Galen Baughman Civil Commitment Trial Begins Monday
The trial of advocate, Galen Baughman, will begin this coming Monday to determine whether he will be civilly committed. Civil commitment is the involuntary detention of an individual beyond the expiration of their sentence. In other words, after a defendant’s criminal sanction is completed, certain states (Florida included) have laws that will allow the government to keep an individual locked up, even though their sentence expired.
The problem with these civil commitment schemes, among many, is that the detention is indefinite and the due process safeguards that would normally apply to a criminal trial, don’t apply to a civil commitment trial. In Florida you can add another major problem; our civil commitment center is run by a private, for profit, entity who makes more money the longer someone stays locked up.
In Galen’s case, his trial is in Virginia and he’s not potentially being civilly committed for a new crime, but for a probation violation on his underlying conviction for which he was serving probation, and that crime took place sixteen years ago.
Many in the advocacy community were angry at Galen because they felt that he, being so outspoken about our cause, turned himself from the poster child of reform to the poster child of recidivism. He should have made better decisions. For those who feel this way, set aside the individual and focus on the process… one that can incarcerate an individual for life, without the protections of a criminal trial, without the ability to present a proper defense and without having convicted an underlying crime. It’s something everyone should be concerned with.
Read more here: In Arlington, a judge must decide if a nonviolent sex offender should stay incarcerated after serving his sentence
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
case was continued
08/26/19 9:00AM Jury Trial 10B 5 Day(s) No Continued Motion Of Plaintiff
to follow:
http://ewsocis1.courts.state.va.us/CJISWeb/CaseDetail.do
My husband of 2 years spent 14 years in the Jimmy Ryce center after serving his prison time .. every time he went for review to be released he was of course denied. He spent half his life incarcerated . This should not be allowed to happen .. double jeopardy that no other offense gets.
Of 25 comments posted to the article, at least 21 are anti-registry, maybe four are on the fence, and not one is pro-registry. As of this writing.
That to me suggests a sea change in public attitudes, compared to 10-15 years ago.
Someone below I think mentioned the more controversial comments by Mary D. Mary does in fact seem to have her facts together, and her comments seem to be anti-Galen specifically (not pro-registry). There is a perception that he undermined his own movement (a perception that FAC addresses nicely in the intro above).
You ended your statement with:
“The Washington Post wrote a good article…”.
This is not true, the “article” which you refer to is actually an opinion piece written jointly by a civil rights lawyer and an author. No journalist, never mind one from the Washington Post was remotely involved in this opinion piece. Please print a correction.
In Arlington, a judge must decide if a nonviolent sex offender should stay incarcerated after serving his sentence
Thanks for pointing it out
The Washington Post published a good article.
It was not an article but an opinion piece. No journalists were reporting anything. Two citizens were expressing their opinions, which of course they have the right to do, this information should be ‘advertised’ properly and not mis-lead people into thinking it was something it was not.
The article was in the opinion section.
And read the comments on the article the Famous Mary D is telling a little bit of a different story what a shame of her comments
Who is Mary D? I am reading your comment that she is someone “known”? Or were you just references her comments?
At the bottom of this post, click on read more. Then at the top of the article that comes up, click on “Sex Panic and the Punitive State”. Go through the comments at the bottom to find Mary Devoy (3 days ago). I think this is the person that is being referred to.
Mary D would be Mary Dayve Devoy, a lady in Virginia who claimed to be against the registry but in reality was promoting the registry for everyone but her own loved one. She finally quit earlier this year after she finally realized that being selfish in this movement wins you no allies.
Mr. Logue, I don’t know where you derived your opinion of Mary Devoy. She is anything but selfish, never promoted the registry and never claimed to be “against” the registry. My opinion comes from hours of reading her research in her now closed blog, from her responding to my emails for direction (never legal) with the lawmakers and me watching her fight in the General Assembly chambers “against” more punitive laws related to the SOR. She acknowledges the need for a registry, just NOT the way it is administered by politicians using false data to do so.
Sir, I just visited your website, OnceFallen. I have seen it before. I compliment you on your work. Here are a few of your words:
“provide useful information to those seeking to reform or abolish the myriad of excessive sex offender laws … visits with legislators, assists registrants in connecting to available resources and support networks, and provides analysis research on sex offender laws FREE of charge.”
She did the same. However, she did not ask and actually refused to accept money from anyone. I tried. She burned 100″s gallons of gas going to not just the G.A., but police seminars re: SOR and addressed lies there.
I am going to stop here. I am for what you are doing. Great resource. I will visit again soon, and may $$$$$ to keep you going. Thanks. But, Sir … you have Mary wrong.
Mary did not have all the same views as other registry activists, and that’s OK.
Yeah, “She acknowledges the need for a registry” is a HUGE problem. There is no need at all. Trivial to prove. So trivial. But who cares, am I right?
Further, anyone who thinks there needs to be a Registry needs to be listed on it. THOSE people are a danger to all Americans. In fact, I’d say that those people are harassing terrorists who cannot mind their own business or leave other families alone. We don’t want them in America.
Only corrupt, criminal regimes have $EX Offender Registries.
Galen was a child himself when all this began. He is paying an extremely exorbitant price for a lapse in judgement. He has continued to do remarkable things for advocacy even while incarcerated and fighting his own battle for freedom. We should all be supporting him 100 percent as he fights this horrible miscarriage of justice. I pray he comes out and becomes, once again, a force to be reckoned with fighting for change for so many caught up in an unjust system.
I agree with Laurie Jones. The law there should be ashamed of what they are doing to people.