Norfolk won’t prosecute accused predator because he has dementia

9-14-2013 Massachusetts:

Norfolk prosecutors notified some two dozen alleged victims of accused sexual predator William E. Sheehan this week that the former Foxborough teacher and Boy Scout leader will not be prosecuted because his advanced dementia makes him unable to stand trial.

The decision, after a psychological examination commissioned by prosecutors, brings an end to the state’s criminal investigation of a set of allegations that date back four decades.

Sheehan, 74, is now in a Florida nursing home. Under the law, defendants must be able to meaningfully participate in their own cases.

Norfolk District Attorney Michael Morrissey called Sheehan’s alleged crimes “predatory and disturbing” and their scope “shocking.” In a statement Friday, he praised the alleged victims who came forward to report their stories.

“We are grateful for their courage,’’ Morrissey said. “Speaking out today, even decades later, will hopefully make it safer for other victims to step forward and maybe even help prevent such a terrible thing from happening to other children.”

After receiving the pyschological report, prosecutors in Morrissey’s office spent the week delivering the disappointing news in personal phone calls to the men, who have been waiting a year for a decision.

“I feel badly victims have no sense of justice,’’ said Foxborough Police Chief Ed O’Leary, adding that there are no more current leads to follow.

SJC: 2006 law banning sex offenders from nursing homes unconstitutional

8-5-2011 Massachusetts:

A 2006 state law prohibiting the most serious sex offenders from living in nursing homes or other long-term care facilities is unconstitutional, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled unanimously Friday, contending that it infringes on their liberty and property rights and violates their 14th Amendment right to due process.

In a ruling penned by Justice Fernande Duffly, the court contended the 2006 law strips level three sex offenders of the right "to live where they choose" without providing any opportunity for those offenders to defend themselves through a public hearing process to present a rebuttal.

"The statute presumes that all members of a class of sex offenders are dangerous to every community of rest home residents," Duffly wrote. "It affords no opportunity for the plaintiff to demonstrate that he represents no or a minimal danger to the community the law is intended to protect and makes no provision for the necessary balancing of the plaintiff’s individual circumstances against the Commonwealth’s interest in protecting vulnerable elders from sexual assault."

Duffly noted that the court has previously upheld laws that require sex offenders to register with the state, which may in turn publicly post their registration information online. In those instances, sex offenders are entitled to a hearing to rebut their classification. But that classification hearing is not enough to deprive offenders of their freedom of movement, which the court argued is a much more significant limitation than the limits on their privacy rights imposed by the registration requirement.

The Legislature included prohibitions on level three sex offenders in nursing homes, infirmaries, rest homes and charitable homes for the elderly or developmentally disabled as part of a larger 2006 law that extended the statute of limitations for prosecuting sex crimes against children. The provision punishes violators with a sentence of up to 30 days for a first offense, and up to two-and-a-half years in a house of correction or five years in state prison, and a five-year minimum sentence for any subsequent offense.

When the law passed the House in 2006, Rep. Eugene O’Flaherty highlighted the provision and said he would spare his colleague "graphic details" about incidents in nursing homes that had occurred involving level three sex offenders.

In the case ruled on Friday, a level three sex offender identified only as John Doe would likely have become homeless and personally endangered if he were forced out of the rest home in which he resides, according to the SJC.

"[T]he plaintiff must have an opportunity to establish that he poses minimal risk to the community the statute was intended to protect and, if removed from the rest home, will likely become homeless and expose himself to significant harm," Duffly wrote.

According to a background of the case included in the ruling, John Doe - diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and who also suffers from glaucoma, seizures and "poor personal hygiene" - was convicted in 1992 of two sexual offenses involving young male children. He was jailed again in 1997 for a parole violation that was not a sex crime. When he was released in 2008, Doe was found "not to be sexually dangerous."

Upon his release, Doe stayed in a homeless shelter for a year and was attacked several times, once resulting in hospitalization. He was released from the hospital and placed in a state-regulated rest home in February 2009. Staff at the rest home were aware of his status as a sex offender. According to the court’s description of the facts, Boston police notified Doe in 2010 that he was ineligible to remain in the rest home under the 2006 state law. A court-appointed defense attorney then sought legal protection to keep him in the home.

The Sex Offender Registry Board concluded that although Doe’s age - he was 65 at the time the proceedings against him began - the fact that his crimes never involved adult victims, and the fact that the rest home provided him with a "stable environment," his criminal history and lack of counseling put him at a "high risk of reoffense and high degree of danger" that required him to register as a level three offender.

Julie Goldman, a prosecutor in the office of Attorney General Martha Coakley, litigated the case on behalf of the Boston Police Department, the attorney general’s office and the Sex Offender Registry Board. ..Source.. by Kyle Cheney / State House News Service (John DOE [FN1] vs. POLICE COMMISSIONER OF BOSTON & others. [FN2] SJC-10916. August 5, 2011.)

MA- State puts porn pervs in sights

3-26-2009 Massachusetts:

Pervs preying on the elderly or disabled could soon face harsh new penalties under a first-of-its-kind proposed law that would punish sicko peddlers of geriatric and handicapped porn the same as child pornographers.

Fueled by a rise in sex abuse against the elderly and disabled and a string of cases involving photography and cyber postings, the proposed legislation would add seniors and the handicapped to kiddie porn laws.

“Obviously with the technology evolving, the crimes committed using that technology have increased. That’s clearly the case,” said Northwestern District Attorney Elizabeth Scheibel, who covers parts of western Massachusetts and helped craft the proposal. “All we’re trying to do with these two pieces of legislation is to protect our two most vulnerable populations.”

Emil DeRiggi, spokesman for the state Disabled Persons Protection Commission, said the agency has “certainly seen an increase” in sex abuse cases involving pornography. One case currently being investigated involves a twisted online posting offering sex with a “cognitively impaired” virgin.

Other recent cases include:

A pair of caretakers who took their disabled boarder on a “state-to-state party,” taking sexual photos along the way;

A man with cerebral palsy who can talk only with a communication board was mocked and harassed by caretakers who snapped pictures of his genitals;

A mentally retarded woman had pornographic pictures taken of her and posted on the Internet by relatives.

The DPCC reported 44 rapes and 29 indecent assault-and-battery cases in the past three months of 2008. In the past year, the agency reported 92 cases of sexual exploitation.

Officials said there have been other recent cases involving seniors and the state Executive Office of Elder Affairs is backing the bill.

“Elder Affairs supports policies that protect vulnerable seniors from exploitation,” spokeswoman Kristina Barry said.

There are currently no federal laws against elderly or disabled porn, and Massachusetts officials were unaware of any similar legislation in other states. A similar effort, though, is underway in Illinois, where new child porn laws also protect the “severely mentally retarded.”

Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein (D-Revere), who backs the bill, said she’s spoken with senior advocacy groups who report that elder exploitation and pornography is on the rise.

“We know that it’s happening. I didn’t realize until this whole scenario was brought to my attention that it was an issue,” Reinstein said. “If we can extend protection to the elderly and the disabled, I think it’s kind of a no-brainer.”

But prominent civil rights attorney Harvey Silverglate said the proposal “amounts to blatant censorship” and is “unconstitutional.”

“It seems to be the latest in a long effort to broaden the definition of obscenity,” Silverglate said. “We’ve already got (laws) against coercion. Why is that not adequate?” ..News Source.. by Dave Wedge

MA- Enforcing bylaw on sex offenders may be a challenge

ISSUE : Senior Housing. Can registered sex offender STOP the aging process? Since every human being will age, it is likely that elderly sex offenders would need housing typical to anyone else who is elderly. This ordinance would prevent elderly sex offenders from obtaining the senior housing they need.

5-10-2008 Massachusetts:

It's one thing to adopt a bylaw restricting where convicted sex offenders can live. It's another matter to enforce the new rules.

'It really has been relatively quiet, much to my surprise. At least now we have this ability to have something to fall back on.'

Southborough adopted such a bylaw at Town Meeting on April 17. If approved by the state attorney general's office, which has approved similar bylaws in Dedham, Marlborough, and West Boylston, registered sex offenders would be barred from residing in 90 percent of the town, according to a presentation delivered by Police Chief William Webber to Town Meeting members.

The bylaw bars registered offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools, day-care centers, elderly housing, parks, and other facilities. Convicted offenders deemed likely to commit another sexual assault - those classified as Level 2 or 3 predators - would also be barred from living within 1,000 feet of places of worship.

The bylaw also prohibits registered sex offenders from loitering within 500 feet of school bus stops. A grandfather clause allows offenders living in Southborough prior to the bylaw's enactment to remain in their residences.

The question now is how rigorously the bylaw can be enforced. Based on Marlborough's experience with a similar law, the question remains unanswered. Marlborough police say they've invoked the city's ordinance only three times since it was adopted in May 2007. They stand by the law as an important tool to protect children and others from sexual predators, but admit it doesn't have much of a track record.

"It really has been relatively quiet, much to my surprise," said Marlborough Police Chief Mark Leonard, adding, "At least now we have this ability to have something to fall back on."

Detective Martha Shea, who oversees enforcement of Marlborough's ordinance, said the law's residency requirement has been used twice, while its loitering clause has been invoked once.

In one case, she said, a registered offender went to jail for a short time, and since he had continued paying his rent he was allowed to return to his home. In another case, an offender left his residence and wanted to move back. Police decided the grandfather clause didn't apply and denied his request.

In October, police determined that a registered sex offender was loitering near a housing area for senior citizens on Main Street, Shea said. He was cited, but his case was dropped in Marlborough District Court at a pretrial hearing with the court's clerk-magistrate, she said. Under the bylaw, the penalty for violating the loitering clause is $150.

Shea said she thinks the ordinance has discouraged registered sex offenders from moving to the city. "We have a lot of rooming houses, so we had a lot of Level 3s coming in on a pretty consistent basis," she said. "Now there's not. I can't prove the ordinance did that. But I have to think it did."

The state Sex Offender Registry Board's website counts 33 Level 2 and nine Level 3 offenders living in Marlborough. A board spokesman, Terrel Harris, said a total of 51 sex offenders were registered in Marlborough in April 2007. The board did not have a breakdown of offender levels from past dates, he said.

'It really has been relatively quiet, much to my surprise. At least now we have this ability to have something to fall back on.'

A single Level 3 offender and four Level 2 offenders live in Southborough, according to the registry board's website, mass.gov/sorb.

Webber plans to assign an officer to handle Southborough's new bylaw and develop a system to monitor the town's 750 bus stops. That's too many for his force to patrol, so he'll probably depend on help from citizens, he said.

"Anyone loitering in Southborough, they're going to call," he said. "They call about people driving too fast. They're certainly going to call about some seedy looking character."

Webber acknowledged the possibility that offenders could circumvent the bylaw by not telling police they're moving into town. But state law also mandates that sex offenders register their whereabouts, he said; if they don't and are caught, they go back to jail.

Short of creating a massive surveillance operation, Webber said, state and local laws depend on compliance from registered sex offenders. "In an open society, these are some of the risks we take," he said.

Since July, Framingham officials have been considering a bylaw like the ones in Marlborough and Southborough. Board of Selectmen chairman Jason Smith said no decision has been made, but he supports a mechanism to keep tabs on convicted sex offenders.

"We have an abundance of them, to the point where public safety comes first," Smith said. "You should never be afraid of walking out of your front door knowing in the back of your mind a Level 3 offender is watching your every move."

Framingham has 19 Level 2 and 74 Level 3 registered sex offenders, according to the state's website.

Smith said he and his colleagues need to study how prohibiting offenders from some areas might push them into others. He would support state legislation requiring registered sex offenders to wear electronic bracelets that would give police their location at all times, he said. ..more.. by John Dyer, Globe Correspondent