Posted on 02/01/2008 1:41:58 AM PST by Jim Noble
NEW BEDFORD - A convicted sex offender arrested this week on charges of raping a 6-year-old boy in the public library had been released from prison a year ago, despite the strenuous objections of the district attorney and three psychologists who argued that he posed a serious threat to children.
Superior Court Judge Richard Moses denied the prosecutor's motion to keep Corey Saunders in custody indefinitely, arguing that he had a low IQ and had suffered physical and sexual abuse as a child.
The judge said Saunders, who was sentenced to four years for the attempted rape of a 7-year-old boy in 1999, had not committed any major sexual offense while he was in prison. Moses released Saunders, ruling that he was not dangerous.
Later, Saunders was classified as a Level 3 sex offender, the most dangerous category considered likely to reoffend. Level 3 offenders are required to register with local police, and their photos are posted on a state website....
Near the end of his ruling, Moses wrote, "Saunders will be required to register as a sex offender, and the public will be provided with the protections afforded by such statute."
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Neither should the judge.
Richard T. Moses
Address: 50 Homers Wharf
New Bedford, MA 02740-7245
Phone: (508) 999-6414
must be a firm’s address
Dear City Council President Jane L. Gonsalves,
The library rape of a six year old children is criminal. At this time, all efforts are concentrated on the victim and the criminal. But you are the city's leader. You have a responsibility to see the bigger picture. In this case, the bigger picture is this type of incident might happen again and again as a direct result of the library's "anything goes" Internet use policy.
Was the criminal using the Internet before the rape to view child p*rnography? The media did not address this. If he did, did the library attempt to stop him? The media did not address this. If not, why not? The media did not address this, but the answer is on the library's own web site, "The New Bedford Free Public Library only provides access to the Internet. The Library cannot control and is not able to monitor any information on the Internet for either content or accuracy." http://www.ci.new-bedford.ma.us/Library/internetpolicy.html
Did you know that is false? Did you know communities may filter all computers and the US Supreme Court has already found that constitutional? Did you know the ACLU and the courts have found filters so effective that they no longer block out health related web sites?
Worse, it is possible your library's policy has exposed it, its employees, and New Bedford to liability for failure to take action that might have prevented the child rape in the first place. A simple reading of the library policy tells me the child's rape was likely partially the responsibility of the library for having an anything goes policy and the community for failure to control its own library in the legal manner in which it may control its library. Indeed, I urge any legal action brought by the parents to include counts against the library and especially against the city for, among other things, a likely failure to enforce the library's enabling statute that I am sure does not say anything goes. Indeed I will actively attempt to contact the family's attorneys and advise them to consider the theory of liability I have outlined generally.
I thought you should consider this. You have the power to prevent future such instances by using every means possible to get your local library to apply filters to all Internet computers. Warning, the American Library Association is responsible for these anything goes policies, is specifically named by your library as its source for library policy, and will be sure to bring the full weight of its misinformation campaign to you if you do decide to protect your community's children instead of the ALA's policies.
Articles I am reading show the city is obviously thinking of ways to prevent this in the future, but all I see are methods of moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. For example, "privacy screens" do not function as claimed. Internet filters are the most effective means to resolve the situation, and that is precisely why the ALA attempts to convince people not to use them.
I will be happy to explain and source every statement I have made here. You have the legal means to remove the negative influence of the ALA from your library. It's a PUBLIC library, not an ALA library. Please let me know if I may assist.
Thanks for the ping. I had posted a thread about it the other day too. I thought to ping you, but couldn’t remember your exact FR name.
Authorities slam release of accused...(freed sex offender assaults young boy in library)http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1963086/posts
“50 Homers Wharf’ sounds kind of gay to me.
We do have too many judges freeing these criminals. I hope his grandson isn’t next!
WTF?
Thanks!
That's because children to rape are few and far between in a prison, judge...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.