. The Lifetime movie, by the way, was based loosely around Natalee’s mother’s book Loving Natalee.

Anyway, perhaps the most interesting thing about Reuven’s film is that the murder of Stefany Flores in Peru and van der Sloot’s arrest by Peruvian authorities is incorporated …

(more…)

Melissa Huckaby has pled guilty and faces life in prison for the senseless murder of 8-year-old Sandra Cantu of Tracy, California a year ago.  What has long been baffling about this story is why Huckaby, whose daughter was a friend of the little girl’s, strangled Sandra to death after sexually assaulting her with a rolling pin.  The latest theory?  A disorder called Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome.

From People:

Such behavior has a name: Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome, a form of child abuse, in which a person harms somebody else, often children, for attention. The prosecutor in the case noted that Huckaby’s daughter may also have fallen victim: the child had a history of being sick and in need of hospital care way too often.

“There were 20 or so times that Melissa cut herself, set fires, or verbally or psychologically attacked someone else, such as a roommate,” says Deputy District Attorney Thomas Tesla. “And there was something like that going on here (after the murder), where she wanted to be the center of attention.”

This is just … sick.  It’s horrible enough to harm children because you are angry or tired or frustrated or drunk or whatever.  I have never laid an angry hand on either of my kids (and it’s not like I’m on some moral high ground here, by the way—I’m just blessed with very well-behaved children), but there have been moments where I could understand where people would.  I think of it as a perfect storm—you lose your job, you go out and get drunk, you get a DWI on the way home, your kids have fed your Delmonico to the dog, and you snap.  Is it right?  No.  Never.  But I can see theoretically how it could happen.  Hurting kids to get attention?  I cannot fathom it.

Evidently Huckaby’s actions following the crime brought the spotlight directly on her.  And evidently this is just what she wanted …
(more…)

A massage therapist from Oregon has accused Al Gore of inappropriate sexual advances that allegedly took place in 2006 at Portland’s Hotel Lucia, referring to him as a “crazed sex poodle” in the process.  The passage of time (it’s been nearly four years since the alleged incident) and Gore’s reputation as a rather staid man contrast with the lurid details … and together lead to a necessary revisiting of both the delicate issue of reluctance in the reporting of sexual assault and the possible fabrication of sexual assault allegations for specific (and usually financial) means.

From Oregon Live:

In her detailed Jan. 8, 2009, statement to a Portland sexual assault investigator, the woman said she was called to the hotel about 10:30 p.m. Oct. 24, 2006, to provide a massage for Gore, who was registered under the name “Mr. Stone.” Once inside his ninth-floor suite, she said he pushed her hand to his groin, fondled her buttocks and breasts, tongue-kissed her and threw her down on the bed as she tried to thwart his advances.

She also said Gore had finished a beer and opened a bottle of Grand Marnier while she was in the room.

While the Police Bureau considers it a closed case, it said it would reopen it if new evidence is received.

So a report was made in January of 2009, well over a year after the alleged incident, that Al Gore got drunk and tried to get up to some sexual hanky-panky with a massage therapist.  And  it’s just coming out now.  Um … call me crazy, but — nevermind.  Actually, the whole story’s crazy.  You’ll see.

The woman told investigators that she informed two friends and kept the clothes she wore that night, including her black pants with stains on them. But Portland police didn’t contact any of the woman’s friends, obtain the potential evidence or interview anyone at the hotel, records show.

Not to make light, but was Al Gore trying to be Bill Clinton or something? 
(more…)

I know it’s hard to believe, but Miley Cyrus is only seventeen.  That makes her a juvenile in terms of the posting of potentially pornographic pictures.  Guess Perez Hilton forgot that …

From Earsucker, which was among the first to call it:

Perez Hilton is such an idiot. He got ahold of a picture of Miley Cyrus’ hoohah and posted it on his official Twitter account UNCENSORED. Apparently this fool doesn’t realize that Miley is still only seventeen-years-old…either that, or he just doesn’t care.

It’s definitely child pornography, considering the fact that he decided that the photo should be made available for mass consumption. So sickening. I hope he gets sued or arrested for this mess.

He tweeted, “If you are easily offended, do NOT click here [REDACTED FOR OBVIOUS REASONS] Oh, Miley! Warning: truly not for the easily offended.”

Okay, there is no question that, in this age of technology, a lot of us have made statements via the internet that we wish we could take back.  Personally, I’m thinking most recently about the “OH, CAPTAIN, MY CAPTAIN” Facebook rant following a night of Captain and Coke.  Yeah, that was embarrassing.  Like, ridiculously embarrassing.  I might as well have posted, “I’m 33 years old and fucking wasted like a college kid.”

This, though … this is criminal.
(more…)

Street harassment of women in cities has been a problem for a long time. Now, a group called Hollaback is bringing the issue to the forefront and trying to do something to do something about it.

From Linda Lowen’s Women’s Issues Blog:

If you’re a woman living in an urban area, chances are you’ve been the victim of street harassment. It may take the form of verbal assault like catcalls or physical harassment such as groping; frequently the predator exposes himself or masturbates in front of you.

Typically women have learned to ignore these behaviors, since a reaction or response is what the perpetrator wants. But why should we put up with it? What did we do to provoke these sexual offenders? Is being female and walking down the street or riding the subway “asking for it”?

Emily May (no relationship to the trailblazing microbiologist Dr. Meghan May) and Oraia Reid, founded Hollaback in 2005 to use technological advances, most notably mobile technology allowing women to share their experiences in specific and inarguable ways. I mean, it’s hard to argue with a cell phone camera or a recording done via voice notes.

From Hollaback’s NYC website (there are also sites for Australia, Savannah, Chicago, and Toronto, among others):

HOLLA BACK NYC EMPOWERS NEW YORKERS TO HOLLA BACK AT STREET HARASSERS. WHETHER YOU’RE COMMUTING, LUNCHING, PARTYING, DANCING, WALKING, CHILLING, DRINKING, OR SUNNING, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO FEEL SAFE, CONFIDENT, AND SEXY, WITHOUT BEING THE OBJECT OF SOME TURD’S FANTASY. SO STOP WALKIN’ ON AND HOLLA BACK: SEND US PICS OF STREET HARASSERS!

Let me tell you, this site is so cool (in a disturbing way)! You cannot imagine the crazy stories on here … I honestly lost track of a fair amount of time perusing them. And what a concept … technology being used to fight crime. Perhaps it’s time for a new superhero or something—The Kamera Kid, maybe, or The Blue BlackBerry.

According to May:

We commiserated over being whistled at, cat-called, and propositioned. The trouble was that we felt there was nothing we could do. If we walked on, we felt victimized. If we yelled, we felt angry, and street harassment was more or less protected under laws of free speech. Then we realized – why not take pictures of these street harassers and post them on a blog? And so, with the clink of our cocktail glasses, we launched HollabackNYC.

That is just freaking genius! So, yeah, if you want to be a Hollaback girl and take a picture of any b-a-n-a-n-a-s that might be wagged in your direction (I’m sorry, Gwen Stefani, but I just couldn’t resist), submit your pictures to this wicked cool group right here.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you think it will solve some of the street harassment problems? Do you have any other ideas that might work better?

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court released a ruling upholding a law allowing for some federal prisoners convicted of sex crimes involving minors (thus being classified as sex offenders) to be held indefinitely, even after they have served their sentences. The length of this additional imprisonment is left up to the discretion of federal prison officials, who are allowed to extend sentences if they feel a specific inmate is too “sexually dangerous” to merit release and reintroduction into an environment where they are likely to re-offend. This law can also be applied to state prisoners if the federal government feels that those considered “dangerous” are not properly evaluated upon toward the end of their terms. While I think this law’s intentions are good, the methods it uses to achieve them are not only ineffective, but also cruel and set worrisome precedents in regards to prisoners’ rights (particularly for groups such as terror suspects, who are often held for long periods without any legal recourse, because they could potentially commit crimes if set free) and the authority of both law enforcement and the Supreme Court itself.

The law originally came about as a result of the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act passed in 2006, which contains a provision allowing for certain sex offenders to be held indefinitely (Adam, who was kidnapped and murdered by a child molester in 1981, is the son of John Walsh, host of “America’s Most Wanted”). Graydon Comstock, who received the “dangerous” certification only days before his scheduled release, initiated the challenge by arguing that he was being wrongfully detained after finishing his 37 month sentence for child pornography. Supporters of the law include President Obama and current Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, who perhaps gave us a sneak peek at her jurisprudence by arguing the case on behalf of the government.

Whatever arguments Kagan may have made were certainly persuasive, as the court ruled 7-2 against Comstock, citing the Constitution’s “necessary and proper clause” as the reason the law needed to be updheld. The only justices to dissent, arguing that the government’s position was over reaching, were Republicans Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, both notorious for being “tough on crime.” While I almost never agree with any of the courts conservative members and I do not propose going easy on despicable sex criminals, this decision is not only a bridge too far, but a poorly constructed one at that.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who agreed with the majority, but not Justice Stephen Breyer’s use of the “clause”, wrote separately that the law may compromise “essential attributes of state sovereignty” by forcing them to punish prisoners according to the federal government’s guidelines. While I am not usually in favor of the “states’ rights” argument as I feel it is used to support discrimination and an authoritarian far-right agenda, in this case, I believe the government should not interfere. Indeed, how are officials in Washington to properly evaluate cases that they were not originally involved in and have little knowledge about?
(more…)