Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Comstock case prompts critical editorials

The Comstock case is prompting some hard-hitting editorials by influential newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal.

The L.A. Times took the opportunity to come out against not just the federal expansion that is the U.S. Supreme Court's focus in Comstock, but civil commitment of sex offenders more broadly:

"Using the civil commitment process to lengthen a criminal sentence is dishonest and dangerous," cries the subhead of yesterday's editorial, "Sex offenders behind bars: How long?"

That issue of federalism isn't unimportant, but the more pressing question is whether civil commitment for a mental condition is being misused to force felons to remain in prison after they've completed their legal sentences.
The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, focused on a critical angle that I'm planning to blog more about soon -- the dangers to civil liberties inherent in expansion of civil commitment laws to other groups. Decrying the attempts by "feds [to] usurp another area of state law," the WSJ pointed out:
The implications go well beyond sex offenders…. If the Supreme Court reverses the lower court's decision, it will sanction the notion that nearly any appealing idea may be justified as necessary and proper. In other countries, loose detention laws give wide latitude to authorities to lock up any number of people who "threaten the public safety," including political prisoners. Maybe next the feds could force everyone in America to buy health insurance.
The L.A. Times editorial is HERE. The Wall Street Journal editorial is HERE. And, for any of you who want to really immerse yourselves in the Comstock case, I recommend the Sex Crimes blog, which has an incredibly comprehensive page of resources on the case.

1 comment:

  1. The sex offender laws have gotten out of control since the Adam Walsh Act. Now, the MAJORITY of people on the registry are NOT DANGEROUS, especially not to children. But few people know this. Or else they don't care.
    The combination of sound-bite, drama-driven media, opportunistic politicians (and even though I'm a Democrat and sent her money, Martha Coakley was one of these people re. these cases), bad lawyering, voracious states attorneys seeking higher office and/or attention and judges worried about re-election all came together to contribute to a huge miscarriage of justice.
    Now, with the Comstock case, there are people who want to carry this even farther.

    There are so many people on the very popular and public whipping post registry now, that the truly dangerous pedophiles, like Gerrido, can hide right under law enforcement's noses. And the numbers grow exponentially every year.
    But it's a boondoggle for unscrupulous politicians and drama-driven media types, ala Nancy Grace. It's the most popular witch hunt around. You'd think every Romeo/Juliet case, every public urinator, even men visiting 15 yr. old prostitutes who look older and lie about their age are dangerous to CHILDREN.
    This is a crime but it helps us win the contest for the most overpopulated prison system in the world too, even more than China and Russia...what a country.
    In the meantime, so many people's lives are being ruined and the vigilante's get whipped up to go after those everybody-loves-to-hate public sex offenders. What a justice system.



    For anyone who wants to really know something true about this, please go to:
    http://www.reformsexoffenderlaws.org/index.php
    MYTHS AND FACTS ABOUT SEX OFFENDERS
    http://www.csom.org/pubs/mythsfacts.html
    http://www.false-allegations-team.com/

    ReplyDelete

 
Real Time Web Analytics