« Under The Bridge, It's Science Versus Politics | Main | The Internet Could Prove Fatal To Skinny Americans »

ACLU Takes On "The Bridge Issue"

After my most recent column on the outcasts consigned to the Julia Tuttle Causeway, Richard Rosichan, a board member of the Greater Miami Chapter of the ACLU writes:

“We have been fighting these ridiculous residency restrictions, and the "bridge issue," tooth and nail. While I can't speak for the local or state boards, I can assure you that the fight will go on. We are not about to back down.

“Residency restrictions affect few if any offenders. Most sex related offenses involve on-line solicitation, family members and friends, baby sitters, consensual relationships of people usually fairly close in age (including the so-called "Romeo and Juliet" cases), young teenagers who look and act much older, and work or school related relationships. The "Megan's Law" type of thing involving someone who assaults a neighbor and in which proximity is a factor are very unusual. As for on-line solicitations, these people almost always prefer to select their targets in relatively distant locations to avoid detection by people who know them.

“A sex offender type crime can involve anything from a vicious murder to an 18 year old getting it on with his 16 year old girlfriend.

“I'm not familiar with any specific cases in this area, but here are two that I do know about that demonstrate the absurdity of these laws. One was the case of Mel Reynolds, a one time congressman (D-IL) who had sex with his 17 year old female page. He was arrested, convicted and served a year in prison. Ten years later, he received a letter ordering him to move out of his apartment. I would say the chance of "recidivism" in his case was a clear zero.

“Think that's absurd? I visit one of my daughters in Atlanta a lot. The Georgia laws make ours look positively lax. There was national publicity about the prison sentence of a black teenage boy there who had consensual oral sex with a teenage girl. Think that's bad? Recently, a 29 year old woman was ordered to leave her house within two weeks because it was within 1000 feet, yards, or whatever, of a bus stop. . I don't recall her name, but I do recall the name of the federal judge who turned down her appeal - Clarence Cooper. Her crime? Twelve years earlier - at age 17 - she had been arrested for having consensual oral sex with a 15 year old boy. Yep, she was still a minor herself. And she never saw it coming until she got a letter from the county sheriff - 12 years later.

Now, about the relationship of this to the homeless issue. The real problem here is a well known and very rich lobbyist - Ron Book, head of the Homeless Trust. He has been a fanatic on this issue ever since his child was allegedly molested - touched inappropriately - by a female babysitter. Because of the tie-in between these residency restrictions and the problem of homelessness, he has no more business being head of the Homeless Trust than he would have being on a jury trying a sex offender case. As the Herald reported, he is doing everything he possibly can to obstruct resolution of the ‘bridge case.’ ”

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b26169e201127963e84728a4

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ACLU Takes On "The Bridge Issue":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

cfcamerica

I am wondering a few things.

1. Why is Mark Lunsford, in a hearing in Washington to discuss the validity of the Adam Walsh Sex Offender Act, when he was caught with Child Pornography on his computer?

2. Why is Mark Foley, Free to Molest Children, when he was caught SEXTING little 16 year old underlings?

3. Why is a Florida Judge allowing Circuit Court Judge Samuel Kent to have 5 counts of Sexual Molestation dropped if he simply pleads guilty to lying. And Why is Mr.Kent going to get to Keep His Tax Paid Retirement?

4. Why is it that the powerful, rich, politically connected Americans are exempt from the laws imposed upon the poor, working class Americans?

The facts supporting all of what was asked above are located on our website.
http://www.cfcamerica.org

Last but not least...
How long will the citizens of this once great nation sit idly by and allow everyone's rights to be violated by the rich, politically connected Ruling Class? How Long?

PS, Thanks for your Great Writing.. Mr. Grimm

Christopher Castrataro

Please forward to the Greater Miami Chapter of the ACLU:

How do I go about filing a petition (per se,) for declaratory relief from a county ordinance? My argument is that :

1) The Counties ordinance is Constitutionally invalid because it intrudes in an area purely of Statewide Concern.

2) The Florida Statute in question clearly shows the Legislatures intent to pre-empt or occupy the field by placing a duty upon the courts of this State to uphold the laws which are part of its statutory scheme, in order to avoid "encroachment on the Legislature’s exclusive power to make laws in this area.”

3) The ordinance is in violation of Article III section 10(4) of the States Constitution.

This would be a Civil matter not Criminal I can not afford a lawyer nor am I sure the Court will appoint one. Any guidance you could provide such as where and how i would submit my petition would be much appreciated.

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise