January 2009 Archives

Now that Harvard's Berkman Center has reassured us that child predators are not a threat online, we've got a new hustler to worry about. And this time it's Facebook. Buried in the Facebook Terms of Use is this little read and considered clause:

As I editorialized here in 2005, between 1986 and 2001 hundreds of NYC foster children were involuntarily enrolled in medical experiments. Soon after the story broke in the NYT, NYC commissioned a study by the widely respected Vera Institute for Justice. Almost four years later, that long awaited (forgotten?) study was finally released today.

Millionaire pedophile donates playground equipment and exposes himself during dedication ceremony, plaque removed Link

More on the cyber-whitewash re: online predators from the WashPost @ Link

I have joined the world of Twitter as a supplement to this blog. Twitter is great for those "one off" observations and links which are too insignificant for a blog entry (or, more likely, discovered when I'm too busy to blog!). You can easily follow me on Twitter by going to my Twitter page. You can also create your own Twitter account and participate in an interactive conversation. With only 160 characters per entry it's a quick easy way to keep everyone apprised of the latest intel as it happens.

Disbarment Urged for NJ Judge Convicted of Child Porn and Sex Trafficking Link

Last month, Foreign Policy Magazine ran a hard-hitting expose entitled The Lie We Love. It's premise: "Foreign adoption seems like the perfect solution to a heartbreaking imbalance: Poor countries have babies in need of homes, and rich countries have homes in need of babies. Unfortunately, those little orphaned bundles of joy may not be orphans at all."

Finally some truth in advertising. Here's reporter E.J. Graff on the international orphan myth:

At first glance, the news in today's New York Times that "the Internet may not be such a dangerous place for children after all" will give many a sense of relief. Look closer, however, and you'll quickly discover that cyber-industry heavyweights have co-opted the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School. By selling itself to the industry it is allegedly investigating, the Berkman Center has become both a shrill and a shield for the powerful well-funded online establishment.

First the "news." According to the NYT:

Last week the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a case of first impression, limited the federal Government's ability to place in indefinite civil commitment "sexually dangerous" persons under a federal law enacted as part of the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act of 2006 [18 U.S.C. § 4248].

Section 4248 authorizes the federal government to civilly commit, in a federal facility, any "sexually dangerous" person "in the custody" of the Bureau of Prisons--even after that person has completed his entire prison sentence. To initiate commitment under Section 4248, the Attorney General need only certify that a person in federal custody is "sexually dangerous."

According to the Court in this case,U.S. v. Comstock, such a certification automatically stays a person's release from prison without proof that they have committed any new offense; Section 4248 empowers the Attorney General to prolong federal detention without presenting evidence or making any preliminary showing other than an allegation of dangerousness.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the Court found several problems with this statutory scheme.

An associate who was fired from Kirkland & Ellis in 2004 after admitting he attempted to arrange a meeting "to engage in an oral sexual act" with someone he thought was a 13-year-old girl has been suspended from practicing law in New York for three years.

In a rare 3-2 decision in a disciplinary matter, a five-judge panel of the New York Appellate Division, 1st Department, agreed that Steven J. Lever "brought shame to himself and to this State's Bar" by using the Internet "to prey on minors for purposes of sexual gratification." They also agreed his conduct required "a significant sanction."

However, finding a dearth of New York precedent on point, the judges could not agree on the appropriate punishment.

The three-judge majority, looking at similar cases from other states, cited the "substantial and credible mitigation evidence" in confirming a hearing panel's recommended three-year suspension.

In a vehement dissent, Justices David B. Saxe and James M. Catterson argued for disbarment. Catterson wrote for the two.

"Because I believe that a convicted and registered sex offender has forfeited the privilege of admission to the bar and the elevated status of the officer of the court, I must respectfully take the unusual step in a disciplinary proceeding and dissent," Catterson wrote. "I believe that any penalty short of disbarment would not comport with the standards to which a member of the bar should adhere. I do not believe that we can reconcile the status of registered sex offender with that of a member of the bar in good standing."

In November 2005, Lever pleaded guilty to the single misdemeanor charge and was sentenced to six years' probation and certified as a level-one sexual offender.

Under New York law, attorneys convicted of a felony are automatically disbarred, but disciplinary authorities have discretion when a misdemeanor is involved.

According to the committee's report, "[P]reying upon ... minors for sexual gratification by means of the internet should be dealt with more harshly" than the referee's proposed six-month suspension.

Read the full story here on Law.com