When a convicted sex offender is released its questionable whether he/she will repeat the act, considering majority of those live near schools, and day- care centers once they are released.
From the porch of his home, a 69-year-old Hammond man convicted of repeatedly having sex with his 12-year-old adopted daughter can see the busy schoolyard of Thomas Edison Elementary School across the street.
In Valparaiso, another man convicted of felony indecent liberty with a child lives in a home sandwiched between the Thomas Jefferson Middle School sports field, which borders the rear of his residence, and the Indiana Immanuel Lutheran School, about a block away from his front door. Also in the home are his girlfriend and an infant.
In Calumet City, a 34-year-old man convicted of aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a child under the age of 18 lives four houses down from the front steps of Thornton Fractional North High School. A ring of the doorbell, and his teen-aged daughter answers.
The three men are among at least 76 of the region's 533 registered sex offenders -- most of whom had child victims -- living within 1,000 feet, or about three blocks, of public and private schools, a computerized map generated by The Times shows.
A startling fact to many region residents, including rape victims and their families: Laws in Indiana and Illinois do not prohibit most of those offenders from living within sight of schools, day-care facilities and other places where children congregate.
And in some cases, offenders have addresses listed on law enforcement registries that place them in violation of laws that seek to keep at least short distances between select offenders and schools or day-care facilities.
To the mother of a 10-year-old girl raped by a neighbor in Gary eight years ago, any adult convicted of sexually violating a child -- whether related to the offender or not -- should be forever stripped of any right to live or loiter near school grounds and other potential victims.
Law enforcement should do all it can to keep the offenders away, she argued.
In Indiana, sex offenders are prohibited from residing within 1,000 feet -- or about three blocks -- of schools or day-care centers while they are on probation or parole, unless they receive a rare reprieve from a judge. But once they are no longer under the supervision of courts and probation officers, they can live where they choose.
And in Illinois, sex offenders' homes are to be kept 500 feet -- or about a block and a half -- away from schools, a distance well within sight of places where children play. The law indefinitely applies to sex offenders who had child victims.
The idea behind both laws is to keep those who have victimized children at a safe distance from them.
But critics said neither law achieves that goal.
In nearly all 76 cases reviewed by The Times, the sex offenders were living near schools, day-care centers and parks where children play -- and most were doing it legally.
The Times' map and visits to some of the addresses revealed:
- All 76 list addresses on either the Indiana or Illinois sex offender registries within or near the edges of 1,000-foot zones mapped around region schools.
- 22 of those offenders either live or have lived within distances of less than 500 feet of schools, with at least three living directly across the street from schoolyards and parks. On school days, children walking to school pass by the front steps of the homes.
- Seven offenders -- five in Indiana and two in Illinois -- list addresses on the sex offender registries that are in violation of residency restriction laws. Two of offenders are back in prison, one is in the process of moving, one is wanted on a warrant for failing to renew his annual sex-offender registration, and three others remain in the restricted zones. But all seven are living or have lived in violation of residency restriction laws -- and were undetected by law enforcement.
Two criminal probation officers in Lake and Porter counties agree that laws should be on the books in Indiana to keep some sex offenders permanently from establishing residences near schools, day-care facilities and parks.
Others who counsel sex offenders under terms of the convicts' parole or probation point out, however, that most offenders listed on public registries chose victims who were family members or children of close friends and did not stalk schoolyards for their prey.
But allowing the offenders -- whether they are on probation or not -- to live in homes that children must pass each day on the way to school is asking for trouble, the mother of the Gary victim said.
Molesters near schools
On Aug. 5, 1999, from the front yard of her friend's Hammond home, a 12-year-old girl noticed a man watching her from the window of his white car. When she later began walking down an alley near the friend's house to get home, the same man, 35, grabbed her shirt from behind, threatened to kill her if she struggled and dragged her to his nearby apartment.
He threw her onto a love seat, bound her wrists to the leg of a coffee table with a handkerchief, masturbated in front of her and then attempted to undress her.
Lake County court documents show the girl escaped from the handkerchief binding, kicked the man in the groin and ran from the home.
The man's guilty plea to a charge of criminal confinement was supposed to be enough to keep him from living within 1,000 feet of any school or day care while he served about two years on parole.
But, apparently undetected by parole officers, he moved in with his sister -- and her two teen-aged children -- about 950 feet away and within eyesight of Hammond High School. The home also is directly across the street from a basketball court, a park where children play and a public swimming pool.
During a Times' visit to the home in June, the man's sister, who owns the house, said the offender had been sent back to prison to complete a four-year sentence because he failed to check in with his parole officer. In the several months he had been living in the home -- along with her two minor children -- he had never mentioned any restrictions regarding living near schools or day-care facilities, said the sister, who spoke to The Times under condition that her name not be printed.
Another sex offender, who spoke with The Times under condition that neither his name nor addresses be printed, said his parole officer never told him about any residency restrictions.
The man, a 26-year-old parolee, lives within three blocks of The Greater First Christian Academy -- a pre-kindergarten-through-fourth-grade school in East Chicago. The Times' map shows his address falls within the 1,000-foot restricted safety zone barring those on parole or probation from living near schools or day-care facilities in Indiana.
He said he was never told about the 1,000-foot rule -- even though a document in his court file spells out the restriction -- and that his parole officer never told him he was living too close to a school.
Senior parole agent Clark Matotte, who handles that offender's case, did not return messages left by The Times on his voice mail.
"I thought it was 100 feet, or something," said the offender, who pleaded guilty in August 2002 to felony child molesting for fondling his daughters -- at the time ages 6 and 7. He has about six months left on parole.
The offender maintains that he is no danger to children and that the mother of his daughters' falsely accused him of molesting the girls. If he forced sex on anyone, he said, it was the girls' mother, not the girls themselves.
But he also agrees that child molesters should not be allowed to live or go anywhere near schools.
The Times' investigation also revealed a registered sex offender in Calumet City living within 500 feet of a school -- a violation of Illinois' residency restriction.
That 34-year-old offender lives with his wife and daughter in a home four houses down from Thornton Fractional North High School. The Clerk of Cook County's 6th Circuit Court refused to produce the offender's court file without a judge's order, saying it was sealed because the victim was a minor.
But a court docket search of the man's case indicates he initially was charged with 10 counts of aggravated criminal sexual assault, one count of criminal sexual assault, one count of aggravated criminal sexual abuse, four counts of aggravated kidnapping, one count of kidnapping, one count of aggravated battery and one count of unlawful restraint. The charges stem from a 1995 offense against a victim under the age of 18.
In a plea deal with prosecutors in 1997, the docket indicates the offender pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated criminal sexual abuse and was sentenced to four years of probation.
His wife, responding to a letter hand-delivered by The Times to the offender's home, said her husband was unwilling to comment about his case.
Perfectly legal
With the hundreds of offenders that probation, parole and law enforcement officials must track in the region, some -- like the seven found in The Times' investigation -- can slip beneath the radar, said John Thorstad, Lake County's chief of probation.
"We try to do our best, and only a few offenders showing addresses where they shouldn't be versus the hundreds you found that are living where they should is a pretty good record," Thorstad told The Times.
But what bothers Thorstad and Stephen Meyer, Porter County's assistant probation chief, is dozens of sex offenders can and do live where they please once terms of their probation or parole are complete.
Meyer, whose office monitors some sex offenders after they are released from prison, said a probation of a few years often is not enough to rehabilitate the worst offenders -- those who violated children.
"One problem is that you put all of these controls on the offender while they are in jail, prison or on probation -- all of these rules are in place. Then, one day, the rules just all go away, and the offenders don't have that structure anymore. They are no longer on probation and can go and live where they want," Meyer said.
Couple that with a system that has little or no success in curing pedophiles, and the public has reason for concern, said Meyer, whose officers make visits to the homes of probationary sex offenders and sometimes employ land surveyors to ensure they are not living too close to schools.
Lake and Porter counties have had some success in changing offenders' behaviors through post-prison counseling programs, Meyer pointed out.
"But once a pedophile, always a pedophile," said Meyer, arguing a need for some offenders -- particularly those who prey on children -- to remain on probation and to be bound by the state's 1,000-foot residency restriction for life. "There is nothing wrong with lifetime probation in some of these cases."
Thorstad agreed, even though most sex offenders, whose names and addresses are listed on public and law enforcement registries, did not stalk schoolyards, parks or day-care centers in search of their victims.
"They groomed their victims, got to know them," he said, noting that the majority of sex offenses against children are committed by a parent, step-parent or close family friend.
As a parent himself, Thorstad said he understands why the public would want to keep anyone who has molested children -- regardless of how old the offense is or whether the offender knew the victim -- from living near the schools and day-care centers their children attend every day.
One mother, formerly of Gary and now living in southern Indiana, agreed.
Her daughter -- at age 10 -- was raped by a neighbor who she believed had been a family friend. That offender, no longer on parole or probation, is living across the street from a Gary elementary school.
"It's perfectly legal for him to be there, and that's just wrong," she said. "It's disgusting and should not be tolerated."
http://www.operationlookout.org/pred/SexOffendersNearSchools.htm
Illegal apartments seem to be where many sex offenders reside. Illegal apartments, especially near schools or playgrounds attract sec offenders.
Illegal apartments are not on the radar screen of the Department of Buildings, a city agency intentionally understaffed so that there can be a ready-made excuse for lack of building code enforcement. There is one inspector assigned to respond to complaints throughout the entire borough of Queens on the overnight shift and on Saturdays and Sundays. So when you call in a complaint about a stop-work order being violated, or work being performed on a site after hours or on the weekend, it is guaranteed that no one from DOB will answer it. Building scofflaws are well aware of this and are taking full advantage of the opportunities afforded them. With a city budget surplus reported earlier in 2006 to exceed $7 billion, there is no excuse for any city agency to be understaffed. That is, unless it’s intentional, which apparently it is.
Why would the city allow this to happen? Well here’s one answer:
“Maspeth, Middle Village and Glendale have been ‘redlined’ by the city to allow for overdevelopment,” said one insider. “This was planned out years ago, with the intention of putting all the newest immigrants here. This is a 'two-fare' zone, therefore your real estate is considered not to be prime ‘yuppie territory,’ but rather an area for people just happy to have a roof over their heads, who don’t mind taking a bus to get home once they leave the train.”
Now if this sounds like some sort of radical conspiracy theory, then consider this:
“If we crack down on illegal apartments, then where will all the people living in them go?” said one high level elected official straight to our executive board’s faces. This was parroted by one of his underlings a few months later when the subject was brought up again. Turning a blind eye to illegal apartments has become policy for this city administration. This is sad considering who usually lives in these spaces. The city would like you to think that college students and people from other parts of the country who recently moved here are occupying them. The reality is that those newcomers will usually share legal apartments in Manhattan or other desirable trendy neighborhoods with their friends.
Those living in basements in Queens typically are people who are trying to avoid being found. In a nutshell, illegal apartments look mighty good to people doing illegal things – criminals, terrorists, and undocumented immigrants. I was shocked more than a decade ago when the FBI showed up on my doorstep with a photo of the man living in my then-next door neighbor’s illegally rented basement! Sex offenders often rent illegal apartments near schools and playgrounds so they may continue to assault children while living under the radar. Let’s not forget that an actress was recently murdered by an illegal alien – Where might her killer have lived? It’s reprehensible that our city government is providing safe harbor for people who are out to do harm to the citizens it is entrusted with protecting.
If you think that shirking the building code is harmless, consider this: 98 people have died since 2001 in construction accidents. Most of them were illegal immigrants who were taken advantage of by builders who ignored safety precautions in order to save a few extra bucks. It’s not a stretch to accuse our city government, which encourages both illegal immigration and unscrupulous development, of having blood on their hands.
In addition to hurting workers, on November 5th, 2006, the New York Daily News reported, “Hundreds of New Yorkers have been forced to flee their homes because dangerous construction nearby damaged their foundations or raised fears their houses were unsafe.” Many of these victims are elderly. This being allowed to happen is an absolute disgrace.
More than a year ago, JPCA volunteers collected and submitted to the Department of City Planning most of the information required for our rezoning study. Once again, we’ve been told that city planning doesn’t have enough staff to complete it. It’s interesting how this happened after surrounding areas were rezoned (including a large swath of Queens Boulevard that was upzoned). Maspeth, Middle Village and Glendale are the only areas of Queens where R4 and R5 infill zones, which permit buildings larger than would normally be allowed, are predominant; therefore, developers are in a feeding frenzy here.
Spot zoning is illegal, yet recently approved rezoning applications clearly show that the code is being very loosely interpreted in order to encourage overdevelopment. The city even admits that the self-certification process it put in place to help architects and developers obtain permits faster is a complete failure, yet has taken no steps to remedy the problem. The NY Times earlier this year quoted an expediter as saying self-certification is "an empty promise met by an empty threat."
Why doesn’t the city council close the loopholes in the zoning and building codes? Well, the largest lobby in the city is the real estate lobby. They donate more money to the campaigns of elected officials than most of the other industries combined. So, “hands off” and in some cases actively helping developers is the way of the City Council. Sure, they’ll host public forums so that their constituents can vent and they can appear sympathetic, but they never actually do anything once they hear the frustrations of the people. (However, voting themselves a fat pay raise was a huge priority for them.)
Someone in the real estate industry explained it like this: “Don’t waste your time writing letters or complaining to elected officials. Buy a $500 ticket to one of their fundraisers, introduce yourself at the event, and then a couple of days later, call them and tell them what you would like them to do for you. That’s the way it’s done.” So, let’s get this straight…the people who work for us will only do what we ask of them if we give them a bonus. Rather audacious of them, isn’t it?
And if you don’t have the time, but have the resources, hire a lobbyist. Did you know that there are certain people who work in our city government that won’t meet with you unless you are a lobbyist? Try calling and getting a meeting with an elected official or head of a city agency. Say you are a concerned neighborhood resident who wants to discuss a quality of life issue. You’ll probably be given some line like, “They are booked solid for the next two months.” Call again and say you are a lobbyist and plan to make a big donation to their campaign. You’ll be squeezed in sometime between their free lunches of today and tomorrow.
When a developer or contractor actually is caught doing something wrong, the fines are so miniscule that they are a joke, and the same activity is soon taking place again. Repeat offenders do not receive punishment that is any more severe than a slap on the wrist. Case in point: Tommy Huang, who owns an illegally constructed house on Mazeau Street, was convicted of environmental crimes in connection with his destruction of the landmark RKO Keith’s Theater in Flushing. He has flagrantly violated building and zoning codes for a quarter of a century, yet is able to continue to do what he does best – destroy neighborhoods while turning a profit for himself – all because the city’s codes allow him to do so and our elected officials don’t care.
One builder surprisingly revealed that a set of bogus plans is kept at their worksite in the rare event that an inspector actually shows up. The inspector walks away satisfied that the plans produced were the same plans approved by the Department of Buildings. Of course, they aren’t. The inspectors do not check with their office to make sure that the 2 sets of plans match. DOB knows this trick is played on them all the time, yet has taken no steps to remedy the problem. It seems like a pretty simple thing to correct, so why isn’t it being done?
The buildings department is there to make money for the city via the issuing of permits, so it is their mission to approve as many as possible, even if developers’ plans don’t always measure up to code. However, the city could make up for this if it stiffened penalties for building violations and hired enough inspectors to cover complaints and do random checks of construction sites. They would reap millions just in our area alone. There are thousands of building problems taking place in our communities every day. It would also help if they made violations of stop-work orders punishable by jail time and abuse of self-certification punishable by license revocation in addition to levying heavy fines.
While real estate seminars mention our area as being the next “hot market,” developers have bought up parcels of land using “all cash.” No one ever seems to question these transactions where underreporting of income and tax evasion is sure to be rampant. Then these developers erect ugly out-of-character structures with built-in illegal basement apartments to make them more attractive to buyers who could use the extra unreported, untaxed income to pay their mortgages. Again, no one in our city government cares.
There is no question that our borough has been earmarked to absorb the anticipated swell in population of the city. “There is estimated to be an additional 1 million people moving into the city over the next 10 years and we want to be prepared for it,” one mayoral aide told us. “Being prepared for it,” in their minds means simply upzoning and rezoning areas. To get the unsuspecting victims of this plan to think it’s a good idea, bogus phrases such as “affordable housing” have been trumpeted by developers, council members, the mayor, etc.
The issue that everyone in our government conveniently leaves out is that our current infrastructure does not have the capacity to handle this. Remember this past summer’s blackout in Astoria and Woodside? Why do you think it happened in that area? In recent years, one-family homes have been replaced with 30+ unit apartment buildings there. And the power grid couldn’t take it. Maybe they should have thought of that before they opened the doors and rolled out the red carpet for high density development projects.
How about fire and police protection, bus and subway service, schools, supermarkets, hospitals? We are sorely lacking in these services now, what will happen when we pile thousands more people into our already overcrowded neighborhoods? Right now, our Borough President is stressing over Queens not having enough hospitals while our Health Commissioner is saying that we have too many. Does anyone in our government have the slightest clue of what the real story is?
We’d be happy to help our city agencies and elected officials accomplish a complete overhaul in the way things are done in the Departments of Buildings and City Planning. But first they must stop representing the interests of unscrupulous developers and start representing the people of Maspeth, Middle Village, Glendale and the rest of the five boroughs of our city. If there truly “isn’t enough staff” to do an adequate job as is claimed, then a moratorium on building needs to be put in effect now as was suggested by JPCA President Robert Holden at the June 2006 public hearing regarding problems with the Department of Buildings in Queens. Not surprisingly, nothing positive resulted from that hearing – people vented, politicians said, “My, that’s terrible,” and business continued as usual for the City Council and their friends in the real estate industry.
The only person ignoring the Council’s “do-nothing” rule is Councilman Tony Avella. He has been at the forefront of issues relating to the preservation of neighborhoods. He has helped us tremendously with St. Saviour’s Church and has been responsive to our pleas for help regarding building and zoning issues despite the fact that he represents an area on the other side of the borough. We commend him for taking a stand and defending the working and middle class taxpayers who are fast becoming an endangered species within the City of New York.
To all the rest in our city government: Enough is enough. We are mad as hell and we’re not going to take it any more. You have acted as accomplices in the destruction of our neighborhoods for too long. You are term-limited so thankfully we will suffer you for a finite period of time. However, you are leaving a permanent mark on this city by continuing to support and encourage overdevelopment.
Is this the legacy you want recorded for posterity? The next issue of the Juniper Berry will thoroughly document the egregious building offenses committed against the residents of our towns, and the names of the criminal masterminds behind them will be made known.
Consider this an official declaration of war. The upcoming year will consist of 12 months of non-stop aggression against those with intentions of destroying our neighborhoods. Quite simply, either you are on our side or you are against us. The choice is yours.
http://www.junipercivic.com/latestNewsArticle.asp?nid=68
Hempstead is a low income area, with an estimated median household income being $50,000 in 2005. Most sex offenders reside in areas that are low-income.
|
(47.8%)
(52.2%)
29.4 years
35.9 years
$50,400
$49,480
$258,900
|
For population 25 years and over in Hempstead
For population 15 years and over in Hempstead village
18,769 residents are foreign born (30.5% Latin America).
Median real estate property taxes paid for housing units in 2000:
Nearest city with pop. 1,000,000+: Queens, NY (14.0 miles Nearest cities: South Hempstead, NY (1.5 miles
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20.4%
1.9% ($2,847)
Nearest city with pop. 200,000+: 
(2.0 miles 
, pop. 755,924).
, pop. 2,229,379).
), 
), 
), 
), 
), 
),
Latitude: 40.70 N, Longitude: 73.62 W Daytime population change due to commuting: -4,631 (-8.2%)
|
http://www.city-data.com/city/Hempstead-New-York.html
Two thirds of convicted sex offenders have victims under the age of 18 and 58% of those have victims under the age of 12.
NEW YORK — Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are reviving their efforts to create a national sex offender database after a recent spate of child kidnappings.
Cases such as those of Jessica Lunsford (search), Jetseta Gage (search) and Dru Sjodin (search) caused outcries in communities whose residents said they needed ways to be better informed when convicted sex offenders move into their neighborhoods. And lawmakers are reacting, even after two more cases of missing girls emerged on Thursday.
Sen. Byron Dorgan (search) reintroduced his bill to create a national sex offender database. The North Dakota Democrat's bill is named "Dru's Law" after Sjodin, a college student who was abducted last fall from a North Dakota parking lot and murdered by convicted sex offender Alfonso Rodriguez Jr (search).
Rodriguez, who was released from prison in neighboring Minnesota just six months before Sjodin disappeared, lived just across the border from Grand Forks, N.D. Lawmakers argue that had there been a national database, North Dakotans who checked their state’s registry of sexual offenders might have known a violent sex offender was living nearby.
(Story continues below)
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/soo.htm
There have been many laws referring to sex offenders and requiring them to register, but according to this article since sex offenders don’t stop at state lines so the registries should be nationwide.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153533,00.html
A big concern with sex offenders is whether or no they will commit the crime again. According to a study in 2006 the recidivism rate for sex offenders could be as high as 88.3%.
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-likely-are-sex-offenders-to-repeat-their-crimes-258/
In 2006 Adam Bradly cracked down on sex offenders by passing legislation requiring mandatory treatment for convicted offenders.
http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/?ad=089&sh=story&story=16787
Under Meaghan’s law it is required that sex offenders register and the information is made available through certain databases. This database shows a map of where the sec offenders are located , what they are convicted of and where they are in proximity to schools.
http://www.familywatchdog.us/ShowMap.asp?frm=0
This site offers statistics on sex offenders and the reasoning of why they commit such acts.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#sex
This database a more in-depth description of sex offenders.
No comments:
Post a Comment