Sex Offenders In Covina
I wanted to make all of you aware that not all registered sex offenders are listed on the Megans Law Website. My neighbor is a registered sex offender that was listed on the Megans Law Site when it first came out. A few months later I noticed his name and picture were no longer listed. I contacted Covina PD regarding the incident and they said the offender could have his name removed if he committed certain sex crimes....the act my neighbor was guilty of was 288(a)(c) PC, oral copulation by force on person under 14. A person who committed a crime that serious should not be allowed to hide his face from public view. I'm sure he is not the only person in Covina that was able to have his name removed. This law needs to be changed by our legislature in Sacramento so that people like that can't hide anymore. We all need to be aware of them for the safety of our children and families. We need to figure out a way to lobby our legislature together, the more people we can get behind us the more power we will have. Sex offenders are a hot topic in politics right now and that could play in our favor. Why should they have more rights then you and I.
Posted by Honeybee  on 07/12/05
Responses: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Post Reply 
|
- Re: Sex Offenders In Covina
Good afternoon...I believe that you and I met during the council campaign and spoke about this issue. I would like to link back up to talk more about this and how we might present this issue to our assembly and senate representatives for Covina. It seems like there is a terrible loop hole in the law that allows your neighbor to essentially hide when others who are just as guilty but committed less egrigious acts in the eyes of the law are being made known to us.
If you wouldn't mind leaving me a message at City Hall, 626/858-7212, I would like to call and discuss this. Unfortunately, it appears that our police are not able to force notification on this individual as he is hidden under the cover of the law. I am frustrated by this and would be very interested in trying to do what we can to change it... Thanks again...JCK
Posted by JCKing a 43 year old on 07/13/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Sex Offenders In Covina
Here's one very strong supporter, Honeybee, and I expect there will be many.
The section in the law that allows this is...
OK, hold the phone…
Having read through a LENGTHY & TEDIOUS California code section and found no such exclusion possible for that charge,
I think you may have another option.
Go to http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/pdf/application.pdf and read the first page of the application to waive internet address disclosure.
The conviction you noted is NOT excluded from internet disclosure.
Call Detective Barraco immediately. Give him your neighbor’s name and the information you kept from your original download from the website, when you first found him there. This has to have been a negligent oversight on the part of authorities responsible for screening the waiver applications. I don’t see a loophole.
The legislation does not allow those convicted of that crime to be excluded.
From the Megan’s Law Database:
Registrants whose only registrable sex offenses are for the following offenses may apply for exclusion: (1) sexual battery by restraint (Penal Code § 243.4, subd. (a)); (2) misdemeanor child molestation (Penal Code § 647.6, or former section 647a); or (3) lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14 (Penal Code section 288) or continuous sexual abuse of a child (Penal Code § 288.5), but only if the person convicted of section 288 or 288.5 successfully completed probation that was granted pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.066, subdivision (c).
The issue is protecting children and the rest of us from being hurt by people
who've been convicted of hurting other people.
I'm concerned too, about inadequate prioritization of enforcement resources on tracking down those offenders who do not register at all.
There are a lot of red checks on that database, which means those people are out of compliance and have not registered as ordered.
I would like to know more about those radio tracking devices that some other states & counties(?) require freed sex offenders to wear.
Police & sherriffs are then actually able to monitor these people's movements.
What about radio tracking implants...sort of a subcutaneous sex-perp LoJack...
installed perhaps at that place in the upper middle back thatcha can’t scratch easily, to deter it’s removal by the offender?
While I find it very creepy, women can be forced to use Norplant (birth control implants) under certain circumstances (such as chronic drug abuse in concert with chronic pregnancy), surely there’s an at least equivalent parallel benefit.
Some other thoughts on possible local legislation:
California law restricts sex offenders from living within ¼ mile (1320’) of a school and permits local authorities to enact stricter ordinances. Some communities do and there are a number of interesting approaches being taken around the country.
Miami Beach (an 7 ½ mile long island, by the way, median age 39) has just enacted a 2,500-foot buffer zone around schools, school bus stops, day care centers, parks and playgrounds. It effectively bans registered sex offenders from living anywhere in the city, making it one of the most restrictive sex offender policies in the nation.
The city of Miami followed suit.
Undoubtedly, challenges to the constitutionality of those laws will follow.
On the other hand, the free movement of people & goods is not restricted. They just can’t move in, which creates an incentive for them to keep moving…which could be problematic too.
Now.
Covina doesn’t (yet?) have any specific ordinance addressing the situation.
It is indeed possible to regulate them more strictly, locally.
For comparison, the zoning approach to mitigating businesses that legally cater to the adult consumer:
Covina’s Zoning law provides
That
Adult-Oriented Businesses
Need conditional use permits which require public hearings
May only occupy the M1 Light Manufacturing Zone, and then only with a conditional use permit.
May be no closer to each other than 500', nor than a 500’ radius from the primary entrance of the business to any property line of any park, church, school, or existing residential zone or use.
And That
Liquor Stores & Bars
Need Conditional Use Permit=Public Hearings
On-Sale (Bars with no food service)
o May only occupy certain zones
o And only if 700' away, from property line to any property line of any sensitive uses, including places of worship, schools, parks, playgrounds, and residential;
o And only if 700’ away from a similar On-Sale use.
Off-Sale (Take-out liquor)
o May only occupy certain zones,
o and only if 700’ (as a pedestrian travels) from the same sensitive uses as above
o and only if 700’ from other existing off-sale liquor outlets.
Now given, these are business uses, but if a legally operating adult-oriented or liquor –related land use can be regulated by zoning, what about using zoning in the same way, to regulate distances between the homes of individual sex offenders, and between them and other sensitive uses,?
In a parallel universe, you’ve also got a lot of local legislation underway
attempting to fathom the appropriate zoning for legally operated (by state law, anyway) medicinal cannabis providers,
another land use that is somewhat controversial when considered next to youth-related land uses.
(I don’t know if anyone is too concerned about other prescription drug providers though, judging by the number of pharmacies popping up on every corner.)
While any one of the uses just mentioned might merit a separate thread,
I want to be very clear that I present them only as fodder for debate on the potential for regulating sex offenders' land use with legislation.
I've organized a community workshop that takes a wide angle on this topic.
With strong support from Covina PD and possibly another special guest,
I aim to inform and engage those who would like to learn more about this issue,
in an open, comfortable, and non-threatening environment.
We've got a great place for the first edition.
I'll post the formal announcement here when we firm up the kickoff date.
It looks like it may be by the end of the month, so do stay tuned.
I have some other thoughts on possible local (and broader) legislation,
but already this is another book, as George calls ‘em.
I’d like to see what some others have to throw down first.
Posted by Duff a 38 year old from Covina on 07/20/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Child Sex Offenders In Covina
I can appreciate the concern that names of sex offenders may not be available to the public. However, the exclusion rules are one way to eliminate discrimination between recidivists and individuals who were convicted one time. This is important because the age of the child does not change, but the photograph of the perpetrator does. It gives an unknowing observer the impression that an aged person committed a sexual act with a child when, in fact, the act may have been committed years or even decades prior, when the perpetrator also was very young.
I personally know someone who is on the website, and I would like to see his name, face, and address removed because the stigma of sexual crimes is such that I believe there is a greater threat to his safety and privacy than he poses to the community. Thus, I believe that the listing of all registered offenders is unneccesary and that the law allowing exclusion is fair and essential. The people who deserve a chance to start over without being listed are subject to approval. The criteria for removal ensures that each case is reviewed. Surely if you trust the justice system to punish, you should trust the system to discontinue punishment and/or exposure when it is no longer no longer required.
Posted by Fishiiis a 38 year old on 08/16/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Child Sex Offenders In Covina
I can appreciate the concern that names of sex offenders may not be available to the public. However, the exclusion rules are one way to eliminate discrimination between recidivists and individuals who were convicted one time. This is important because the age of the child does not change, but the photograph of the perpetrator does. It gives an unknowing observer the impression that an aged person committed a sexual act with a child when, in fact, the act may have been committed years or even decades prior, when the perpetrator also was very young.
I personally know someone who is on the website, and I would like to see his name, face, and address removed because the stigma of sexual crimes is such that I believe there is a greater threat to his safety and privacy than he poses to the community. Thus, I believe that the listing of all registered offenders is unneccesary and that the law allowing exclusion is fair and essential. The people who deserve a chance to start over without being listed are subject to approval. The criteria for removal ensures that each case is reviewed. Surely if you trust the justice system to punish, you should trust the system to discontinue punishment and/or exposure when it is no longer required.
Posted by Fishiiis a 38 year old on 08/16/05
Responses: (0) (1) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Child Sex Offenders In Covina
Fishiiis, sorry but your "friend" should have thought about that before committing his crime(s). I feel the right for residents know that there is a sex offender in the area, so they can inform and protect their children better, outways the rights of a sex offender. I really don't care when they did the crime, nor do I care if the picture makes it look like they are a "dirty old man." And I'm sorry, just because an individual claims they're "all better," wouldn't exactly help me sleep better if he were living next door to me.
If an offender were being threatened or harrassed, they can make a claim to the police department just like any other citizen. A brand new halfway house has opened down the street from me, and we're not going down there with our torches and pitchforks, but rather we are complaining to the parole board, our state legislature, and protesting with the help of our city council. I don't see that they have a "threat to their safety and privacy."
Posted by Mattj a 27 year old from pomona on 10/07/05
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
- Re: Sex Offenders In Covina
Honeybee, I support you. I am fighting the same thing in my neighborhood. I have a registered sex offender living across
the street and another one living down the street around the corner from my family and I. We have bi-yearly neighborhood
watch meetings. I work with the city of Lake Elsinore. We are trying very hard to let the schools, neighbors and anyone
who will listen that these bad people are not wanted near us and especially our children. No second chance, my feelings
on this subject. JUST KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS!!!
I now work with our local Assemblymen and our Congressmen to make everyone aware of the dangers of having Sex Offenders
living near us. From what I have heard there will be an opperturnity to vote on a upcoming law (this November)
Good luck.
Posted by Valerie a 47 year old on 03/01/06
Responses: (0) Reply (to this)(main)
|
|
