An Update on Jamiel's Law

A hat tip goes to L.A. area blog Mayor Sam for this story...

This coming Tuesday morning, Jamiel's parents are going to City Hall at 9:45 a.m. to ask the Los Angeles City Council to adopt Jamiel's Law. Set forth below is an e-mail from the Shaws to you, explaining how you can help by joining them at City Hall or contacting the City Council. For more information, go to www.JamielsLaw.com.

Jamiel's Law would again outlaw L.A.'s status as a sanctuary city. Jamiel's Law is named after Jamiel Shaw, a 17 year old high school student with a promising future. Shaw was shot by a gang member named Pedro Espinoza. Espinoza is a gang member with a long rap sheet, and he is also here illegally. Because L.A. had a sanctuary policy, a policy in which police were prohibited from finding the legal status of criminals they arrested, Espinoza was let back on the streets rather than being deported.

Jamiel's Law is being touted by L.A. mayoral candidate, Walter Moore. The city council meeting tomorrow should be a major step toward ending L.A.'s status as a sanctuary city. On the issue of illegal immigration, I firmly believe that liberal pols like Mayor Villaraigosa have totally overestimated the views of the public. Even in a liberal city like L.A. the folks are simply not going to stand for innocent people being killed so that pols can get in tight with open borders lobbyists. Here is how Mayor Sam blog put it...

Forget DWP or anything else going on. This is the number one political problem for Antonio Villaraigosa right now. The usual team will be going full force to put a stop to it. Let's hope that Walter Moore, the Shaws and their supporters go all the way. A move to help prevent the death of innocent teenagers is too important to let the usual LA politics quash it.

I hope firmly that Jamiel's Law becomes a nationwide campaign much like Jessica's Law did in the aftermath of Jessica Lunsford's death, however a good place to start is in L.A.

Jamiel's Law

Sometimes there is an event that affects the public so viscerally that it leads to change. In 2005, Jessica Lunsford was murdered by John Couey. Couey was a convicted child molestor out on parole after receiving a relatively light sentence. The death affected the public at large so viscerally that Jessica's Law was created in its aftermath. In 42 of 50 states, there is now a mandatory minimum sentence at or near 25 years for the first conviction of sexual assault against a child under 13.

The death of Jamiel Shaw maybe lead to the same sort of visceral reaction. I actually expected the murders of three college studnets last year in Newark, New Jersey to create this very visceral reaction.

The murder of three college students left residents of Newark shaken and angry Monday, prompting a march on City Hall and providing a major challenge for the city's new reform-minded mayor.

Mayor Cory Booker, 38, a Rhodes scholar and Yale-educated lawyer, was elected last year and promised to make public safety his top priority.

Crime has fallen during the last year, including a slight drop in the number of murders. But five killings over the weekend — including the execution-style slaying of the college students — jarred the mayor and the city. "This breaks the heart of our city," Booker said.

The murders took place around midnight Saturday behind Mount Vernon Elementary School in a middle-class neighborhood. The victims had no record of being in trouble and were seen as success stories for the city's school district.

In that case, the three college students were murdered by Jose Carranza, an illegal with a long rap sheet. Newark was known as a so called sanctuary city, a city where police were forbidden to ask for the legal status of any suspect. As such, the cops never found out that Carranza was an illegal and thus never handed him over to ICE for deportation.

Much like that case, Jamiel Shaw was killed in another senseless and random act of vicious violence. Also, like in that case, Shaw was also killed by an illegal with a long rap sheet. Just like in that case, Los Angeles is also another so called sanctuary city.

Enter, mayoral candidate Walter Moore...Moore is pushing for Jamiel's Law. The Law would end L.A.'s status as a sanctuary city. Last year, Senator David Vitter proposed an amendment that would cut off federal funding to any so called sanctuary city. The amendment failed on a largely party line vote. Maybe, just maybe, the death of Jamiel Shaw will produce the necessary visceral reaction to finally end the practice of sanctuary cities.

O'Flaherty Vs. Jessica's Law

Anyone that is cynical about politics will have most of their cynicism reinforced by this story. Massachusetts is one of only eight states that still hasn't instituted Jessica's Law. Jessica's Law sets mandatory minimums for child molestors (children 13 and under) of 25 years minimum for the first offense. Jessica's Law was created after Jessica Lunsford was killed by John Couey who was then himself a multiple times convicted molestor who was out on parole.

Even in liberal Massachusetts, this bill would have overwhelming approval. It would pass through the legislature and would have overwhelming support among the Massachusetts electorate. Yet, not only is it still not law, but the reason is that won't see a vote from the entire legislature. That's because Eugene O'Flaherty (D Suffock County) refuses to introduce it into the full Senate. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, where Jessica's Law was introduced, he singularly has the power to move bills in front of the entire Senate.

Now, Flaherty is a fairly liberal individual. When confronted by Jessie Waters of the O'Reilly Factor, O'Flaherty said this...

The practical effect of Jessica's Law is a chest-thumping, sound-tough-on-crime piece of legislation when, in fact, what ends up happening is prosecutors have their hands tied when it comes to plea bargains and other arrangements.

Later on during the Factor, Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly indicated that O'Flaherty also has ties to elements within the trial lawyer community. Trial lawyers are among the most vociferous opponents of Jessica's Law because it ties their hands in plea negotiations. Whatever the reason for O'Flaherty's opposition, one thing is clear. He is single handedly subverting the will of the legislature of which he is a part of and the state he was elected to serve.

Judge Moses, Jessica's Law, an Updated on Secular Progressivism in Massachusetts

A few months back I wrote this provocative piece on Massachusetts. I pointed out the absurdity of Massachusetts considering an anti spanking law while disregarding Jessica's Law. A reader objected to my characterization. They pointed out that the anti spanking law wasn't going to get anymore than a passing hearing, and they further pointed out that Jessica's Law was on the agenda with a realistic chance of being passed. While I agree that I twisted the reality of the situation of the two laws in my first piece, it is not twisting reality to say that Massachusetts remains one of the few states that hasn't passed Jessica's Law and it won't be passed in that state anytime in the near future.



Meanwhile, the state has become a magnet for what Jessica's Law tries to avoid.





Judge Richard Moses may wind up being the poster child in the fight to bring Jessica's Law to all remaining states that don't have it. Moses has commuted the sentences of three sex offenders who went on to offend again. Here is how it was reported...

Corey Saunders, 26, was arrested Jan. 30 after allegedly assaulting the boy in a second-floor magazine room, police said.

Saunders, who had recently moved to New Bedford, is charged with rape of a child by force, indecent assault and battery on a child under 14. Saunders was convicted in 2001 of child rape and assault and battery on a child.

Last week another so-called "Level 3" sex offender - considered the most likely to re-offend - was arrested for allegedly peeping at a woman under a restroom stall at a retail store in Quincy.David Flavell had been released from a treatment center in February 2006 after Superior Court Judge Richard Moses found he was not sexually dangerous...

and...

Judge Richard Moses did it again. Another Level 3 sex offender he let loose was accused of committing yet another sex crime.

Before the ink was dry on the story, the apologists lined up. "It isn't Judge Moses' fault - he was just following the law." Blah, blah, blah. Not really.

Kenneth Stone had a long rap sheet and he'd been charged or convicted at least four times for sex crimes between 1989 and 1995, already far too many bites at the apple. Moses should have known better no matter what the so-called "experts" said.

A few things have become clear to me since I wrote that piece linking the anti spanking law to Jessica's Law in Massachusetts. Massachusetts has absolutely no intention of passing this anti spanking law, but they currently also have no intention of passing Jessica's Law either. In the meantime, judges all to often in that state show the kind of judgement that makes Jessica's Law necessary. Jessica's Law would put a mandatory 25 year sentence on any sexual assault of a minor under 13. Jessica's Law would take the discretion out of the judge's hands in cases of predators like Sanders, Flavell, and Stone.



It is also clear that Massachusetts is among the most secular progressive states in the union. It is the only one that allows gay marriage. The anti spanking law would take secular progressivism to its most extreme, however there are few if any states that would allow such a bill to get as far as it did in Massachusetts. It is of course no surprise that Massachusetts remains a handful of states where Jessica's Law is still not law.

Here is what one Massachusetts prisoner is asking of Massachusetts.

Now in Massachusetts, this guy, who's murdered his wife. He's in jail forever. Robert Cuselack, 58-years old, wants to be Michelle Cuselack. And he wants to the taxpayers -- there, there's Michelle. To pay for it.

...

Now back to Robert AKA Michele, so far he has cost the taxpayers of Massachusetts over 56,000 dollars in sex therapies {Hormone therapies and laser hair removal

Examples of Massachusetts libertine attitude is everywhere. While some of these other issues have a debateable effect on society, what is clear is that Massachusetts refusal to enact Jessica's Law continues to harm the kids of that state. What is clear since I wrote that piece is that the state has no motivation to pass Jessica's Law and all the while kids are being abused as a result there.

A Massachusetts Law, A Massachusetts Non Law: A Case Study in Secular Progressivism

Jessica Lunsford was a nine-year-old girl who was abducted from her home in Homosassa, Florida on February 23, 2005, then raped and murdered by 47-year-old John Couey. The case sparked controversy and in many ways it created the sort of critical mass necessary for serious and meaningful action against child predators.

In its aftermath, Jessica's Law was created first in her homestate of Florida and then (especially with the backing of her father Mark Lunsford and television bloviator Bill O'Reilly) throughout much of the rest of the country.

Here are the main components of Jessica's Law:

a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years in prison[1] and lifetime
electronic monitoring[2] of adults convicted of lewd or lascivious acts against a victim less than 12 years old. In Florida, sexual battery or rape of a child less than twelveyears old is a capital felony, punishable only by death or life imprisonment with no chance of parole.[3]

Currently, only seven states have no intention of passing any form of Jessica's Law: New Jersey, Hawaii, Wyoming, Colorado, Vermont, Idaho, and Massachusetts.

In fact, Massachusetts' record on child predators is so weak that it is downright scary and dangerous for children.

in June 1999, George Roy was charged with sexual assault of a four-year old girl in Springfield. Roy had been given a two-year suspended sentence with probationin 1991, but never registered as a sex offender, although he had been registeredto vote all the while.

In June 1999, Michael Vick, a Lynn man with a history of convictions for breaking and entering and sex offenses was arrested for molesting a four-month old boy in Revere. A judge had lowered Vick’s bail in an October rape case from $25,000 to $5,000 in February, because the District Attorney did not take the opportunity to show the court that Vick was dangerous. The DA said that he did not want to harm the child victim in a dangerousness hearing, but a court official told Massachusetts News that a judge might have granted the petition even without the testimony of the victim. "An attempt should have been made by the District Attorney," the official said.

In November 1998, Eben Hoyt was arrested for dozens of child rapes while on probation, and while registered as a sex offender. Hoyt, a former Methuen school bus driver, pleaded guilty to molesting an eight-year old in 1996. He plea-bargained to avoid prison and was placed on probation.

In January 1999, a twice-convicted sex offender was arrested for raping a four-year old boy in Northboro.

Last fall, Frederick Wyatt used a 1994 Massachusetts law that allows convicted sex offenders to persuade a jury (rather than a judge) that they are no longer sexually dangerous. Wyatt refused treatment during his fifteen years in the Bridgewater Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous. State officials warned that Wyatt remained a danger and called for stronger criminal penalties and sex offender registration laws. Wyatt moved to Ohio after his release.

This April, Brian Nagle, who had been convicted of sex crimes in 1987 and 1996, and was registered as a level III (most dangerous) sex offender, raped a six-year old boy in Amesbury, was sentenced to life in prison, but will be eligible for parole after fifteen years.

Currently in Massachusetts, the guidelines for sexual assault against a child under thirteen is an absurd three years in prison. That's because, in the absurd view of the secular progressives that run the states, child predators need treatment not punishment.

Now, while the state of Massachusetts seems to be quite lax when it comes to child predators, they are quite gung ho in protecting children from other "abuse": spanking.

Kids out of line? Spanking might not be an option in Massachusetts if a proposal takes hold in the state legislature.

The proposal, submitted by a nurse, would ban corporal punishment, including spanking, in all cases for children under 18 unless it is to save them from danger. Parents would face charges of abuse or neglect, according to The Boston Herald.Click here to read the full report in The Boston Herald.

A hearing and debate is scheduled in the State House on the measure Wednesday, the paper reports.Democratic state Rep. Jay Kaufman introduced the measure onbehalf of the nurse, but isn't taking a position on it...

Here is another view of the proposed law to ban spanking by parents of their children.

Massachusetts lawmakers say a proposed measure that would ban parents from spanking their children, even in their own homes, is a way to protect kids from abuse. But many parents believe it's an example of government run amok.

In all 50 states, parents are legally allowed to spank their children. But in 29 states it's illegal for a teacher to practice corporal punishment, including spanking.

A Massachusetts nurse is hoping to change that and make the state the first in the nation to ban corporal punishment at home."I think it's ironic that domestic violence applies to everyone except the most vulnerable  children," said Kathleen Wolf, who wrote the bill.

I am not necessarily a huge fan of spanking, however it is not only ironic but downright shameful that a state moves quicker to stop parents from deciding for themselves what punishment their kids should have than they do from protecting children from actual child predators.

Such is the absurd and perverse world view of the secular progressives. In their world, all criminals need treatment not punishment. At the same time, parenting decisions are taken away from the parents and controlled rather by the states. In some sense, child predators have more rights than parents.

Make no mistake, this is exactly the culture war that O'Reilly was talking about in his book Culture Warrior. If anyone wants to know just how the world would look if the secular progressives ever got power, they only need to look at the absurd dichotomy of these two areas in Massachusetts.