Chasing Rainbows

Goodbye Kristen Helms

Who is Kristen Helms?  Kristen Helms was a 14 year old star student and athlete, who was seduced by a predator nearly twice her age who traveled from Texas to California to have sex with her.

Kristen Helms eventually revealed her secret to her mother. Danielle Helms recalls her daughter telling her that she didn't mean to fall for him emotionally and saying, "It's not your fault, mom."

And then one day, while her parents were at church, Kristen hanged herself.

Kristen's mother is determined to change the way predators operate online, while Child advocates have called Internet social networking sites the Sears Catalog for child predators.

The thousands of sex offenders who have been caught so far are offenders that have been using their own names, so one might ask, "Are there thousands more that are using aliases?"  There are probably tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of predators on these sites using aliases or disguised identities.

Kristen is gone forever because she couldn't handle her shame, humiliation and feeling that she had failed her parents.  Kristen's predator, on the other hand, Kiley Ryan Bowers, who was 27 at that time, was recently convicted of child molestation. He was sentenced to nine years in a federal prison plus six years of supervised release after completing his prison term. He will also be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.  Somehow I just do not believe that Bowers has paid a high enough price for the consequences of his actions.

Attorneys general in all 50 states are now calling for effective age and identity verification and parental permission for minors to post profiles on social networking sites.  This is not enough.  Stiffer penaltiees for the sex offenders are required in order to deter their blatant use of the internet to stalk young teens like Kristen.

What is your opinion?  Does the  sentence fit the crime here?  Should he have been charged with involuntary manslaughter or worse?  You tell me....spout off.

Outrage about Border Patrol Agents

Our President is being petitioned by American citizens who are outraged that nothing has been done by our government to perpetuate the release of two border guards who were doing their job.  The guards say they saw a gun and took appropriate action.  They now sit in a prison where they are being abused.  The conservative Grassroots org. is sponsoring the petition.  Further comments can be heard at Youtube.com. {see below} 

The Issue:
Two former U.S. Border Patrol agents -- Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean -- are serving 11- and 12-year prison terms for attempting to apprehend an illegal alien drug smuggler. The smuggler, who was transporting 743 pounds of marijuana (about $1 million worth), was given full immunity to testify against our agents and is suing our government for $5 million.

Now, reports indicate that the Mexican government was instrumental in this case even being launched. Plus, our own government has been lying about key details in the case. Meanwhile, the agents sit in jail (Ramos was severely beaten by Mexican nationals in jail who shouted “death to the border agent”), the drug smuggler may get rich and our President has not taken action!  What are your feelings about this issue?

60-Second TV Spot
(Click the arrow to view)

The Pedophile's Blog

Numerous bloggers are writing about Jack McClellan's blog on which he openly admits to being a pedophile, but defends his actions by stating that he hasn't "done" anything yet [see next]: Jack McClellan, 45, who calls himself a pedophile but says he has never sexually touched a child, has created Web sites in Seattle and Los Angeles detailing how and where he trolls for children.

I am a proponent of our Constitution and certainly support the First Amendent and our right to freedom of speech, but I find it difficult to accept that injurious material is allowed on the internet under the auspice of public domain.   "It is an interesting case," said Eugene Volokh, a law professor and First Amendment expert at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Professor Volokh cited a federal statute that bars the posting of bomb-making information on the Web, and suggested that a similar statute banning information that helps people find children to molest could be enacted, perhaps. But simply providing information about where children gather was not likely to constitute such a crime, he said.

In terms of children's images, he said: "The general rule is pictures of people in public are free for people to publish. Now if it is without permission and the person is a child and he suggests the children are sexual targets, you can imagine a court saying this is a new First Amendment exception. But it would be an uphill battle."

The plight of those opposed to sites such as McClellan"s will be a difficult road. While posting pictures of children in sexual situations is a felony, posting them fully clothed in everyday situations is not, even in the context of sexualizing them by proxy, so to speak, First Amendment scholars said. Further, while inciting others to commit crimes can be illegal, it is unclear whether giving people links to children's book fairs is criminal.

I strongly believe that it is the responsibilty of law makers and citizens combined to resolve this type of problem. Can we, in good conscience, allow such  sites to flourish and qualify their content as allowable under the Constitutional right to freedom of speech?   

I would like my readers to leave me comments on this issue.  Specifically, possible resolutions and opinions would be welcome.  I want to know how other people feel about this issue and about other sites analogous to Mr. McClellan's .

About Jury Duty

According to MSNBC, our courts are struggling to get people to act as jurors.  Why is it necessary for various cities to be employing numerous techniques to encourage participation in what is a cornerstone of democracy? 

Courts across the country have been going to extraordinary lengths in recent years to get people to report for jury duty — a cornerstone of democracy and a civic responsibility that many citizens would do almost anything to avoid.

American citizens have long complained about the explosion of lawlessness, government control and feeling ineffective in promoting relevant changes.  Serving on a  jury is a way to effect change, and have a voice in what laws we demand to be upheld.

Experts say the shirking of jury duty has been a problem as long as anyone can remember, and it is unclear whether it has gotten any worse in the past few decades. But according to one study, fewer than half of all Americans summoned report for duty, in part because of apathy and busy lifestyles.  Perhaps some of the responsibility falls upon employers who could provide more incentives to employees who do not shirk their responsibility to serve.  This option is not as likely to occur because afterall, it iis the employer who is short staffed during the time served by the employee.

Among other efforts around the country to boost participation:

• In Los Angeles County, officials have put ads promoting jury service on the court system’s mail trucks. They read: “Jury Service: You Be the Judge.”
• In New York state, occupational exemptions to jury service have been eliminated, so doctors, lawyers, firefighters, police officers and even judges can no longer get out of jury duty.
• In Florida, court officials use a poster of Harrison Ford, star of the movie “Presumed Innocent,” to encourage people to report for jury duty. The poster was part of a 2005 public service campaign developed by the ABA. “If a picture of Harrison Ford helps us be a more democratic society, then I’m all for it,” said Greg Cowan, a court official in Leon County, Fla.
• In Washington, D.C., judges have summoned no-shows to court, where they must explain why they missed their date or face up to seven days in jail and a $300 fine. In Tulare County, Calif., sheriffs go to the homes of no-shows and hand them orders to appear in court to explain themselves.
• Around the country, some courts have tried to make jury service less burdensome by raising daily fees paid to jurors, limiting jury service to one day or one trial, and reimbursing jurors for parking costs.

Sheriffs rarely sent to find jurors
Nationally, about 46 percent of people summoned for jury duty show up, according to a survey of jury improvement efforts conducted by the National Center for State Courts and published in April. It was the organization’s first such survey.

Many of the rest did not show up or were excused or disqualified for a variety of reasons, including medical or financial hardship, or employment in a job exempt from jury service. Or, they never received their jury summons because it was mailed to an outdated address. 

'A common problem'
The problem appears to be worse in urban courts, where the population is more transient and address lists can quickly become outdated. But rural and suburban areas also have problems with reluctant jurors.

In Tulare County, Calif., where the trial of two brothers accused of murdering five people in a bar had to be delayed a day because not enough prospective jurors showed up, Superior Court Judge Lloyd Hicks said the warning letters and visits from the sheriff are making a difference. He said the no-show rate has declined from about 56 percent to 39 percent since the crackdown began about a year ago.

“It had been a common problem because people were aware that nothing would happen to them,” Hicks said. Now, people are calling in to schedule their jury service after watching their neighbors get a visit from the sheriff, he said.

Would you serve for jury duty if requested?  Leave a "yes" or "no" in the comments area.

Justice????

In light of the Paris Hilton case, have any of you been following the Mary Winkler case? Mary Winkler is a 33 year old female who shot  her husband in the back in bed and killed him. He was a Pastor and allegedly abusing Mary.  To get to the point, however, Mary was sentenced today and her sentence was 210 days incarceration.  Now remember, she shot her husband in his back and left him there to die because the shooting did not end his life as Mary had hoped it would.  The judge then stated that Mary will spend 60 days of that sentence in lesser confinement, i.e. an institution albeit she has no history of mental illness nor any previous criminal record. It gets even better....the judge now adds that her current stint of incarceration will count toward the total 210 days.  Mary had been incarcerated for 5 months.  Now if you crunch those numbers and assume 30 days per month, she has already served  150 days of her sentence!  Don't stop there! Add the 60 days of lesser confinement to the already served 150 days and Voila!  Mary will have served her complete sentence without seeing a prison cell!!!  Folks, the woman murdered her husband!!!!  Where is the justice here?

Rape by fraud is not rape?

Taken from a transcript of Rush Limbaugh's Radio broadcast on May 14, 2007, the following story is just as Limbaugh presented it on the air.  Now, you tell me how much goofier does our Legislature have to become before we stop their ridiculous and harmful rulings?  You decide on this one for yourselves!

Rape Isn't Rape If Sex Obtained By Fraud

Here's a story the Kennedys are going to love. "A Hampden County, Massachusetts man who allegedly tricked his brother's girlfriend into having sex with him by impersonating his sibling in the middle of the night cannot be convicted of rape[.]" This is in the Boston Globe today. According to Limbaugh, This is the kind of thing the Kennedy's will cut out of the paper and frame and put on all of their walls in the bedrooms and so forth. Anyway, this decision came from the state's highest court yesterday. It's "a controversial ruling that affirms the court's long-held view that sex obtained through fraud is no crime."

Oh, man!

"The Supreme Judicial Court unanimously ruled that a judge should have dismissed the rape charge against Alvin Suliveres, of Westfield, because Massachusetts law has for two centuries defined rape as sexual intercourse by force and against one's will and that it is not rape when consent is obtained through fraud." Oh, don't you just love these liberal meccas? It's not rape when consent is obtained through fraud!

"The unusual case dates to a night in January 2005. The woman had been living with her boyfriend, Duane Suliveres...in the basement of his father's home." His brother, Alvin, had been staying in another room for several months. "At 3 a.m., the woman later told authorities, she was awakened by the sound of the door opening in the dark room and said, 'Duane, why are you home so early?' but heard no response. Then, she said, she felt someone who she thought was her boyfriend get into bed, remove her clothes, and climb on top of her and had sex with her for about ten minutes. After he got up, he opened the door" and she saw it was Alvin Suliveres. "After Hampton County prosecutors presented their case, Suliveres' trial lawyer asked Superior Court Judge Tina Page to acquit his client for lack of evidence." The judge refused. The case went to the jury which couldn't reach a verdict. Oh, Lord, folks.

Virginia Tech Shootings

I know that many of my blogger peers have posted something regarding the senseless shootings at Virginia Tech earlier today.  Most have summed up their reactions to it quite well.  An example can be read at my friend's blog, Shadow of Diogenes.  I want to talk about some of the surrounding issues involved here. There are now 32 ( as of tonight) families who unexpectedly have to plan a funeral and who need to grieve.  There is a small percent of these families thinking if they hadn't taken out that loan, there son or daughter may not have been there at that time.  There are 25,000 students panicked over the thought of returning to the campus when classses resume again.  There are University officials who are being pressed to prove that campus security was adequate even though it seemingly failed this time.  There are the pending lawsuits for Wrongful Death that will commence if campus security is found to be inappropriate.  There are members of the media who have thoroughly irritated me by focusing more on proving and reporting that, indeed, this act of campus violence is the worst in United States history.  Are we suppose to be impressed?  Finally, there are the American citizens who are wondering how such a thing could happen in our country......our country???  Do they mean the country that was founded on Christian principles and a belief in God that was unshakeable?  Do they mean the country that penalizes some of us for mentioning God today in certain public places?   Do they mean the country that allows the burning of our flag under the freedom of expression facade?  Look around us...do you like what you see? This being said, God be with every family, every friend and every administrator involved in the aftermath of this heinous crime.  My heart goes out to you!