Showing posts with label Criminal Cases. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Criminal Cases. Show all posts

Thursday, July 28, 2011

(DCSO) Despite changes in sex offender law few petition to get off sex registry | Georgia's sex offender laws | Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the state Department of Corrections


Although Gov. Sonny Perdue signed into law last year that made changes to the state law governing people on the sex offender registry, only three in Douglas County have petitioned to be removed from the registry, according to Investigator Trent Wilson of the Douglas County Sheriff's Office.

Wilson, who manages the county's registry, said there are 150 sex offenders on the sex offender registry here. DCSO officials and local probation officers did a county-wide roundup two weeks ago to locate those on the list and to verify addresses and other information.

Georgia's sex offender laws, once among the toughest in the nation, were revised following challenges from civil liberties groups and losing court battle after court battle, according to the Associated Press, which said state legislators were forced to make a change or a federal judge was going to throw out the entire law.

Georgia's tough law failed because it cast too wide a net, targeting sex offenders who had committed crimes years before the strict law which was passed in 2006, banning all sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools, parks and other places where children congregate, essentially forcing them to live in desolate areas or move out of stare.

There are about 20,000 registered sex offenders in the state, according to AP.

HB 571, which became effective on May 21, 2010, allows registered sex offenders who committed their offenses before June 4 2003 to live wherever they choose. According to AP, the date was picked because that was when the first sex offender overhaul too effect. Those restrictions were made stricter three years later.

The new law also deletes a requirement that persons on the registry must provide their email addresses, user names and user passwords to law enforcement officials as part of the required registration information.

Most sex offenders who committed their crimes after June 4, 2003 are subject to the 1,000 feet living and work restrictions.

The new law also allows sex offenders to petition a superior court for release from registration requirements and from any residency or employment restrictions but, in most cases, the person must have completed all prison, parole, supervised release and probation for the offense which required registration.

"What they have to do is petition to come off the registry," Wilson said. "They have to petition the court, us and have a hearing in the jurisdiction where they were convicted."

After the judge makes the ruling, the court decision will be sent to the DCSO, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the state Department of Corrections, Wilson said. Read More


Thursday, July 14, 2011

HC to decide on MCOCA law: stringent anti-gangster law MCOCA be invoked


MUMBAI: Can the stringent anti-gangster law MCOCA be invoked only in criminal cases which reveal some pecuniary or monetary benefits to the organized crime syndicate? A full bench of the Bombay High Court has been constituted to decide the issue.

“The scope of the law cannot be restricted to mean that the offence is made out only if there is any economic advantage to the accused,” said additional public prosecutor Aruna Pai.

“There are other advantages that the syndicate may gain.”

“Acts such as murder of police informers, forcing witnesses to turn hostile, gang wars are not acts which directly cause financial gains, but are used to consolidate the power of the organized crime syndicate,” said senior advocate Amit Desai.

Under the law, an accused can be charged under MCOCA if he is shown to be part of an organized crime syndicate against whom there is more than one charge sheet in the past 10 years. The law further says that the offences should reveal continuous unlawful activity “with the objective of gaining pecuniary benefits or gaining undue economic advantage or other advantage”.

The issue before the full bench is whether the term “other advantage” can only mean economic advantage. The cases before the court include the killing of advocate Shahid Azmi. A special court had dropped the provisions of MCOCA saying there was no “pecuniary benefit” revealed in the first information reports. Read More