When a false idea gains traction, spreading far and wide, it’s always interesting to try to trace it back to its source to figure out what caused it to catch on in the first place. The New York Times has an NY Times: Dubious Data Belies Supreme Court’s Stance on Repeat Sex Offenders, and it pertains to a common myth about sex offenders: that they have extremely high recidivism rates relative to other types of criminals. Full Article
Like what Josef Goebbels had said “if you tell a lie and keep repeating it, people will believe it to be the truth”, present the public through media about the growing dangers of sex offense, and that all registrants are at risk of committing future crimes, make the public believe it be true and be fearful enough that they would want more laws and ordinances to protect the public and protect children.
Tired Of Hiding
Guest
March 6, 2017 1:30 pm
Nothing’s gonna change in America. It’s a country that has peaked and is in decline.
Do not expect pesky facts to get the way. The game is over. We lost.
Tobin's Tools 2.0
Guest
March 6, 2017 4:56 pm
It was awkward — during oral argument — when North Carolina’s attorney, Robert Montgomery, said: “This court has recognized that they have a high rate of recidivism and are very likely to do this again.” The justices seemed to be holding back a bit. I was wondering whether they knew the consequences of their sloppy error (considering that John Roberts had argued Smith v. Doe — and Kennedy had cited the erroneous recidivism statistic). I eagerly anticipated for at least one Justice to question whether sex offenders truly recidivate at a high rate. [At 35:30 of the audio.] Unfortunately, that did not happen.
For those of you that are interested, the following is a link that includes the Packingham oral argument (as well as real-time text and photographs that accompany who is speaking). I find the real-time text and photographs helpful in determining which justice is speaking at the specific time:
The guide, a compendium of papers from outside experts, is 231 pages long, and it contains lots of statistics on sex offender recidivism rates. Many of them were in the single digits, some a little higher. Only One Source claimed an 80 percent rate, and the guide itself said that number might be Exaggerated [aka Hysteria].
It’s clear that This Wicked & Evil Blind Seat (Judge) Justice Anthony M. Kennedy with malice of forethought under The Color of Irrevocable Authority has Twisted Justice & with a cheap Sleight of Hand Instituted A Counterfeit Justice, A Coliseum Justice for the Masses to consume and Not be Satisfied.
He has formed divisions among fellow country men, A abomination to the Soul of The Most High Possessor of Heaven & Earth who formed light & created darkness:
Not to mention all the innocent family members & friendships he helped destroy!
I speak Truth
As Yehovah Lives, so should we
New Person
Guest
March 7, 2017 1:27 am
This is a bit off topic, but related to this article. It seems Adam Liptak is receiving a plethora of praise from the author of this article, Jesse Singal. So much of the information presented by Liptak was not his information, but information founded by someone else… Dr Ellman and Dr Ellman.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m happy to see this information being spread about, but all the hard work and research came from the Dr. Ellman and Ellman. I’ve read their well developed article several times. That article gave me a sliver of hope to hang onto when I was utterly without confidence in my situation. Okay, I still am without confidence, but a lil’ stronger.
Anyhow, much appreciation to Doctors Ira and Tara Ellman for compiling all this information that many others have regurgitated and passed off as their own research.
Bob
Guest
March 7, 2017 9:19 am
I heard the oral argument and it was ok. The Montgomery fellow seemed clueless and a little frustrated getting his point across. I found it a bit a amusing how he kept bringing up the high recidivism rate and pointing to the court how they were the ones that ruled that. lol. The court never responded. Although Sotomayor sort of did in an indiscreet way for just seconds(it seemed). Many times, it seemed like Montgomery was setting himself up and some of the justices layed the hammer on those set ups made by him. He pretty much made clear that this is only for sex offenders and nobody else, singling out a group of people in a discriminatory fashion. This didn’t sit well with a couple of the justices who voiced their opinion on that.
Goldberg could of argued and even shown proof how Facebook is pretty much linked and integrated to many “all purpose websites” across the internet. You can’t blog or comment on pretty much 90% or so of websites today without a Facebook account. You take Facebook away from someone and you’re left with limited resources in social interaction and speech. Facebook does contain news, and all sorts of every day information and interaction. It corners every single market today.
I hope that if they rule in our favor they use the words punitive and unconstitutional and mention the registry and resident restrictions somewhere in their opinions. Can only hope.
C L A R K
Guest
March 7, 2017 9:50 am
False information
Misrepresented
Manipulated
Deceived
Is criminal especially when its relied by others. What is Enron.???
An American citizen having to register is as corrupt sham as the figures Enron was feeding people.
Feeding people corrupted sham figures:
What’s the f’ing Difference.
jo
Guest
March 7, 2017 11:06 am
I still don’t understand why all the excitement when Facebook itself bans registered folks from using it’s services. I had my entire profile and years worth of friends and business profile wiped off the planet by Facebook staff when someone reported to them I was on the registry.
Tired Of Hiding
Guest
March 7, 2017 6:11 pm
Why is anyone surprised that a group of out of touch OLD robe wearers elitists would spread lies and/or be totally ignorant of actual facts and yet feel so “superior” to everyone else that they make life altering rulings using lies that destroy the lives of millions and yet can sleep like babies at night knowing that they have a life time job?!?
The “supreme” court sickens me to my very core. I have nothing but contempt for the court as it has nothing but contempt for me.
Lee
Not Really
Guest
March 7, 2017 7:28 pm
“Recidivism rates of sex offenders increase as
followup periods lengthen and with the number of
convictions. A set of studies that followed offenders
at 5-year intervals up to 20 years found that
rearrests for sex offending increased steadily from
14 percent to 27 percent over that time. In addition,
the 15-year rearrest rate for offenders who had a
prior conviction for sex offending was nearly twice
that of first-time offenders. However, offenders who
were not rearrested for sex offending within the
first 5 years were progressively less likely to sexually
recidivate the longer they remained offense-free.”
and it continues to slowly unravel.
Like what Josef Goebbels had said “if you tell a lie and keep repeating it, people will believe it to be the truth”, present the public through media about the growing dangers of sex offense, and that all registrants are at risk of committing future crimes, make the public believe it be true and be fearful enough that they would want more laws and ordinances to protect the public and protect children.
Nothing’s gonna change in America. It’s a country that has peaked and is in decline.
Do not expect pesky facts to get the way. The game is over. We lost.
It was awkward — during oral argument — when North Carolina’s attorney, Robert Montgomery, said: “This court has recognized that they have a high rate of recidivism and are very likely to do this again.” The justices seemed to be holding back a bit. I was wondering whether they knew the consequences of their sloppy error (considering that John Roberts had argued Smith v. Doe — and Kennedy had cited the erroneous recidivism statistic). I eagerly anticipated for at least one Justice to question whether sex offenders truly recidivate at a high rate. [At 35:30 of the audio.] Unfortunately, that did not happen.
For those of you that are interested, the following is a link that includes the Packingham oral argument (as well as real-time text and photographs that accompany who is speaking). I find the real-time text and photographs helpful in determining which justice is speaking at the specific time:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2016/15-1194
(Refer to the left-hand side that says “Oral Argument – February 27, 2017.”)
In-Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,
“Cited what seemed to be a good source for the statistic: “A Practitioner’s Guide to Treating the Incarcerated Male Sex Offender,” published in 1988 by the InJustice Department.
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/03/05/sex-offenders-colorado-rules-children/
The guide, a compendium of papers from outside experts, is 231 pages long, and it contains lots of statistics on sex offender recidivism rates. Many of them were in the single digits, some a little higher. Only One Source claimed an 80 percent rate, and the guide itself said that number might be Exaggerated [aka Hysteria].
It’s clear that This Wicked & Evil Blind Seat (Judge) Justice Anthony M. Kennedy with malice of forethought under The Color of Irrevocable Authority has Twisted Justice & with a cheap Sleight of Hand Instituted A Counterfeit Justice, A Coliseum Justice for the Masses to consume and Not be Satisfied.
He has formed divisions among fellow country men, A abomination to the Soul of The Most High Possessor of Heaven & Earth who formed light & created darkness:
It is clearly documented in Proverbs 6:16 YLT
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+6:16-19&version=YLT
Not to mention all the innocent family members & friendships he helped destroy!
I speak Truth
As Yehovah Lives, so should we
This is a bit off topic, but related to this article. It seems Adam Liptak is receiving a plethora of praise from the author of this article, Jesse Singal. So much of the information presented by Liptak was not his information, but information founded by someone else… Dr Ellman and Dr Ellman.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m happy to see this information being spread about, but all the hard work and research came from the Dr. Ellman and Ellman. I’ve read their well developed article several times. That article gave me a sliver of hope to hang onto when I was utterly without confidence in my situation. Okay, I still am without confidence, but a lil’ stronger.
Anyhow, much appreciation to Doctors Ira and Tara Ellman for compiling all this information that many others have regurgitated and passed off as their own research.
I heard the oral argument and it was ok. The Montgomery fellow seemed clueless and a little frustrated getting his point across. I found it a bit a amusing how he kept bringing up the high recidivism rate and pointing to the court how they were the ones that ruled that. lol. The court never responded. Although Sotomayor sort of did in an indiscreet way for just seconds(it seemed). Many times, it seemed like Montgomery was setting himself up and some of the justices layed the hammer on those set ups made by him. He pretty much made clear that this is only for sex offenders and nobody else, singling out a group of people in a discriminatory fashion. This didn’t sit well with a couple of the justices who voiced their opinion on that.
Goldberg could of argued and even shown proof how Facebook is pretty much linked and integrated to many “all purpose websites” across the internet. You can’t blog or comment on pretty much 90% or so of websites today without a Facebook account. You take Facebook away from someone and you’re left with limited resources in social interaction and speech. Facebook does contain news, and all sorts of every day information and interaction. It corners every single market today.
I hope that if they rule in our favor they use the words punitive and unconstitutional and mention the registry and resident restrictions somewhere in their opinions. Can only hope.
False information
Misrepresented
Manipulated
Deceived
Is criminal especially when its relied by others. What is Enron.???
An American citizen having to register is as corrupt sham as the figures Enron was feeding people.
Feeding people corrupted sham figures:
What’s the f’ing Difference.
I still don’t understand why all the excitement when Facebook itself bans registered folks from using it’s services. I had my entire profile and years worth of friends and business profile wiped off the planet by Facebook staff when someone reported to them I was on the registry.
Why is anyone surprised that a group of out of touch OLD robe wearers elitists would spread lies and/or be totally ignorant of actual facts and yet feel so “superior” to everyone else that they make life altering rulings using lies that destroy the lives of millions and yet can sleep like babies at night knowing that they have a life time job?!?
The “supreme” court sickens me to my very core. I have nothing but contempt for the court as it has nothing but contempt for me.
Lee
“Recidivism rates of sex offenders increase as
followup periods lengthen and with the number of
convictions. A set of studies that followed offenders
at 5-year intervals up to 20 years found that
rearrests for sex offending increased steadily from
14 percent to 27 percent over that time. In addition,
the 15-year rearrest rate for offenders who had a
prior conviction for sex offending was nearly twice
that of first-time offenders. However, offenders who
were not rearrested for sex offending within the
first 5 years were progressively less likely to sexually
recidivate the longer they remained offense-free.”
https://smart.gov/SOMAPI/pdfs/SOMAPI_Full%20Report.pdf