Seems like it’s been a busy month for law enforcement and sex offenses. Three stories this week of law enforcement officers charged with sexual crimes… Goes to show….
Cop who ran youth program charged with sex acts with girls
September 29, 2015 14:10 EDT
MIAMI (AP) — A South Florida detective who oversaw a youth police program has been arrested for allegedly engaging in sex acts with young girls.
Florida Department of Law officials had been investigating 47-year-old South Miami Police Detective Joe Mendez following a complaint alleging he had sexual interactions with multiple female cadets.
Mendez was arrested without incident Tuesday and was charged with eight counts of sexual performance by a minor and four counts of selling, giving or serving an alcoholic beverage to a person under 21. He is being held on a $42,000 bond. It’s unclear if he has retained an attorney.
Mendez coordinated the Police Explorer Program for five years for his agency, which teaches youths about crime prevention and allows them to participate in community events (SOURCE)
Trial to begin for South Florida officer charged with rape
September 29, 2015 05:03 EDT
BOYNTON BEACH, Fla. (AP) — A trial is set to begin for a former police officer who is accused of raping a 20-year-old woman last year while on duty.
Local media outlets report that 36-year-old Stephen Maiorino will face trial Tuesday. Maiorino was arrested after a 20-year-old woman said he raped her at gunpoint while on duty. Maiorino faces multiple charges, including two counts of armed sexual battery by a law enforcement officer.
An arrest report says Maiorino offered to give the woman a ride home after a friend she was riding with was arrested for DUI. The woman says Maiorino forced her to perform a sex act on him, then drove her to a secluded area and raped her, threatening to kill her if she told.
Maiorino’s attorneys say the sex was consensual. (SOURCE)
Former Officer of the Year arrested in Homeland Security child porn investigation
Officer Michael Harding was taken into custody Tuesday evening by agents.
Harding was named Fort Pierce Police Officer of the Year in 2011.
Harding joined the Port St. Lucie Police Department in 2012.
According to a graphic criminal complaint obtained by CBS12, the investigation began in July.
An undercover investigator with Homeland Security signed on to Kik Messenger where, according to investigators, the user “desthfromabovee” posted two images of a preteen female engaging in a sex act and exposing herself on a couch.
The undercover investigator said “desthfromabovee” posted more pictures a week later. And in August, the investigator said the user posted in a Kik Messenger chat room a sexually explicit video of a young girl engaged in a sex act, according to the criminal complaint.
Investigators served a summons on the account for “desthfromabovee” in August. The person who set up the account used the name of Mark Powers. Homeland Security then obtained phone records from AT&T. Authorities said the user name, Kik Messenger app, IP address and cell phone service all traced back to Harding.
According to the criminal complaint, Harding accessed the “desthfromabovee” account on Kik 33 times, most often during the early morning hours between midnight and 6 a.m.
Investigators said Harding worked the 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. shift for the Port St. Lucie Police Department, Saturday through Tuesday. Based on the time frames of the posts and his work schedule, investigators believe Harding uploaded some of the pornographic content while in his patrol car.
Investigators searched Harding’s home and found two thumb drive, one stored in a gun case in a closet in the master bedroom. The thumb drive had hundreds of images and videos of children “engaged in sexually explicit conduct,” according to the criminal complaint. A second thumb drive included images of Harding and bondage photos of prepubescent girls.
Harding is currently in federal custody and will face a judge Wednesday morning in federal court. (SOURCE)
I have no words for acts this despicable. How is it that these men passed scrutiny and rose to the positions they did and/or were allowed to get near their targets with no one suspecting a thing? In the case of Harding, particularly, it says much about Homeland Security, which was hastily cobbled together after 9/11 and underwent several permutations, each one more dumb-downed than the last. The FBI, who created a “dictionary of computerspeak” complete with definitions for LOL and BRB, and then had it classified, until they were sued under FOIL, cannot even properly lock down their own sites and prevent breaches, nor can any of the other branches of government. This just speaks to an inherent corruption that seems to exist within Law enforcement and any branch of government. I expected to read something rather middling, as far as criminality goes. I did not expect to have my eyelids scorched off with this evil!
Whoa Viola, why all the outrage? These are your Peeps remember? Once these guys go thru the system and obtain sex offender designation, Don’t you people become one big happy family? Isn’t FAC filing lawsuits all over Florida to let Mr.Harding pass thru “exclusionary zones” without getting his feathers ruffled? I always found it amusing SO groups couldn’t get online fast enough to publish sex crimes committed by police, judges and legislators then scurry over onto another article proclaiming how unfairly treated and abused those with a SO label are subjected to????? Maybe I am just misunderstanding this entire issue, the outrage and eyelids scorched off only comes into play with LE or any branch of Government that are held to higher standard of behavior but doesn’t apply to our sons, daughters, fathers, neighbors or family members, right? Your sentence “””or were allowed to get near their targets with no one suspecting a thing?””” is telling. Seems “Us” simpletons ask that same question about those whose responsibility it is to ensure a safe and secure environment for children and fail to do so, whether they be in LE or not. (Just an observation).
Valerie, we agree with your sentiment that ANY abuse of a child or sexual abuse at all should not be tolerated and deserves harsh punishment. Our mission is to end the cycle of abuse and while we realize nothing anyone can ever do will be able to end it entirely, we favor policies that focus attention on effective measures instead of ones that have been proven not to work.
To that point; our reason for highlighting these officers is to show that the registry gives a false sense of security and, in fact, the ones out there committing crimes are not the people on a list, but include police officers, teachers, coaches and their own family members. In over 9 out of 10 cases the offender will be someone known to the victim and not a stranger on the registry. In 9 out of 10 cases, the offender will be a first time sex offender and not a recidivist from the registry. These are facts from piles of empirical studies, including studies conducted by the government itself.
Statistically, a child has a greater chance of being sexually abused by their uncle than someone on this registry, yet we invest nothing in education and awareness programs that prevent sexual abuse and instead pour tons of time and money into this “registry” and enforcing restrictions that have been proven ineffective.
We are sincerely very appreciative of the opportunity to engage in this discussion with you and happy that we have some common ground; we both are advocating for public safety and preventing sexual abuse. You are clearly a passionate advocate and I hope you appreciate that we are as well.
Hopefully these exchanges can bring forth a better understanding and respect for each other and now that we at least know there’s some common objective, we can focus less on the unproductive and more towards the goal of ending the cycle of abuse.
If I dare to be so bold , let me remind you ever so fervently, I am not the Masses Gail or (whoever is responding to this) and I am no rookie in falling for the sales SO-speak you deliver to others.
“Our mission is to end the cycle of abuse and while we realize nothing anyone can ever do will be able to end it entirely, we favor policies that focus attention on effective measures instead of ones that have been proven not to work……” “proven not to work” is very definitive statement on your part, but doesn’t quite fill me with the confidence to “take that sentence to the bank”. What doesn’t work exactly? The residency restrictions, harsher sentencing, the SOR , or as I suspect “what doesn’t work” is really the fact some people are rather substandard in their morals and ethics and despite whatever society may determine as a punishment or a deterrent, these people will seek out avenues of sexual self gratification even at the expense of their own families and freedoms?
Your second point: “our reason for highlighting these officers is to show that the registry gives a false sense of security and, in fact, the ones out there committing crimes are not the people on a list, but include police officers, teachers, coaches and their own family members”
At this one I just shake my head and want to say “well duh”, just what segments of the population do you think make up the registry? It is comprised of Police officers, teachers, coaches, and family members, those who have demonstrated (often for years, with multiple assaults under their belts) that they are capable to extort an opportunity for their own sexual gratification with persons that the Law (in no uncertain terms) have determined to be a crime. Pretty simple actually. Why your groups attempt to differentiate or minimize the abuse that comes from a stepfather rather than a stranger is mindboggling to me. The bulk of infamiliar abuse where a child is threatened daily by a so called trusted family member/family friend, is to me, far more damaging than most sexual assaults I can envision or even compare too. Yet, your groups use it as a punch line to minimize the crime and lessen the repercussions. That comparison continues to slay me.
and this: “registry gives a false sense of security” . Umm now I am rather familiar with our registry and no where did I read the registry was touting itself as a security feature. I looked high, I looked low and could not find even one byline or disclaimer that advertised itself as a stop gate to sexual violence. Who exactly has made the statement to FAC that they use the registry as a security feature? No one I have ever even in casual conversation has ever said to me ,”Ya know Val, my family is protected from sexual assaults cause we have a registry”?? Let me be clear on my feelings about the registry. The SOR has one very HUGE problem. Not enough people access it and even less do it on a frequent basis. There are no registry fairies that are going to swoop down and envelope families in fairy wings. It is a database, no more or no less to inform the public of those who have been convicted of sexually based crimes. . You inferring in your SO propaganda that it has magical powers that instill a “sense of security” is used only by YOU and other SO groups. You make the mistake of under-estimating the public on that and many other aspects of your advocacy as well.
“” 9 out of 10 cases, the offender will be a first time sex offender and not a recidivist from the registry. These are facts from piles of empirical studies, including studies conducted by the government itself.””
Again do not presume to think you are communicating in the comment section of the newspaper to some one who doesn’t know better. There is an old Southern Saying “Liars can figure, but figures don’t lie” those of you from up north (Gail) need to get familiar with them. I take nothing the DOJ (government) releases to the bank, nothing. It is not only my opinion but others a lot smarter than you and I who readily admit “studies” are usually aligned with whatever government policies the budget will support. Don’t insult me with “studies” contributed by “researchers” and “grant whores” who happen to conclude whatever the present administration wants to promote. For groups as yourself who swear on a daily basis how “corrupt” the system is, you sure don’t have any problem quoting their “offenders are harmless, so we are going to release them into your neighborhood ” genre. Lets agree the registry is cheaper than daily incarceration cost, so your “outrage “pouring tons of money and time into the registry” makes no sense.
Valerie, you should read the legislative intent behind the registry. I refer you to Florida Statutes 775.21(3)(b)(5)(c) in which it says, “The state has a compelling interest in protecting the public from sexual predators” or (d) that says, “in order to protect the public, it is necessary that the sexual predator be registered with the department”
While nobody may have verbally said to you, “Ya know Val, my family is protected from sexual assaults cause we have a registry” – Your legislature has said to you, directly, in writing within the registration statute; that “in order to protect the public” they register people.
The very definition of ‘protect’ is to keep safe from harm or injury. So, actually quite literally the registry is touted as a security tool to make the public safer.
As to your second point; you write that you don’t believe DOJ (government) or other studies – well that’s fine… whose studies do you rely on in your opinion? If figures don’t lie, what figures are you referring to? There’s a wealth of research and data that has come out in recent years and you have free reign to cite as many sources in here as you like.
And finally, we do agree that the registry is cheaper than incarceration, but again, you are going back to punishment. Incarceration is punishment and the registry has nothing to do with punishment. We are not saying registration is a substitute for incarceration, but the registry requirements live on forever, long past when someone is done with the incarcerative or probationary portion of their sentence.
To answer your first point as to what doesn’t work, take residency restrictions as an example of what’s NOT working. Here’s a recent study; (http://www.csom.org/pubs/ATSA%20Residence%20Restrictions.pdf) which concluded “there is no research to
support the effectiveness of residence restrictions in reducing sex offender recidivism.” If you don’t like reading our posts, you can read last month’s New York Times article that states, there is “”Not a single piece of evidence” supporting sex offender residency restrictions.” You can read that here: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/opinion/the-pointless-banishment-of-sex-offenders.html?_r=2
As to your second point; there is no minimizing of crime. All deserve punishment. There should definitely be harsh punishments for anyone who sexually abuses someone, regardless of who that person is and punishments should fit the severity of the crime; for example a 50 year old that abducts and molests a 5 year old deserves a harsher punishment than an 18 year old who had consensual relations with his 15 year old girlfriend. But let me be clear our mission concerns the sex offender registry, not punishment for a crime.
I think you’re confusing the registry element with the punishment element. The registry is not supposed to be punishment – that has been long established.
If you think all Sex Offenders deserve eternal punishment; that’s is a separate issue that’s outside the scope of this discussion. But if you are talking about the effectiveness of the registry, residency restrictions, proximity ordinances, etc. as an effective sex offender management tool, you should refer to the research and studies on our resources page.
“”we invest nothing in education and awareness programs””
Not sure what this “we” stuff is? What “we” do invest in, your pesky SO groups seem to like to show up and PROTEST at. The protest at Lauren Book’s walk in my shoes campaign wont be one any SO group will live down for many years. Florida’s Legislature and those who have the power to turn an offenders world upside down wont forget it either. This protest was so distasteful and derogatory towards victims, that you should make no mistake the “shaking of heads” still happen at cocktail parties. Please, the women at WAR have already confessed their philosophy of educational programs and it is “NOT TO TELL” .
I am not some one you can speak to as if I were a soundbite for a media release. I only responded here to give you the respect you are intent on depriving Floridians out of by informing you that I will do my best to stop FAC’s legal action . If there ever was a common denominator on this issue it sailed the moment Gail aligned with Oncefallen and RSOL.
Valerie – Might I remind you that FAC is not WAR. As far as our position on WAR and the Lauren Book event, you can read what we wrote here:
http://floridaactioncommittee.org/fac-is-not-affiliated-with-rally-in-tally-protest/
If you have any other concerns; we’ll be happy to address them.
Dear Valerie,
Those who feel powerless and are fear-based thinkers toss around threats. Your purely emotional, feat-driven thinking is as transparent as it comes looking in from the outside.
I would not be surprised if many of those “head shakers” you speak of shake their head again once they are out of your soap-box zone, but don’t have the heart or courage to admit it. Truth is, all of them are human and have admitted, if only to themselves, their transgressions. If the population at your dinner parties is an accurate sample of the general population, and we have no reason to believe otherwise, a significant percentage of them qualify as sex offenders, they have simply escaped “justice” thus far.
And then there are the others who thrive on your hate, looking for the next “child protecting” scam to afford the next new shiny toy, or maybe even high-class prostitute (We know this sort of greed accompanies other frowned-upon behaviors). You are their Goose that lays Golden Eggs, and one day they will throw you under the bus looking for the last big payout and to disassociate with a fad that will have gone out of style.
And, finally, surely and sadly, there are quite a few who have adopted the fearful hate thinking like the cancer it is.
First they came for the Registered Sex Offenders, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a [Registered] Sex Offender.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.