"Judge refuses GPS use for rapist; Says SJC ruling ties her hands on such monitoring" by John R. Ellement and Martin Finucane, Globe Staff | August 20, 2009
LOWELL - Also yesterday, the arm of the court system charged with supervising sex offenders said it would not, or could not, say how many offenders are wearing GPS monitors under its supervision....
Of course, the paper is better than me and commands a response and/or can investigate better than me.
--more--"
Looks like we found one:
"Man charged with molesting 8-year-old boy
ATTLEBORO, Mass. -- An Attleboro man who helps a local youth baseball league has been charged with molesting an 8-year-old boy. John J. Paine, 51, was ordered held without bail at his arraignment Tuesday in Attleboro District Court. He is charged with indecent assault and battery, open and gross behavior, enticing children under 16 and showing obscene matter to a minor.
--more--"
FLASHBACK:
"SJC curbs tracking devices on offenders; Law enforcement officials angered" by John R. Ellement, Globe Staff | August 19, 2009
A divided Supreme Judicial Court ruled yesterday that sex offenders convicted before 2006 cannot automatically be forced to wear GPS devices because it creates an unconstitutional burden on their freedom.
On THEIR FREEDOM? What about the VICTIMS?
In a 4-to-3 decision, the court said a 2006 law mandating GPS devices on all sex offenders placed on probation cannot apply retroactively.
Actually, as DISTASTEFUL as it is, I AGREE with the DECISION because IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY CORRECT!!!!
Of course, TELECOMS that SPIED for the GOVERNMENT GET RETROACTIVE and UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION, so WTF?
Ruling in the case of a Bristol County sex offender convicted in 1997, the majority said public safety must give way to constitutional protections against government intrusion into citizens’ lives, including those of sex offenders.
With a BIG, STINKING EXCEPTION for "terrorists!"
“The GPS device burdens liberty in two ways: by its permanent, physical attachment to the offender, and by its continuous surveillance of the offender’s activities,’’ Justice Margot Botsford wrote for the majority.
But it is OKAY to put in CARS and PHONES so the government can track you.
The decision, which forced judges to weigh child protection against constitutional rights, outraged law enforcement officials and a Beacon Hill lawmaker....
Russell M. Cory’s lawyer, Theodore F. Riordan of Quincy, applauded the majority’s conclusion in a telephone interview as one that safeguards vital protections for citizens. Riordan said the ban on retroactive punishments was included in the US Constitution and was also part of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights that preceded it.
“It’s really the people triumphing here,’’ Riordan said. “The ex post facto clause is working exactly like it should.’’
Riordan said being forced to wear a GPS device is a burden, both emotionally and physically, for Cory. “It’s a big deal to wear a GPS device,’’ he said. “It’s attached to you all the time. It’s kind of like a Scarlet Letter.’’
Well, if the PERVERTED LETTER FITS, then WEAR IT!!!
.... Beth Eisenberg, the Committee for Public Counsel Services lawyer who argued for parolees, said GPS devices are “the new frontier of punishment.’’
--more--"
Also see: A Drunken Supreme Court
