In 1996, a 19 year old woman was sexually assaulted and killed. Rodney Reed is currently on death row in Texas, having been convicted of the crime. He is scheduled to be executed on November 20th. He has maintained his innocence throughout.
His lawyers with the innocent project have exculpatory evidence to prove Rodney did not commit the murder and more than two million people have signed a petition to delay his execution in order to give Rodney the opportunity to prove his innocence before it is too late. Celebrities such as Kim Kardashian and Beyonce have spoken out against the execution and he has bipartisan support from the Texas legislature for a stay.
So far the Governor of Texas doesn’t seem willing to budge and as the days tick closer to the 20th, Rodney Reed’s life is on the line for what could be a very horrible mistake.
You might be wondering what all this has to do with our cause. Sure, some of us are being sanctioned for something we are innocent of. Some of us had a vindictive ex spouse make false accusations in order to get a significant advantage in a divorce. Some who had no intent of soliciting a minor were entrapped in a police sting. But many of us were guilty of the crimes we were convicted of. What we all have in common, though, is we are all the victims of a mistake. In 2003 the Supreme Court relied on a false statistic, that sex offender recidivism rates are “frightening and high” as the basis for finding the registry is not punitive and we are all living with the consequences of that mistake since.
“Be humble to see your mistakes, courageous to admit them, and wise enough to correct them” – Amine Ayad
We can only imagine what it must be like facing execution and pray that Rodney Reed will be given his opportunity to prove a mistake was made. Just like Rodney Reed, we are all watching valuable time tick by, living a social death, while we await our opportunity to prove the foundation for the sex offender registry is based on a falsehood. We pray that the Governor of Texas and the Justices of the Supreme Court heed the words of Amine Ayad, re-consider the facts based on what we know today and let justice prevail!
Clay County citizens, online it is showing that our Clay County Commissioners meeting begins today at 4 pm with the SO ordinance being brought up at 5 pm or later. It will be live streamed and is also on some TV channel for which I cannot remember the channel number.
I keep remembering Commissioner Rollins’ final statement concerning a possible SO ordinance that he proposed at the Oct. 8 meeting: he just wants to see all “sex offenders” out of our county.
Clay County residents, our proposed ordinance also has a 300-foot buffer zone around schools, daycares (including in homes), parks, playgrounds, and SCHOOL BUS STOPS. A detective with the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office told me that if a church puts up any type of playground equipment, such as a single swingset, then it comes under the definition of a playground. This 300 foot requirement is measured from the outside boundary of the property that contains each of the above places. I checked out 300 feet from Orange Park High School. That is going to wipe out a lot of businesses on Blanding and Kingsley that are across from the high school. The same thing is probably true for Orange Park Mall. Assuming that our mall still has the play area down by Sears, that means any business across from the mall along Blanding and Wells Road that is 300 feet from the outside boundary of the mall. I cannot even imagine what will be eliminated when you include bus stops. What about buses for our alternative school that stop at individual homes for the students–are those homes considered bus stops? We also have buses that stop at individual homes for certain special education students. The problem for northeast Clay County is that we are so congested along Blanding, Kingsley, Wells, and 220 on Fleming Island (if it is part of the unincorporated area), that one of these special categories is going to wipe out a lot of surrounding businesses for us.
But I almost forgot — this is not punishment, so I can relax now.
This ordinance gets worse and worse the more I learn about it. It is really bad and a step backward for Clay County.
Must be stopped. What can we do people??
I am waiting in the Lord on this issue. Patience is so difficult for me. When I see a problem, particularly when it is a gross injustice, I am ready to dive in and “take care” of the problem, but that is not necessarily what God wants me to do. My husband and I discussed this yesterday at visitation, and I am waiting on the doors the Lord leads me through and will accept the doors He closes for me. FAC censors (whom I greatly respect and know why you do what you do), I hope you will allow this one last statement, in addition to my above statements: There are certain doors that God will have to open for me in order to pursue this injustice that might be occurring in Clay County. I am waiting to see if He will open those doors.
Thank you Jacob, Muriel, and JZ.
I am confused about parts of this ordinance:
file:///C:/Users/sarah/AppData/Local/Temp/Sexual_Offenders_and_Predators_Ordinance_11062019_(1).pdf
Our county attorney states on page 1 that “due to the substantial risk to children that recidivism poses..” In my email to our commissioners, I gave them the latest stats from the DOJ on the low recidivism rates for registrants, so where is this substantial risk coming from?
On page 2, Sec. 15-42., it is stated: “The Board of County Commissioners hereby finds and determines that convicted sexual offenders and sexual predators present a threat to the public safety and welfare of children and are likely to repeat their sexual offenses.” Does our county’s legal department no have access to research-based facts?
On page 4, under (c) exceptions, (1), it is stated: “If the residence was established prior to the effective date of this Article, unless the sexual offense or a violation of probation for said offense was committed subsequent thereto.” So does that mean that if a registrant already living in Clay County violates one of their terms of probation, that he/she will be forced to move from their home that was grandfathered in for the county residency restriction? Is there any other county in our state where a registrant, whose offense was long enough ago to be grandfathered in on their county residency restriction ordinance (which would have to be greater than 1000 ft), is on probation, violates probation, and then loses their right to continue to live in their current home, thereby being forced to live under the new residency restriction? If so, is that stated in the county ordinance?
Reading (5) at the bottom of page 5, “An incarcerated individual’s initial registration and re-registrations fees…still apply, and shall be collected.” So our county will be requiring incarcerated people to register while incarcerated and pay fees for their registrations?
Concerning (f) at the bottom of page 5, judges would rule that these fees are administrative and therefore constitutional, but at the Commissioner’s meeting on October 8, 2019, it was stated that the sheriff wants the fees because of the cost to the sheriff’s office dealing with the registration process. Yet here we are also told that the fees will additionally go for crime prevention (so registrants are going to have to help the county stop armed robbers, drug dealers, etc.?), drug abuse education (is it constitutional to require active shooters to help fund drug abuse programs once they have completed all of the requirements of their sentence?), prevention programs (so registrants are going to be used to prevent drug abuse among juveniles, fund neighborhood crime prevention programs?), or other law enforcement purposes (is this a purposefully used phrase to mean absolutely anything our sheriff, who is currently under FDLE investigation, desires for it to be?)
Sorry, but I see that I still cannot get the link to work.
The recidivism language appears borrowed directly from other counties’ ordinances. You are asking exactly the right questions with respect to that and the other provisions you point out. This looks like a horribly-conceived law!
If you or someone in the county have the opportunity to publicly and respectfully voice these objections prior to passage (is it too late?), then that might give them one less argument in the future when the law is challenged in court (ie, “well, nobody raised objections at the time of passage!”)
So saying “nobody raised objections at the time of passage” could be used as a defense in a lawsuit? I believe you, but that is one wimpy excuse.
It looks to me as though their meeting tomorrow night (Nov. 12) is when the ordinance will be brought up, but Muriel, a FAC member, thinks that it was already passed.
I gave them 5 typed pages of why I feel the ordinance is a bad idea. I used the recent DOJ report and the Declaration of R. Karl Hanson to support the findings of very low recidivism rates. Concerning the futility of having residency restrictions, I quoted numerous studies to support that argument. I discussed the need for risk assessment — that not all registrants are the same, so why are we punishing everyone just because of the deeds of a very small number of people. I mentioned that there is no need for the buffer zone because of Florida Statute 856.022.
I encouraged them to go to http://www.casomb.org for the latest findings on registrants. Ronnie (from FAC) sent a link to a brief that was filled in the U. S. Supreme Court with Cook County, Illinois being named as the respondent, containing 18 people (who were mostly law professors), who gave their expert testimony on the futility of residency restrictions. That link was sent to our commissioners, too.
I discussed the lawsuits that are being filed and won against counties passing such punitive ordinances. I noticed our county attorney did include an acknowledgement that parts of the ordinance might be found unconstitutional. I did tell our commissioners that counties often pass these punitive ordinances assuming that because of the difficulty of landing a decent-paying job for registrants (because of being on the punitive registry), that no one will have the money to file a lawsuit challenging these ordinances. I reminded them that it only takes one registrant who has the money , and a lawsuit could be filed. I take the county’s attorney’s statement as acknowledgement that they would lose, at least in part, if a lawsuit is filed.
So with all of that, it has apparently changed the mind of no one. Our chairman said that he wanted to slow things down, but apparently that will not be happening. I really do not know what else I could tell them that would help them see the error of their ways. Only a lawsuit will do that.
FAC, we are going to keep getting county ordinances like this. I had assumed it was far less costly to prevent them from passage, then to let them pass it and sue them later. What else do we need to be doing in such situations, that we have not already been doing? SarahF has already done an amazing job and and is a real asset to the group and to her county.
I feel for Rodney. And understand his frustration.
We have a president who has made several mistakes though not admitted. This would be a good time for him to do the right thing and give this person the chance at a just trial. Isn’t that what he would like. The Kardashian’s have had a personal audience with the president in the past, I’m sure they will be able to relay the message to him and if he feels it’s in his best interests will take action if necessary. He has a lot better chance than any on the registry, after all all he’s accused of is murder, that’s not as bad as doing something to end up on the sor.
Just read this story. https://theintercept.com/2019/11/08/rodney-reed-death-row-texas/
Governor should loose his immunity for it and be investigated.
Northeast Florida residents, Clay County commissioners have their proposed “sex offender” ordinance posted online. I am in a remote area of the panhandle with poor reception and have been unable to copy the link to it. It can be found online for their agenda for their November 12 meeting. Can someone please help me by posting a link to it?
In the ordinance, it states that there is a substantial risk to children that recidivism poses.
In what I can find online, the state statutes say that once voted on and then sent to the state clerk of court, it would be in effect within 10 days — meaning it could all go into effect right after Thanksgiving.
This ordinance would only apply to the unincorporated area of our county.
Thank you guys for all of your help. I do not know what I would do without you.
For Clay County proposed new SO ordinance, SarahF I wish I was better at these things but this is the closest I got and is maybe the wrong place (anyone else?):
https://claycounty.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/MeetingsResponsive.aspx
Residency expanded to 2,000 but not retroactive. Halloween participation very limited.
In more than one place states that numbers and actions for recidivism VERY high.
Establishes an initial $50 registration fee and quarterly/semi annual fee of $25.00. New address fee $10.00. Again lots of caveats to follow.
Simply crazy. Of course approved ,passed without any comment
Clay County Sexual Offender and Sexual Predator Act
https://claycounty.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/Coversheet.aspx?ItemID=5470&MeetingID=1352