A Further Response to Betsy Karasik and the Washington Post.

Over the weekend I wrote up a piece a on why Betsy Karasik's Op-ed for The Washington Post was flat out wrong.  She opined that cases, like the Stacey Dean Rambold teacher rape case in Montana, should be decriminalized for several reasons. You can read my response here.  Suffice to say letting teachers get by with grooming and raping students is not a popular opinion in my profession.

One point that Ms. Karasik made, and has continued to make in social media, dealt with the stress of the criminal justice system and trial on the victim.  She believes and maybe rightly that the victim in the Rambold case, Cherice Morales committed suicide due to that stress.  There's no way to know for sure, but a reasonable inference could be made.

In almost 20 years of work as a Child Protection Professional, my ability to identify and understand the stress on victims has evolved.  When I first started I thought that every sex case should go to trial. That every perpetrator should get the maximum sentence and every kid who testified would feel better when justice was served.

Over time, I've come to understand that this is not always the best course of action.  Too many trial losses because the jury just couldn't be convinced that anyone could do that to a child. Too many defense attorneys finding the smallest flaws in a statement and turning that around on the child. Things happen and justice isn't always best served.  So when the State's Attorney makes a deal and gets a plea bargain, I'm all for it.

It is completely wrong headed to assert that the victims don't have stress, if the case doesn't go to trial. The stress of  the victimization is still the overriding factor in the victim's recovery. The best way to deal with the stress of a trial is to provide support and counseling during the process.

In the counties I work in, the victim support services have evolved along with my understanding of victims issues. When cases do go to trial, we have a wonderful counseling service the specializes in child sexual abuse that works with the Victim Coordinator at the State's Attorney's office to prep the child for testimony. The counties I cover include one fairly large urban population and two with rural populations. All three have made great strides in protecting and supporting the victims through the trial.

This protection and support starts at the outset of a case. Children here and all over the country are interviewed by forensic interviewers like myself at Children's Advocacy Centers.  The Advocacy Centers provide parents with support, counseling referrals and other services. Further, our Advocacy Centers have done presentations for the Judges in our Circuit to educate them about victim sensitivity. If it's done in three counties on the Mississippi river in Illinois, it can be done anywhere.

Bringing this back to Ms. Karasik's argument about decriminalization.  No. No. No. The victim is not better served by the perpetrator not facing justice in some form.  The victim is better served when we demand that the court process be more sensitive to victims, when we demand that readily available counseling services and victim support services are available in every jurisdiction not just those like mine that are forward thinking and lucky.

Victims deserve a voice. They deserve a fair and safe process. They deserve closure.  None of these things happen if as Ms. Karasik suggests, teacher/student rape be decriminalized.  That doesn't protect the victim. It only makes it easier for these predators to keep hunting.

Consent Decrees: Why Betsy Karasik and The Washington Post Are Wrong About Teen Aged Girls

I've been an investigator of child abuse for almost 20 years. I've investigated over three thousand cases of abuse and hundreds of cases of sexual abuse.  Many of those cases involved sex abuse of teens by teachers. To say I know a thing or two about Teacher/Student sex and consent is an understatement.  That's why the Washington Post Op-Ed penned by Betsy Karasik about Stacey Dean Rambold is just flat out wrong.

If the subject of the op-ed doesn't ring a bell.  Rambold was convicted of raping a 14 year old student, Cherice Morales when he was 50.  He was sentenced to 30 days in jail by judge G. Todd Baugh.  Baugh saying that Morales was "as much in control of the situation".  Karasik argues that teen aged students can consent to adults. More on that presently, but first, an example of why the Judge, and Karasik just don't  get it. 

In the course of my career, I investigated a case of child sexual abuse between a respected teacher and a 16 year old boy.  The boy disclosed shortly after his 17th birthday.  He gave a credible statement that his teacher fondled his penis multiple times.  

Since the family requested no prosecution, it was left to me to speak to the teacher and inform the school. I did so, and when confronting the teacher, he admitted that he had fondled the boy.  I indicated the report and the teacher resigned.   

Several months later through the official DCFS appeal process, the teacher won his appeal. The DCFS attorney and Manager who reviewed the case said that the incidents were not "sexual abuse" because of the age of the child, the fact there may have been consent and the fact that it did not happen at school. This decision was made even though according to IL Statutes, a teacher is always a teacher. 

Sometime there after, the victim committed suicide. 

The heart of Ms. Karasik's opinion seems to be that teen aged girls have sex on the mind as do teen aged boys. This is true in the abstract.  It's also true that girls have had affairs with teachers for millenia. She conflates sex between teens and teachers and sex with college professors, however. That is a false equivalence and frankly just kind of dumb. College students who have sex with professors are adults, and therefore able to consent. 

It's true on its face, that teenagers are maturing/mature sexually. They have sex on the brain as Ms. Karasik points out.  The gray hair in my Van Dyke can attest to being the father of a quickly developing 13 year old daughter.

What Ms. Karasik fails to understand, or maybe she does and she's just not saying, these developing teens have normal appetites for each other. For other teens, kids their own age and maybe a little older. My daughter may think that Mr. X the science teacher is cute, but she is not eyeing him with the idea of dating and possible sexual relations. 

On the other hand, teachers who have sex with teens, are looking at the child in nothing but sexual terms. They use their position of authority over the children and gradually groom them until they are in an intimate situation, of which the teacher takes full advantage.  

I think most people agree that teens can "consent" to that first fumbling in the back of 1974 Chevy Caprice Classic, with another teen.  That's not what we are talking about here. A teacher using a child for sex is no different than a priest doing the same thing.  No different from Jerry Sandusky.  

Ms Karasik seems to think  the trauma of going through a trial doesn't help the victim and in fact delays their healing. She's as wrong about this as she is about everything else in the work.  Especially in cases like this where the perpetrator confessed and plead guilty, the closure for the victim is vital to their ongoing recovery. We'll never know how Cherice would have responded because she, like the boy in my case, committed suicide. 

Finally, Ms. Karasik closes with a pretty ridiculous reason we should excuse teachers who sexually abuse students: "If religious leaders and heads of state can’t keep their pants on, with all they have to lose, why does society expect that members of other professions can be coerced into meeting this standard?" 

So holding people to account for sexually abusing children is a ridiculous standard because religious people and Bill Clinton can't keep their pants up?  I seem to remember Clinton being impeached and at last tally the Catholic Church is bankrupt paying for priests who abused children. In my world those are pretty severe consequences.

A better question is: how can we not hold teachers to  a "ridiculously high standard"?  

The DudeBro Bill of Rights

It's been a while since I've written.  The subject of Dudebros and their faux outrage at President Obama, the NSA, and the west in general got me to thinking.  Maybe the dudebros need to form their own nation. If they're going to do that, the need a Constitution, and a Bill of Rights.

For those wondering about who the Dudebros are, they are generally the far left libertarians in the vein of Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden. Some call them Utopian Left, some call the Emo-progressives.

Tom Nichols at his blog The War Room describes them as nihilistic millenials, who got a ribbon for participating and thought they won something. He further says they're incredibly self centered and immature and have no concept of how things work in the real world.   

So here follows the Dudebro Bill of Rights. I took liberties with the constitution by adding a preamble, but if the Kenyan Marxist Socialist Nazi President Blackenstein can trample on the Constitution, anyone can. 

The DudeBro Bill of Rights

Preamble:

We the Dudebros , in Order to form the most perfect Union, establish Just Us, disrupt domestic Tranquility, Disdain for The Common and Defense, Disdain for Welfare, Secure the blessings of Libertarians to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for Dudebros but not Evil America.

Amendment 1

Dudebros shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, except for the cult of personality as evidenced in the divine visage of Julian Assange and his prophet Edward Snowden. or abridging the freedom of speech, unless its the speech we don't like especially if it comes from brown people. No abridgement of the Dudebro Press Glenn Greenwald and David Sirota , but the evil Mainstream Media totes abridged. The right of the people to peaceably assemble, unless they're brown, then they'll be frisked. And to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, but  only our pet grievances, yours don't matter.

Amendment 2

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, except those pesky Chicago thugs, they give gun owners a bad name.

Amendment 3

No Soldiers 

Amendment 4

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. So stop listening to my calls President Obummer.

Amendment 5

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, even if they steal state secrets and give them to bloggers, cause FREEDOM BRUH!

Amendment 6

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, except data thieves (See Amendment 5)

Amendment 7

In Suits at common law, frankly, we don't care about anything common. Our parents taught us all that we are special and precious and perfect and never wrong.

Amendment 8

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted, cruel punishments like hiding in an Ecuadorian Embassy is travesty.

Amendment 9

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people unless they're women, blacks, the poor, and centrists, then we can disparage them, cause they just don't get it man...

Amendment 10

The powers not delegated to the Dudebros by the Constitution,  don't really matter, because our Dudebro Utopia doesn't care about non Dudebros. 

Allies

I've been thinking about how to write this piece since Saturday.  I've started and restarted it 3 times. I finally got a frame when I read Chez Pazienza's fine piece about a young man who took his own life, Carlos Vigil. Carlos committed suicide because he was bullied, called fat, made fun of because he had acne and because he was gay. A tragedy played out every day.

Chez's work made me reflect on the bullying I suffered as a child, and suddenly I knew how I could write about being an ally to African Americans, Women, Gay people and any other minorities.

Being a white male in America is a pretty good gig, and it's hard to articulate where and how I was able to learn how to be an ally.  For me, being an ally has been molded by several things, childhood bullying, growing up poor, good parents and working as a social worker.

As a child I was mercilessly teased and bullied by my peers.  I was fat. I had a Fat Albert lunch box. To this day I remember being made fun of by the lunch lady, an adult. All the kids joined in. It was 40 years ago. As I got older, because I wasn't a fighter, I got spit on, my ears flicked, books grabbed away and hidden.  I was mocked as Fat Pat forever.

We also grew up poor. While the other kids had Levis and Nikes I had Sears Huskys and Trax from KMart. These differences were again a source of constant mocking and teasing.

Things improved slightly in High School, because I played football and I turned my anger inward and made myself the first person in the history of my high school to get a 4.0 GPA.

The bullying gave me a profound respect for others who have traditionally been considered "other". People who have been demeaned and downtrodden for no other reason than  they are black or female or gay. I just can't stand injustice to anyone, but especially to those folks who look different or have different sexual orientations than what is considered "normal".

My parents raised us to be nice people. Not just nice to people who looked like us or acted like us. Nice  to everybody.  My mom was the nicest person I ever met. My dad is a crazy old dude, but he's unfailing the nicest guy in any room he enters.

When a mixed race couple moved into our neighborhood in the early 80's mom and dad put the skids to a group of neighbors who were essentially pointing and staring.  Both mom and dad had friends and colleagues at work who were African American and Hispanic, even a few Vietnamese refuges. So we had good roll modeling regarding different races and cultures.

I went to college and wanted to be a physicist.  I found out the psych majors had more fun and switched majors.  Through a series of coincidences and good fortune, I ended  up being a child abuse investigator for the last 20 years.

As a social worker, I have learned that the most important skill I have in most situations is listening. Just listening. Not offering a solution all the time, not telling people how they ought to do it. Listen. Be present for people.

I used this skill a lot these last few days after the Zimmerman verdict. All of the African American friends I've made on social media were to some extent angered and saddened. I notice several white people who should know better trying to tell my black friends how they should be.  That's not being an ally, that's being privileged.

It's not okay to point out to your black friends that "not all of us (whites)" are like that.  Your black friends know. Just shut up and let them vent unless they specifically ask you for advice. That's good advice for a lot of situations.

If you truly want to be an ally for minorities, it isn't hard.  Be nice, don't condescend, don't look at those relationships for what you can get out of them.  Listen. Learn. Support. Don't be afraid to stand up for your friends, but don't do it to be a glory hound.

Be an ally because it's right.

Spies Like Us

It's been a while since I sat down and wrote.  Frankly life has been busy and I didn't find anything worth writing about that I couldn't accomplish in 140 characters on Twitter, or a random smart ass quip on Facebook.

I pointedly stayed away from writing about Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald and the NSA revelations.  Other people have been doing a much better job of debunking the non story than I would have dreamed of doing.  Bob Cesca, and Charles Johnson among others have been doing yeoman's work in reporting the facts of the Snowden case without Greenwald's disturbing bias towards the President and his Administration.

I chose today to jump back into the fray because Snowden was charged in Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia.  Per the AP he was charged with two counts under the Espionage act and one count of theft of government property.  Glenn Greenwald and his hoard of navel gazing fan boys are already crying foul and accuse the government of "over charging".

As somebody who is a both a Government employee (State of Illinois), and someone who routinely seeks criminal charges, I have some perspective on Snowden's charges.

If you work for the Government, whether it's Federal, State, or Local, there are some pretty strict rules about what you can take out of the office.  By strict I mean: You can't take ANYTHING out of the office. The only exception for us is State of Illinois pens, but much like the legislature they work fine for about 20 minutes, then get gummed up and useless.

In addition to working for the man, I'm also a union steward for AFSCME.  In that duty, I have represented co-workers in numerous grievance and discipline meetings.  People get disciplined up to and including dismissal for all sorts of things involving misusing Government issued phones, computers, what have you.  I represented a guy who got a day off with no pay for downloading 1.99 game to his work cell.

Lest ye think that I'm above it all. I once got a verbal reprimand for sending an office wide email that my daughter was selling pizza's for her school.  The point of these anecdotes is to underscore the fact that when you work for the Government there are certain things you don't do.

Taking classified documents is right at the top of that list.  What Snowden did would be like me bringing home a client file and giving it to the media. I would be fired on the spot and because client confidentiality is codified in Illinois, I would be charged with crime.

Which brings me to the "over charging" issue.  I have no idea exactly what Snowden is charged with but speaking to prosecutors charging suspects, issuing multiple charges is nothing new.  As a matter of fact,  I have been involved in cases in which an adult had sex with a minor.  The Assistant State's Attorney on the cases issued a discrete felony count for every single act. The ASA charged each individual act of intercourse, each individual fondle etc.

The reason that prosecutor's over charge as well as including lesser included charges is pretty obvious in dealing with sex cases.  A perp may be charged with 8 counts, plead guilty to two counts and do 10-20 years as apposed to the 160 years if he was convicted on all 8 counts.

I suspect that the Federal indictment of Snowden is similar. He and his jongleur Greenwald can claim all they want that the Government is going too far, but they've already admitted that Snowden broke the law.  In the end the Government may drop the Espionage Act charges if he pleads to stealing property.

If he does plead to a lesser charge, he'll probably end up serving a couple of years at a country club prison camp like Marion.

Who knows maybe he'll end up on a beach in Brazil with Greenwald drinking an ice cold bohemia style beer.  Although knowing Greenwald, I'm sure beer is something that "you people" drink.  Too bad for Snowden that when he's no longer useful to Greenwald, he'll be "you people" too.

An Investigator's View of the DoJ/AP Dust-up

There's trouble a foot in DC for President Obama and Attorney General Holder, or so the the usual assortment of hacks, wannabes and never weres that make up the beltway media would have us believe.

You see, back in 2012, the Associated Press ran a story about the CIA thwarting of an Al Queda plan to bring down a US passenger jet.  In so doing they used information that was classified that they had gotten from a source.  Congress responded by asking Department of Justice to find and stop the leak.

Beltway pundits, politicians and their hangers on got all kinds of butt hurt about the revelation that in the course of the investigation the Department Of Justice obtained the telephone records of reporters for the Associated Press.  Words, like wire tap and bugging, ran rampant throughout social media and blogs all across the internet. 

People immediately called for Eric Holder’s head.  Even people like Charles Pierce whom I admire a great deal dashed off a thousand words on how this was overreach and DoJ was out of control and Holder must go. 

Funny thing happened on the way to storm the castle.  As it turns out Eric Holder recused himself as he had already been question by the FBI about the leak investigation.  It should also come as no surprise to anybody that phone records of the reporters were obtained by subpoena.  This is a very common practice in investigation.

As a child abuse investigator for the last 20 years, I have gathered evidence, including using subpoenas for records.  I emphasize that I am not law enforcement, but I have worked closely with law enforcement and have received much of the same training in regards to collecting evidence and following leads. 

In the press conference today, Attorney General Holder said that the content of the subpoenaed phone calls was not turned over, just the phone numbers, times, dates, etc.

You may ask why they did this with the reporter’s phone information. The answer is very simple.  It’s much easier to go through the phone records of 20 people to find a lead on a government employee, than it is to go through the phone records of over a hundred thousand employees at the Department of Defense or CIA.

I have had similar experiences with phone records, albeit for an entirely different type of case.  I helped a co-worker and police on a case of a teacher who was having sex with a teenaged student.  We combed through 30,000 text messages between the two because there was a concern that there were other victims.  We also looked through emails of the perpetrator looking for clues as to other trysts he may have had. 

That particular case ended well, but it illustrates what I was talking about re: the volume of information we had to go through.  We could have subpoenaed the records of all of the students the teacher had interactions with but it was easier to go through the teacher’s records. 

In the AP case, Congress directed the DoJ to find the leak.  There was really no other way to get a lead on the leak, without going through the phone records of the recipients of the leaked information. In fact the use of the subpoena per DoJ rules was a last resort which explains why the phone records weren't immediately looked at.  In fact the records were requested in April and May of last year, several weeks after Holder was directed by Congress to investigate.

I completely understand the fears of interference with the media and a free press.  In the case of the AP investigation, the Department of Justice is not going after a member of the press for possible prosecution.  They are using readily available and commonly used law enforcement tools to develop leads on the real criminal.  The person who leaked the information could have gotten a CIA asset killed and at very least tipped off our enemies that they had a mole in their operation.  

If the forth estate plans on continuing to abet criminal activity, they better damn well be ready to be party to the criminal investigation. 

Heroes

By now most everyone has at least a passing understanding of who Charles Ramsey is.  If the name doesn't ring a bell, he was the neighbor who helped rescue three women in Cleveland who had been held captive for a decade.

Upon hearing screaming from his neighbor's house, he went to the door and a woman asked him to help her. He told reporters that he at first thought she was a victim of domestic violence.  He quickly became an internet meme because of his awesome interview with local TV.

The aftermath of all this has been rather strange to observe.  Some people are worried that Ramsey is being treated like the "funny black neighbor".  Not understanding that we can laugh a funny guy without mocking him. I'd love to talk to him. He's a good story teller, and a character.

Today it was revealed by the omnipresent media that seems to find the bad side of everybody, that Mr. Ramsey has a record including an assault on a woman in his past.  National media especially seem to love to find the dirt to tarnish a heroic act.

As many of you know, I work for DCFS in Illinois. In the last 20 years I have interviewed thousands of people a lot like Mr. Ramsey.  People who may have had a bad past, or made bad choices but who have grown from those experiences to become better people and better parents.

It may be bone headed optimism, but the fact that Mr. Ramsey initially thought the victim may have been a DV victim, could be because he learned from his past.  Most men who are convicted of Domestic Battery have to take classes in anger management and other counseling to help them recognize their own triggers.  Is it so far off base to think that Mr. Ramsey internalized what he learned and put it to good use when needed?

It's easy to be a cynic, but people can change.  I've seen it countless  times. While there are really bad people in the world who will never change (mostly White Sox fans but I digress), the capacity for positive change exists in us all.

I recognize that Mr. Ramsey has a checkered past, and I've certainly called out abusers in this blog before, but for now, he did a heroic thing.  On top of his heroism, when Anderson Cooper asked about the reward money, he said give it those women, give it to that little girl who was out here crying last night.

Maybe karma isn't always a bitch.