Dear legislators, in reviewing the framework of your legislation in HB 1133 - 2007-08, Monitoring sex offenders. I was concerned that there appeared to be no oversight and allotment of any real-world cost analysis to public safety benefit in the report slated for delivery on or around December 31, 2007.
It appears, and what I see lacking, are no controls for oversight or identification of a benefit analysis to align the proposition that the dollars earmarked for this legislation is to enhance public safety and should be reconciled against a zero tolerance towards sex offender and recidivism in the community?
Providing the goal is not simply to implement technology on sex offenders, because it is feasible to do so, there could be no other resultant affect of any monitoring tool? The fact remains to date, no country has dealt with such a panacea as we see today regarding sex offenders. American public opinion is devoted not only financially but emotionally, to pay the costs to assure known sex offender criminalised are either incarcerated, kept on a short leech, or driven out of almost every community that elects to do so.
The concept of zero tolerance, in today's wake of legislation, is not only pushing the brink of sentencing, post conviction requirements, but as well broadening the ability for prosecutors to prosecute. In this vain, I entertain, that if this is the goal then a more comprehensive plan must be devised, than ad-hoc emotionally charged disparate legislation. Which often needs retooling, whenever a new unacceptable crime is committed. Thus curtailing problematic and costly revisions of old ideas yet again not working.
To move away from being recognized a few years from now as just another 'feel good' sex-offender law against the most-despised it is imperative to sit and retrace how and where the laws of come to date, and evaluate what, if any have we learned.
When we review these laws it must be openly evaluated as to the change and the empirical data as towards the tools enhancement of public safety. The benefits of each tools cost-effectiveness. The tools ability to deliver or change recidivism of sex offenders. And a cost analysis of program effectiveness to public benefit, perceived or not. There is no question that perception often out weighs actual relevance. But, in this case, it becomes the duty of the government to assure that perceived panacea, is in fact reality.
Today there appear to be many gaps in how the current system can benefit from electronic monitoring. Being a sex offender, regardless of how I got here, I can say the current identification process is week at its very foundation. The creation of the PSI (pre-sentence investigation inventory). Here the DOC interjects it first subject analysis of an offender. (It is important to note, although a defendant can object to the material within the PSI, if is very often allowed to be maintained as-is and as factual throughout an offenders DOC life span).
Currently, with this type of structure, the down-stream reports are compounded by an opion never mitigated or corrected by the current system. For example, in my PSI my attorney objected to it in its entirety, the judge accepted the objection, and ruled on my sentence without its use. But, for every report thereafter, made my the DOC the objected to report was used by the DOC.
If we were to conitue with this type of maligned procedural characterization of offenders, adding onto it a tool that electronically monitors offedners, becomes superficial, for the electronic monitoring tools functionality, although in isolation has value, will only have the ability to enhance public safety when it is worn by a correctly identified wearer.
The concern is not only in the effectiveness of monitoring and the benefit perceived or not. But is the current system capable enough to even properly identify a potentially at risk to reoffend sex offender? The answer is in the facts. No. In the current system the DOC controls all upstream reports which the local police department accepts as the representative profile of an offender. The PSI, LSI, CHI, RMA currently are developed through DOC administrators who have a limited amount of investigative police, therapeutic, and social service tool sets, and a magnitude of responsibility for reporting valid opinions that can later be used singuarily to represent a sex offenders risk in the community.
Although on it its face this lends to a high degree of capriciousness, in laying out the activity seen in the trenches, it is the departments best practice. In allowing these administrative type officials to make critical, potentially life saving decisions, as limited experienced evaluators is connecting the dots to liability, which are resulting in inconsistent metrics of measurement and a classifications scheme that relies more on subjectivity than objectivity, and dtractions from community safety.
The fact remains that any identification system that relies on subjective questioning and answering will always lend itself to skewed results. Even in the most conscientious examinees. Thus, when devoting a program utilizing any subsystem tool, such as electronic monitoring, it too will become prone to its antecedents failures.
This issue is concerning, as if not recognized and given its greater worth, will divert much needed resources, opposed to funneling it towards the greatest perception of need. I advocate carefulness in your reporting and I entertain the need of a comprehensive value-add proposition which puts the problem directly in hand and enhances a system that accumulates to safety to the community, and lives.
Peace.
Showing posts with label washington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label washington. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Saturday, September 15, 2007
.. [ day thirty-one ] .. N I haven't been hit by a truck, sorry DOC!
So, today walking from thrift store to thrift store, I stumbled across a women selling her wares, and I have come to a horrible politically incorrect thought: "I am over 'let's do it for the children.'"
Yesterday, I walked into a second hand store. The lady owner started telling me the advantages of buying stuff from her store. "..for the children, we provide money from the store to local youth groups in the community."
"Well, I am glad to hear of your socially conscious," I say allowing my mind to run with it, "but, what about the adults? Am I hearing we shouldn't care about adults anymore?", yikes Mr. Homelessness!
The vendor looked at me with a smile. "Well that would be an AMEN."
Hm ... the store is in a very quaint part of Seattle called Queen Anne, it is a socially conscious community, that sits on one edge of the 1962's Worlds Fair Space Needle. This neighbourhood is soon to become a more thriving metropolis with Bill Gates building 100.000's of square-feet of space devoted to his philanthropic foundation. It currently is the home for middle income to lower high income housing, that has a high density of professional types. The area appears to have never been gentrified, since many of the high end grocery stores that reside there appear to have been there for well over 20 plus years.
I hate it there. Have always. Why, because I find it pretentious. I like raw reality, pre gentriefied communities. I like to be part of the muck, the rawness is exhilarating. More importantly, it is exciting to be at the onset of an awareness. Whether art, music, social, or just new. Like what the deep Eluum street used to be in Dallas, prior to the completion of its gentrification, it was a vibrant exhilarating area that brought to it amazing festivals and raw creativity that to me, became my Bauhaus, Da-Da experience.
But, that isn't the only reason, why Queen Anne has always made me uncomfortable, although, I used to love running up the steep Queen Anne hill to the Queen Anne Pool to swim with the masters program, I felt that the area had too many closeted deep rooted bigoted emotions.
While being now restricted from more comfortable settings, sitting at a cafe in the middle of this area writing, this BLOGS early entries, I overheard a conversation that affirmed my uncomfortableness of the neighbourhood.
A stoutly Theodore Roosevelt, but Jewish in appearance, man was having a nice-day-outside-the-office with his small petite Japanese secretary typing feverishly on her laptop. I witnessed, passer-bys after passer-bys stop, shaking his hand and having small chit chats that, more often than not, would joust the man in front of me with laughter and confidence.
Bored, and nosey. My attempts to eves drop was requiring me to have to move over several tables. I over came my yearn for human interaction and social discussion. I also realized that I must have been staring too often, as more than once I noticed his eyes caught mine. He revealed in his popularity that day, and I sat introspectively thinking of how I used to love to come to cafe's, mine own in particular, and do my work.
While moving my concentration to to my entry, I noticed an uncharateriztic silence of the crowd, that woke me back up to the jovial jaunt of this man mocking sex offenders to one of his passer-bys: "Oh yes there has been a committee formed to deal with sex offenders, can you imagine ..."
Quickly, I stared at him, he got my message. 'I am considered a sex offender sir, do you have something to say to my face?'
Remember that cartoon in the 50's that was always in the back of 'Richie Rich Magazines'? The one where the big hunky swimmer on the beach kicks sand in the face of the skinny young man dreaming he could was strong and beautiful enough to get the girl?
I do.
Yesterday, I walked into a second hand store. The lady owner started telling me the advantages of buying stuff from her store. "..for the children, we provide money from the store to local youth groups in the community."
"Well, I am glad to hear of your socially conscious," I say allowing my mind to run with it, "but, what about the adults? Am I hearing we shouldn't care about adults anymore?", yikes Mr. Homelessness!
The vendor looked at me with a smile. "Well that would be an AMEN."
Hm ... the store is in a very quaint part of Seattle called Queen Anne, it is a socially conscious community, that sits on one edge of the 1962's Worlds Fair Space Needle. This neighbourhood is soon to become a more thriving metropolis with Bill Gates building 100.000's of square-feet of space devoted to his philanthropic foundation. It currently is the home for middle income to lower high income housing, that has a high density of professional types. The area appears to have never been gentrified, since many of the high end grocery stores that reside there appear to have been there for well over 20 plus years.
I hate it there. Have always. Why, because I find it pretentious. I like raw reality, pre gentriefied communities. I like to be part of the muck, the rawness is exhilarating. More importantly, it is exciting to be at the onset of an awareness. Whether art, music, social, or just new. Like what the deep Eluum street used to be in Dallas, prior to the completion of its gentrification, it was a vibrant exhilarating area that brought to it amazing festivals and raw creativity that to me, became my Bauhaus, Da-Da experience.
But, that isn't the only reason, why Queen Anne has always made me uncomfortable, although, I used to love running up the steep Queen Anne hill to the Queen Anne Pool to swim with the masters program, I felt that the area had too many closeted deep rooted bigoted emotions.
While being now restricted from more comfortable settings, sitting at a cafe in the middle of this area writing, this BLOGS early entries, I overheard a conversation that affirmed my uncomfortableness of the neighbourhood.
A stoutly Theodore Roosevelt, but Jewish in appearance, man was having a nice-day-outside-the-office with his small petite Japanese secretary typing feverishly on her laptop. I witnessed, passer-bys after passer-bys stop, shaking his hand and having small chit chats that, more often than not, would joust the man in front of me with laughter and confidence.
Bored, and nosey. My attempts to eves drop was requiring me to have to move over several tables. I over came my yearn for human interaction and social discussion. I also realized that I must have been staring too often, as more than once I noticed his eyes caught mine. He revealed in his popularity that day, and I sat introspectively thinking of how I used to love to come to cafe's, mine own in particular, and do my work.
While moving my concentration to to my entry, I noticed an uncharateriztic silence of the crowd, that woke me back up to the jovial jaunt of this man mocking sex offenders to one of his passer-bys: "Oh yes there has been a committee formed to deal with sex offenders, can you imagine ..."
Quickly, I stared at him, he got my message. 'I am considered a sex offender sir, do you have something to say to my face?'
Remember that cartoon in the 50's that was always in the back of 'Richie Rich Magazines'? The one where the big hunky swimmer on the beach kicks sand in the face of the skinny young man dreaming he could was strong and beautiful enough to get the girl?
I do.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
.. [ day twenty-six ] ..
Today I got a letter in the mail, it said:
'Mr. Homelessness, ..., was tried and convicted of rape of child in the third degree and communicating with a minor for immoral purposes based on his sexual relationship with a young teenage boy. Mr. Homelessness now files this personal restraint challenging his convictions under King County ... on a number of different grounds.
.
Accordingly, the petition should be transferred to the Washington Supreme court for review and consideration....'
Is there justice? Well, this is what I personally feel. The first statement curdles my skin! Give it up folks. This young man was raped by the lover of the states witness who pointed at me to protect his lover, then the state did the same to protect this conviction.
Enough now.
Now that we are potentially moving into a phase where the Supreme Court, may elect to hear or not hear my arguments; that the prosecutor in this case, had no legal ground to demonize a gay recanter, anymore than she does to impeach a heterosexual female one (rape shield laws).
This case has the smell of a tragic one; where the prosecutor in her own zeal, not only created many new victims, but by protecting the very people who raped this young man, she empowered them to keep control of a young mans psychological life and ruin another's.
When America government was founded it built into it strict protections against, Star Chamber, type of governmental persecution.
I interject two feelings of thought here: First a statement made by a women activist in an article I read over a year ago, a concept I was formulating in my head while tracking the history of sex crimes legislation in Washington, the article titled "Impact of false rape complaints Jonathon Harper [published in The Press Saturday February 4, 2006.], quotes:
'Back in 1996, a writer in Feminist Review, Camille Guy, criticized the feminist movement for becoming ‘chauvinistic’' to the extent that criticism was not countenanced of the violent and notorious abduction of playwright Mervyn Thompson, “Feminist reframing of sexual abuse has served to bring the abuse problem into the open,'' Guy wrote. “But it has also contributed to false allegations and over-zealous interventions which have destroyed lives just as cruelly as has abuse. It is time we opened our eyes to that.''
Second, the reasons we give prosecutors such great power and discretion is that we expect them to be above the law, not just kind-of-above it but greatly above it, and surely never ever below it!
Besides that, Calvin Cline's new line is amazing, the colors make me cry ...
Peace.
'Mr. Homelessness, ..., was tried and convicted of rape of child in the third degree and communicating with a minor for immoral purposes based on his sexual relationship with a young teenage boy. Mr. Homelessness now files this personal restraint challenging his convictions under King County ... on a number of different grounds.
.
Accordingly, the petition should be transferred to the Washington Supreme court for review and consideration....'
Is there justice? Well, this is what I personally feel. The first statement curdles my skin! Give it up folks. This young man was raped by the lover of the states witness who pointed at me to protect his lover, then the state did the same to protect this conviction.
Enough now.
Now that we are potentially moving into a phase where the Supreme Court, may elect to hear or not hear my arguments; that the prosecutor in this case, had no legal ground to demonize a gay recanter, anymore than she does to impeach a heterosexual female one (rape shield laws).
This case has the smell of a tragic one; where the prosecutor in her own zeal, not only created many new victims, but by protecting the very people who raped this young man, she empowered them to keep control of a young mans psychological life and ruin another's.
When America government was founded it built into it strict protections against, Star Chamber, type of governmental persecution.
I interject two feelings of thought here: First a statement made by a women activist in an article I read over a year ago, a concept I was formulating in my head while tracking the history of sex crimes legislation in Washington, the article titled "Impact of false rape complaints Jonathon Harper [published in The Press Saturday February 4, 2006.], quotes:
'Back in 1996, a writer in Feminist Review, Camille Guy, criticized the feminist movement for becoming ‘chauvinistic’' to the extent that criticism was not countenanced of the violent and notorious abduction of playwright Mervyn Thompson, “Feminist reframing of sexual abuse has served to bring the abuse problem into the open,'' Guy wrote. “But it has also contributed to false allegations and over-zealous interventions which have destroyed lives just as cruelly as has abuse. It is time we opened our eyes to that.''
Second, the reasons we give prosecutors such great power and discretion is that we expect them to be above the law, not just kind-of-above it but greatly above it, and surely never ever below it!
Besides that, Calvin Cline's new line is amazing, the colors make me cry ...
Peace.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
..[ day one ].. letter is to direct you to not e-mail any DOC personnel
"So your a quasi-whistle blower type?", a preacher type told me last night at my new UGM home. "Yeah, it sounds like they are punishing you."
Technically speaking, this is the beginning of day 2, since it is past noon, but it feels like day one. Maybe that is how it feels when you are homeless, everyday turns into one long nightmare.
Today, I received my final email from my CCO. I had to report to the DOC office at 8:30 am downtown. I guess I have to sign another new DOC imposed "directive." I can not imagine that anyone has more of these than I do!!!
This one states:
"Michael, This letter is to direct you to not e-mail any DOC personnel. We do not accept service of paperwork via e-mail. If you have any concerns or issues to discuss, please do so with me in person or over the phone. As you are aware, you are free to use the grievance procedures at any time to contact my supervisor via a letter or the phone to discuss issues you feel you can not resolve with me. Sincerely, ..."
So when I went to sign the letter with my usual M signature, which I use for these types of DOC documents, along with me usual tailored objection statement, the CCO took the document and told someone to come over and witness that I was refusing to sign the document. Wait – wait – I really want to sign it.
Once again I am glad to be assured that the DOC no longer has to comply with the CR (court rules) when being delivered legal documents via email as per CR 5 (b) (7) Service by other means: [ELECTRONIC MAIL]. I guess I didn't get that memo (email):
“(7) Service by Other Means. Service under this rule may be made by delivering a copy by any other means, including facsimile or electronic means, consented to in writing by the person served. Service by facsimile or electronic means is complete on transmission when made prior to 5:00 p.m. on a judicial day. Service made on a Saturday, Sunday, holiday or after 5:00 p.m. on any other day shall be deemed complete at 9:00 a.m. On the first judicial day thereafter; Service by other consented means is complete when the person making service delivers the copy to the agency designated to make delivery. Service under this subsection is not effective if the party making service learns that the attempted service did not reach the person to be served.”
And the part that I can use the grievance program. Yep guess what – you can not use the grievance program to grieve conditions set by you CCO.
So the real issue here is not that I have grieved them, or have complained too much, the real problem is that I have been elevating issues, that no one wants to address. "So your a quasi-whistle blower type?, a preacher type told me last night at my new UGM home. Yeah, it sounds like they are punishing you."
"Everyone agrees SO are maggots, right? And isn't it confirmed that what whatever we do to the most despised, has no moral, or ethical value? Society is on our side - who cares about these scum."
"Besides, isn't it just a matter of time that that Island will be built and we can forget they exist!"
"So shut this SO up ... now!"
But, you know I respect the fact I have conditions to follow - but "Helllooooo" (in Jerry Lewis fashion) ... [ a childhood hero ].
I also got a brand new DOC certified Homeless Offender Verification Form, I particularly like the stuff that says:
"A condition of this individuals judgment and sentence is that he reside at a DOC approved place of residence. Since this individual lacks financial or community resources he/she has been required to reside at a shelter or place of residence supplied on a per night basis; this requirement has been imposed for community safety reasons. Please, provide contact information for safety verification,..”
But wait .. if you never verify an address, of the many I have submitted, if I have money, if I have community resources but you will not allow me go there, even temporarily so I wont be homeless ... wait isn't this what this BLOG is about anyways .. why repeat myself?
STAR CHAMBER anyone? Or should I just accept I am frustrated that this kind of stuff goes undetected so widely.
Peace.
Technically speaking, this is the beginning of day 2, since it is past noon, but it feels like day one. Maybe that is how it feels when you are homeless, everyday turns into one long nightmare.
Today, I received my final email from my CCO. I had to report to the DOC office at 8:30 am downtown. I guess I have to sign another new DOC imposed "directive." I can not imagine that anyone has more of these than I do!!!
This one states:
"Michael, This letter is to direct you to not e-mail any DOC personnel. We do not accept service of paperwork via e-mail. If you have any concerns or issues to discuss, please do so with me in person or over the phone. As you are aware, you are free to use the grievance procedures at any time to contact my supervisor via a letter or the phone to discuss issues you feel you can not resolve with me. Sincerely, ..."
So when I went to sign the letter with my usual M signature, which I use for these types of DOC documents, along with me usual tailored objection statement, the CCO took the document and told someone to come over and witness that I was refusing to sign the document. Wait – wait – I really want to sign it.
Once again I am glad to be assured that the DOC no longer has to comply with the CR (court rules) when being delivered legal documents via email as per CR 5 (b) (7) Service by other means: [ELECTRONIC MAIL]. I guess I didn't get that memo (email):
“(7) Service by Other Means. Service under this rule may be made by delivering a copy by any other means, including facsimile or electronic means, consented to in writing by the person served. Service by facsimile or electronic means is complete on transmission when made prior to 5:00 p.m. on a judicial day. Service made on a Saturday, Sunday, holiday or after 5:00 p.m. on any other day shall be deemed complete at 9:00 a.m. On the first judicial day thereafter; Service by other consented means is complete when the person making service delivers the copy to the agency designated to make delivery. Service under this subsection is not effective if the party making service learns that the attempted service did not reach the person to be served.”
And the part that I can use the grievance program. Yep guess what – you can not use the grievance program to grieve conditions set by you CCO.
So the real issue here is not that I have grieved them, or have complained too much, the real problem is that I have been elevating issues, that no one wants to address. "So your a quasi-whistle blower type?, a preacher type told me last night at my new UGM home. Yeah, it sounds like they are punishing you."
"Everyone agrees SO are maggots, right? And isn't it confirmed that what whatever we do to the most despised, has no moral, or ethical value? Society is on our side - who cares about these scum."
"Besides, isn't it just a matter of time that that Island will be built and we can forget they exist!"
"So shut this SO up ... now!"
But, you know I respect the fact I have conditions to follow - but "Helllooooo" (in Jerry Lewis fashion) ... [ a childhood hero ].
I also got a brand new DOC certified Homeless Offender Verification Form, I particularly like the stuff that says:
"A condition of this individuals judgment and sentence is that he reside at a DOC approved place of residence. Since this individual lacks financial or community resources he/she has been required to reside at a shelter or place of residence supplied on a per night basis; this requirement has been imposed for community safety reasons. Please, provide contact information for safety verification,..”
But wait .. if you never verify an address, of the many I have submitted, if I have money, if I have community resources but you will not allow me go there, even temporarily so I wont be homeless ... wait isn't this what this BLOG is about anyways .. why repeat myself?
STAR CHAMBER anyone? Or should I just accept I am frustrated that this kind of stuff goes undetected so widely.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
