While Texans and Cajuns were fighting Hurricane Harvey, a Nixon-era judge was deciding to help rapists escape sex offender registries and take money from taxpayers.
The 9/1/2017 Denver Post reported the following:
“A federal court judge’s ruling finding that Colorado’s sex-offender registry violated the Constitutional rights of three sex offenders who sued could change the way the public gets access to the list.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard Matsch found that the Colorado Sex Offender Registration Act violates the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and the due-process rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.
Thursday’s ruling came in a civil case filed against Colorado Bureau of Investigation director Michael Rankin in 2013 by registered sex offenders David Millard, Eugene Knight and Arturo Vega.
Matsch found that the men are entitled to compensation and attorney fees, which will be determined later.
There are similar cases in other states challenging sex-offender registries.
(Boulder woman Alison Ruttenberg, the attorney for the three plaintiffs) said she expects the cases will eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
“I would characterize this as a landmark case. My goal eventually is to get rid of this sex offender registration altogether, at least as it applies to a public registry that people can pull up on a website,” Ruttenberg said Friday. “I would be surprised if the state doesn’t appeal the decision.”
Matsch found that Colorado’s registration act poses a “serious threat of retaliation, violence, ostracism, shaming, and other unfair and irrational treatment from the public” for sex offenders and their families.
“The registry is telling the public — DANGER, STAY AWAY. How is the public to react to this warning? What is expected to be the means by which people are to protect themselves and their children?” Matsch wrote in his ruling.
In answering his own question, he determined the law exposes sex offenders to punishments “not by the state, but by fellow citizens.”
“The fear that pervades the public reaction to sex offenses — particularly as to children — generates reactions that are cruel and in disregard of any objective assessment of the individual’s actual proclivity to commit new sex offenses,” Matsch wrote. “The failure to make any individual assessment is a fundamental flaw in the system.” “
Of course, there are sure ways to avoid winding up on a state’s sexual predator registry. DON’T RAPE. DON’T MOLEST. DON’T ABUSE. DON’T EXPLOIT. DON’T TRAFFIC IN GIRLS.
If the U.S. Supreme Court upholds Matsch’s corrupt and/or crazy ruling, rapists get cover. And rapists will get your money. They will be paid “reparations” for being labeled as sexual offenders. That’s right. These felons will rob you, with government help, and your children will be more at risk.
“We’re the government. We’re here to help.”
Let’s understand something. At least half of all sexual offense victims are girls – females 17 or younger. Half of girl victims are 12 to 15. Another 10 to 15 percent of all sexual offense victims are boys – males 17 or younger. Most boy victims are 10 or younger. Of the remaining 35 or so percent, most are young women 18 to 30. (This does not count prisons, government-run institutions where same-sex assaults are almost all of the sexual offense crimes.) These stats come from the U.S. Justice Department and my math on their figures.
In other words, most victims are children, and the average child victim is a victim many times. The average young woman victim is a victim once. Sexual predators ruin children by raping them repeatedly. This is why the public is rightly concerned.
“Matsch wrote that public shaming and banishment are forms of punishment considered cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment,” noted the Denver Post.
Being raped by a child predator is much crueler, but Matsch was silent on that. Has he molested children himself, or does he have someone close to him who has done so?
I’m for burning child molesters at the stake. It might be cruel, but if we do it often enough, it won’t be unusual anymore.
JUDGE MATSCH’S BACKGROUND
Richard Matsch was born in 1930, according to Wikipedia. Richard Nixon appointed him to the federal bench. Is he senile, or is he old and destructive like John McCain? Let’s look at two other cases Matsch handled.
Richard Matsch was the judge who ran the Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols Oklahoma City Bombing trials. Matsch kept out the testimony of Carol Howe, a US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) informant who infiltrated a group with ties to McVeigh and other figures of the bombing. Matsch also suppressed an Inspector General report accusing FBI lab technicians of essentially falsifying evidence in the case.
If Carol had gotten on the stand, she would have revealed she warned the ATF of an impending bombing, and they ignored her. She could have also testified to the presence of FBI protected instigators in the group she infiltrated, one of whom reportedly raped her. (She revealed these facts in open court when Clinton Administration prosecutors indicted her to shut her up, and she proved the feds were lying pigs on her way to acquittal.) If the IG report had been allowed into the trial, people may have concluded the FBI was hiding the probability there were others involved besides McVeigh and Terry Nichols. How could a pair of inbreds like McVeigh and Nichols bring down a massive building with no prior experience and without outside help?
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the British journalist who covered the Oklahoma City bombing and the related fallout, said in so many words in his book “The Secret Life of Bill Clinton” that during Bill’s first term, the FBI and the ATF were inciting extremist nuts into considering bombing federal installations with the hopes of busting them for conspiracy. Problem was someone achieved their ends and killed scores of people under the feds’ noses. At best, the feds were incompetent. Ar worst, the feds were complicit.
Richard Matsch covered for the Justice Department with his rulings. This implies Matsch was bad seed before he got old enough for people to blame his horrible sex offender ruling on dementia.
THE SCUMBAG LAWYER BEHIND THE CASE
Now to another facet of the case.
Alison Ruttenberg, the rapists’ lawyer, claimed “only 5% of sex offenders were arrested for new crimes,” the Denver Post reported.
She is of course wrong, because the recidivism rate among sex offenders is much higher than the joke of a number she quoted. It’s no shock she wasn’t leveling with the public when she said this. She’s a lawyer. But even if she was right, it would prove marking sexual predators as scum publicly is a great idea because it keeps out of their paths potential victims who otherwise might stray there.
Neither Alison nor the reporter nor Matsch would say why her sex offender buddies were on the state list. So I’ll fill in the revolting blanks. According to the Colorado state sex offender registry website, one guy committed felony sexual penetration (rape), and another of the plaintiffs raped a child. The third criminal’s offense wasn’t on the website. Maybe his was a lesser offense, or maybe state people dropped the ball on tracking him or keeping his file correct.
Alison no doubt is looking at the legal fees she could extort out of the public if the U.S. Supreme Court is foolish and corrupt enough to uphold Matsch’s corrupt and insane ruling in her favor. She is also representing three other rapists (Brockhausen, Toner, Cook, Case No. 16 CV 2090, also in US. District Court in Colorado) for similar issues. If Alison Ruttenberg represents all the rapists in Colorado, she could retire on the money the taxpayers would have to give her for representing the worst people in the Rockies.
But Alison might have to split it with the ACLU, whose lawyers have been litigating on similar issues against a Colorado city in the federal court system. (See Stephen Brett Ryals v. Englewood, Case No. 12 CV 02178 for details. Alison is listed in that case too.)
This is how the ACLU and others like them have apparently become an extortion racket. In my opinion, what nuisance lawsuit groups do in suing towns with Nativity Scenes or school districts without bathrooms for self-identifying freaks into doing their bidding against the will of the vast majority of the public is akin to running a shakedown, a protection racket, or some other form of extortion. In my opinion, they commit abuse of process. They plot to sue small government entities in federal court in areas where they figure the cases will go to sympathetic judges, or the appeals will go to sympathetic judges. They find some dorks to be “local aggrieved citizens,” and then they file suit.
Even if the ACLU or a similar nuisance litigation group wins nominal damages, they often win full legal fees, which they jack up through the stratosphere. Judges – who are also lawyers – allow it. This is how such groups parasite off of the public.
Many millions of dollars of the ACLU’s budget come from lawsuit wins against small government entities. You can see the ACLU’s IRS returns (Form 990s, for nonprofit groups, which are public records obtainable thru the IRS, thru some on-line charity monitoring companies, and randomly on the Internet), and in some cases their audited financial statements which they make public.
The ACLU’s Form 990s (nonprofit group tax returns) also indicate quite a few ACLU employees get more than $200,000 a year. This doesn’t count the lawyers they retain who are not employees.
Alison Ruttenberg is called a civil rights attorney. More than 20 years ago, she was called a sexual harassment lawyer by a Newsweek reporter in a 11/24/1996 article about the rapes of female soldiers. (The Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Discipline website says she’s been a lawyer in the state since 1988.) Maybe whoring for sex offenders is more lucrative than protecting rape victims.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
What does this mean for you?
You must press your state attorney general and your state’s governor to oppose this ruling when Colorado state attorneys appeal it. Likewise, contact your state representatives and your local police chief or sheriff to fight it. This is a nationwide case that could end your state’s sex offender register and make you pay rapists “reparations.”
You must also press Attorney General Sessions and your representatives to defend the Adam Walsh Child Protection And Safety Act of 2006. This helped make sex offender registries easier to access. John Walsh is reachable at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and at the Justice Network.
You must also teach your children to avoid trouble and to level with you if someone is treating her or him in a sexually wrong way. The good people of Carlie’s Crusade can give you in-depth advice; they are on the Internet.
Check the background of your children’s teachers and other adults in their lives. Be alert to people in the neighborhood. As long as you have access to sexual offender registries, use them.
In many cases, the ACLU or a similar nuisance litigation group doesn’t have to pay legal fees if a judge throws out their case against a local government. This must change. Push your state representatives and members of Congress to make groups like the ACLU liable for expenses when they lose. Also have them enact laws limiting amounts plaintiffs can collect for certain civil rights cases and urge them to enact laws setting a low maximum on what cause groups like the ACLU can bill for legal fees – a limit low like a public defender hourly rate. This would cut the average legal bill from such groups by 80 to 90 percent.
We are pushing for making sex offenders pay for their monitoring, and for making realtors disclose 30 days before closing to neighbors that they intend to sell nearby properties to sex offenders. If you’re interested, contact us.
And punish those in office who refuse to protect children, and who roll over on sexual predator registries, by kicking them out at election time. There are many politicians and judges and prosecutors who are on the record against sex offender registries and limitations on sex offenders, or who have taken actions to thwart the public will in this regard.
Remember, homeland security begins when our women and children are safe. You are your children’s first responder.
SHERLOCK JUSTICE
WE CAN SHOW YOU HOW TO BE YOUR OWN DETECTIVE
END NOTES
Info on ACLU finances comes from the ACLU and ACLU Foundations’ IRS Form 990s (both are public records), from the ACLU, Inc. and Consolidated Entities Consolidated Financial Report dated 3/31/2014, from the ACLU Foundation, Inc. and Subsidiary Consolidated Financial Report dated 3/31/2014, and from similar documents from several ACLU state affiliates. Info on the ACLU’s court actions and legal work on issues comes from the ACLU 2014 Annual Report, and from an ACLU statement opposing congressional attacks on “sanctuary cities” by Joanne Lin 7/23/2015.
