Who would push FOR puppy mills? OH… Ron Book would.

That’s what happened when Ron Book took a job as a lobbyist for one of the states largest retailers of pets. While the County of Miami-Dade’s motto has been “adopt, don’t shop” to encourage people to adopt from the county’s shelters, Book (undoubtedly motivated by the six figures his firm gets paid for it) argued FOR the puppy mills and asked the County for a waiver from the conflict of interest, allowing him to keep his six figure income from Miami-Dade even though their position conflicts with Book’s client.

Here’s the kicker…

According to the Miami Herald, yesterday “Miami-Dade commissioners were set to vote on stripping lobbyist Ron Book from his county contract if he didn’t agree to drop a puppy-store chain as a client over the industry’s efforts to block local regulations of pet sales. Book didn’t attend the meeting, and that didn’t matter. When Book’s requested conflict-of-interest waiver came up on the agenda late in the afternoon, Chairman Esteban “Steve” Bovo requested a delay until the prominent lobbyist and two associates could be there in person to defend themselves.”

In case you didn’t say “ah ha” Esteban Bovo is the commissioner who sponsored Ron Book’s amendment to the county ordinance allowing police to arrest homeless sex offenders on site. (Conveniently, ‘the Bovo Amendment’)

Dirty, dirty, dirty!!!

The post More Ron Book Shenanigans appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Dear Members and Advocates,

In 2017, Forbes Magazine featured an opinion piece titled, “The Well-Meaning ‘Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act’ Could Be A Trojan Horse”, which was written by Larry Magid. He began the article by stating, “It’s hard for me to argue about a proposed law called Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act. After all, I’m co-founder and CEO of ConnectSafely.org, an internet safety group, and have been active in child protection organizations for decades. But this proposed law, which has the support of several prominent Republican and Democratic senators, may have some unintended consequences both for tech companies and the very people the bill hopes to protect. “

Larry’s premonition came true a year later, as the legislature passed a new bill that imposed criminal liability on websites for actions/comments/posts from it’s users. In other words, classifieds sites, such as Craigslist could be hit with criminal liability for something one of its users posted. And the example isn’t a hypothetical. Earlier this month, the founder of Backpage.com was indicted on human trafficking charges. For years, people posted ads for sex services in Backpages’ classifieds services and by turning a blind eye to what its members were posting, they were arrested. Willing to take no chances, Craigslist immediately took down its personals section.

Now, nobody is for sex trafficking or would argue that it’s a good thing. But as Magid predicted, the government’s action is showing some immediate collateral consequences for those who the bill hoped to protect. Case in point; last week, a segment on NPR featured several sex workers who were talking about the demise of Craigslist personals and Backpage.com. For them (those who engage in sex work by choice), these internet portals got them off the street corners. Transactions could be handled online instead of out of seedy motels. There was a level of vetting and if something tragic did happen, there was an electronic trail to investigate. Sex workers no longer needed promoters or pimps.

These online sites made it safer for them. Law enforcement also used these sites to investigate actual sex trafficking. If you believe their press releases, the internet was an invaluable tool for them in rescuing trafficked women. That tool has now been taken away from them, making it more difficult to identify actual trafficking victims.

With the same sentiment as Magid alluded to in his article, it’s hard to argue against something that’s titled ‘stop enabling sex trafficking’ but when the laws harm so many more people than they help, you need to speak out. Take, for example; International Megan’s Law. When H.R. 4573 came out, who would argue against a law titled, “The International Megan’s Law to Prevent Demand for Child Sex Trafficking”? But now that we’ve had some experience living with this law, we see that the law is punishing far, far more individuals travelling for completely innocent purposes, than its protecting children being sex trafficked.

Take, for example the two heartbreaking stories we wrote about here. A daughter didn’t have her father at her wedding and the children have STILL not been reunited with their exiled father. What about those children? What about the thousands of individuals who need to travel for business (to support their families) or to visit sick relatives, who were turned away at their destination because the United States sent a warning to the receiving country? Even though only a very small fraction of people (sex offenders and non) might travel for illicit purposes, the overwhelming majority simply want or need to travel for perfectly legitimate purposes. The IML has broken apart families and made it impossible for individuals to attend to sick relatives or share in family celebrations, decades after they were punished for their crimes.

Tacking the word “sex trafficking” onto a bill has proven to be a Trojan horse for lawmakers to trick their colleagues into voting for anything, regardless of how untested, irrational, ineffective or expensive it might be. Dare I call it “good”, but the good thing about the recent prosecution of Backpage and Craigslist are that they are not targeting a disfavored, suppressed group. In 2014 Backpage.com earned $135 million and last year Craigslist took in over $690 million. Online media giants won’t stand for it and they have the resources that we don’t to hopefully fight these laws.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act insulated websites from their member’s posts. In 1996, it was touted as one of the most valuable tools for protecting freedom of expression and innovation on the Internet. That protection is in jeopardy today and its very unlikely online publishers will stand for it. Imagine if every time someone posted something threatening on another’s Facebook page, the FBI arrested Mark Zuckerberg. Or, if the feds would seek to shut down YouTube because some of the videos might be pirated content. It seems incredible, but that’s where we’re heading.

Whether it’s the ‘International Megan’s Law to Prevent Demand for Child Sex Trafficking’ (which became law in 2016),the ‘Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act’ (which became law in 2017) or the ‘Allow  States  and  Victims  to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act’ (which was signed into law this year), as government uses the term “sex trafficking” to pass more laws that throw out the baby with the bath water and create collateral consequences for people engaging in innocent activities, it is our hope that the large whales caught in their nets will fight back, creating some legal precedent to help us all.

Sincerely,

The Florida Action Committee

SOME HEADLINES FROM THIS WEEK

Florida Action Committee Honors Jeanne Baker with Humanitarian Award

This past Friday night, the Florida Action Committee honored attorney and activist, Jeanne Baker, with what will become the first of our annual humanitarian awards. The award will be named in her honor. Jeanne has practiced in the area of civil liberties litigation…

Indiana Supreme Court suggests declaratory judgment a better avenue to challenge collateral consequences.

Although the Indiana Supreme Court ruled against a registered sex offender father trying to attend his son’s school events, they did give him some guidance on how to go about his challenge. Douglas Kirby plead guilty to child solicitation eight years ago and was…

Miami New Times: Miami-Dade Will Close Sex Offender Camp by May 6, Threatens Jail Time for Stragglers

Since 2014, a colony of homeless sex offenders has been rapidly growing by the railroad tracks near Hialeah. Nobody wants them there, including the dozens who call the ramshackle camp home. Everyone, from the Homeless Trust to the ACLU to the county commission, agrees…

Is this a trap? US Marshals Service puts up IML Complaint form.

As part of the International Megan’s Law, the US Marshals Service has been notifying receiving countries when a registrant is traveling. You can imagine how the immigration officials in a country you are traveling to will react when they receive a warning from the US…

The post Legislation aimed at stopping Sex Trafficking contains “Trojan Horse” appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Earlier this week, CNN reported that “103 Uber drivers and 18 Lyft drivers have allegedly raped, forcibly touched or kidnapped passengers, among other crimes”. There are active investigations into the company by the Attorneys General of California, Colorado, Massachusetts and Texas and Uber itself has hired the former US Secretary of Homeland Security as chairman of its Safety Advisory Board.

The companies, which currently use a third party background screening service AND check against national sex offender registries are accused of not doing enough to screen drivers, but what more can they do?

The two ride sharing programs give rides to more than one million people PER DAY! Uber provided 2.4 BILLION rides in the US during the same period that CNN discovered the 103 allegations of sexual assault (and ‘other crimes’) against their drivers.. Do the math… If you can.

If one billion is 1,000 million… your chances of getting sexually assaulted in an Uber are less than getting struck by lightning TWICE in your lifetime (1 in 9 million). Less than winning the Powerball (one in 292 million)! When you consider CDC statistics (https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf) for instances of sexual assualt (1:5 women during their lifetime) in the context of 2.4 billion Uber rides, an Uber might be one of the safest places to be!

Yet, Uber and Lyft are under attack. But what do we know? With them already banning registered sex offenders from driving for them, these sexual assaults are NOT being committed by registrants. We also know that ride sharing is much safer than public transportation. (see: https://nypost.com/2017/10/23/public-transportation-is-a-nightmare-for-women-everywhere/).

The danger of what comes next is concerning. Either legislators will step in to impose laws that will effectively shut down ride sharing programs (ironically in favor of the less-safe public transportation). Or, heightened background checks will be required which will (a) drive up the cost for Uber and Lyft customers, (b) cause rehabilitated individuals who are just trying to earn a living to lose their source of income and (b) still not reduce the instances of offense, since it’s not recidivists who are offending.

Agreed, that one instance of sexual assault is too many, but are we using these statistics to make a mountain out of a mole hill?

The post WIll Uber and Lyft be driving over molehills? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

From http://all4consolaws.org/2018/04/state-department-files-motion-to-dismiss-iml-lawsuit/

The post State Department Files Motion to Dismiss IML Lawsuit appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

This is a very well researched, comprehensive document that is full of useful information (including authorities) that you can cite to when contacting your legislators, the media or anyone you communicate on sex offender issues with.

Thank you Dr. Horowitz for putting this together.

SOR Info Center Fact Sheet April 2018

The post Sex Offense Registry Fact Sheet – April 2018 appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Last week, the 2nd DCA threw out the “unlawful use of a two-way communications device” conviction of a defendant who was also convicted of traveling to meet a minor in 2012, finding that it was part of the same conduct and to be convicted of both would violate Double Jeopardy.

The court’s opinion mentioned that the lower court already recognized that it could not charge him with both traveling to meet a minor and use of a computer to solicit (because of Shelley), but here the Court further prevented the “use of a two-way communications device”.

In lay terms; prosecutors have been tacking on multiple criminal offenses arising from the same course of conduct. Caught in a sting? That’s one crime for online solicitation, one crime for traveling to meet, one crime for use of a two-way communication device, etc… Courts are catching on that if it’s all arising from the same course of conduct it can’t be three separate crimes, otherwise it’s double jeopardy.

If you are facing charges, make sure your attorney is aware of these decisions. If you are currently serving a sentence speak to your attorney (FAC is not a law firm, don’t ask us about your case) to see whether you would be entitled to any post-conviction relief.

The post Registrants in Florida Continue to Find Relief from Double Jeopardy Under Shelley appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

42 year-old Jason Vukovich, targeted and attacked three strangers, beating one man so badly with a hammer that he fractured his skull and knocked him unconscious.All because their names were on the state’s sex offender registry.

“We’re lucky we’re not dealing with a murder charge,” Assistant District Attorney Patrick McKay told the judge. “People do not get to take the law into their own hands just because they don’t like a particular group of people or a particular person.”

Unfortunately that’s what’s happening. deranged individuals who view themselves as “vigilantes” are using the sex offender registry as a hit list. As the Anchorage Daily News reported, “the men Vukovich singled out and attacked were complying with the law. They had gone through the court system, received their sentences and put their names on Alaska’s public sex offender registry, where Vukovich found their addresses.”It was not the purpose of the registry to allow people to do their own brand of justice,” the Judge told Vukovich. “The purpose of the registry was to keep the community safe.”

Sex Offender Registries Do Not Work

As more of these instances occur, we are realizing the registry does anything but that. It’s failing to keep the families of registrants safe.

The post AK: Man who attacked sex offenders sentenced to 23 years appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

Although the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that States cannot restrict a registered sex offender’s access to social media (Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. ___ (2017)), nothing has stopped social media companies, such as Facebook, from restricting sex offenders from their platforms. A lawsuit filed last week may change that!

Jared Taylor is the founder of the Virginia-based New Century Foundation – a white supremacist organization that was banned from Twitter because of new rules aimed at reducing abusive content. Although we don’t agree with the viewpoints of the Plaintiff, this lawsuit is certainly one in which we hope the Plaintiff prevails.

Taylor is suing California-based Twitter in California Superior Court, alleging that Twitter’s policy of banning him and his organization from their social media platform is unconstitutional and violates Twitter’s own founding principle; to “[g]ive everyone the power to create and share ideas instantly, without barriers.”

The issue in the suit is, “whether Twitter can arbitrarily and discriminatorily ban a speaker from its platform due to nothing more than the controversial nature of the speaker’s viewpoint, political beliefs, and perceived political affiliations.” The issue is very similar to Facebook’s practice of deleting the profiles of registered sex offenders and their policy of banning sex offenders (and their opinions) from it’s platform.

Facebook discriminating against sex offenders?

The suit does not question these social media platform’s rights to block hateful, offensive, abusive, obscene or speech intended to incite. It question’s it’s right to arbitrarily deprive anyone they “don’t like” to speak on it’s “town square”. For a long time we’ve considered a challenge against Facebook’s Terms of Service which ban anyone who is a “registered sex offenders” from their platform. We’ve never moved forward because, candidly, we didn’t think we had the financial resources to go up against one  of the top 10 tech companies in the US. This suit may give us some hope!

You can read the complaint below:

Taylor-v-Twitter-Complaint

The post New lawsuit may provide access to social media. appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

We have received several emails from members advising us that they have received a letter from a law firm in Texas, Estes-Hightower, PLLC stating they “received their contact information” from the state’s Public Safety Sex Offender Registry” and to contact them to see whether they are eligible for “early removal from the Sex Offender Registry”.

Be VERY cautious about these opportunists who market service to registrants.

***UPDATE – THIS FIRM IS SOLICITING A $5000 RETAINER FROM REGISTRANTS, A COPY OF THE “RETAINER AGREEMENT” WAS SHARED WITH US, THE AGREEMENT DOES NOT OFFER ANY SCOPE OF LEGAL SERVICES AND IS GOVERNED BY TEXAS LAW.

The post Warning: Texas law firm solicits registrants in Florida appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

The Florida Action Committee will be circulating the following letter to all legislators in our State concerning the “Vacation Rental” bill that would impose ridiculous requirements on both registrants and owners of vacation rental properties.

The bill is the result of “knee-jerk” legislation that is proposed without any planning or forethought. In practice, it is impossible to comply with and imposes a significant burden on individuals, with the effect of banning registrants from vacation rentals.

Proposed Law Burdens Vacation Property Owners

Letter To LaRosa re Vacation Rentals 02262018

The post FAC questions Vacation Rental Bill appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).