~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Los Angeles Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Conservatives latch onto prison reform

Reduced sentences and rehabilitation programs once were branded as liberal. But now, states such as Republican-dominated Texas are seeing success after adopting the approach.

by Richard Fausset, Los Angeles Times

January 28, 2011

Reporting from Atlanta

Reduced sentences for drug crimes. More job training and rehabilitation programs for nonviolent offenders. Expanded alternatives to doing hard time.

In the not-too-distant past, conservatives might have derided those concepts as mushy-headed liberalism — the essence of "soft on crime."

Nowadays, these same ideas are central to a strategy being packaged as "conservative criminal justice reform," and have rolled out in right-leaning states around the country in an effort to rein in budget-busting corrections costs.

Encouraged by the recent success of reform efforts in Republican-dominated Texas — where prison population growth has slowed and crime is down —conservative leaders elsewhere have embraced their own versions of the strategy.

South Carolina adopted a similar reform package last year. Republican governors are backing proposals in Louisiana and Indiana.

The about-face might feel dramatic to those who remember the get-tough policies that many conservatives embraced in the 1980s and '90s: In Texas, Republican Clayton Williams ran his unsuccessful 1990 gubernatorial campaign with a focus on doubling prison space and having first-time drug offenders "bustin' rocks" in military-style prison camps.

Now, with most states suffering from nightmare budget crises, many conservatives have acknowledged that hard-line strategies, while partially contributing to a drop in crime, have also added to fiscal havoc.

Corrections is now the second-fastest growing spending category for states, behind Medicaid, costing $50 billion annually and accounting for 1 of every 14 discretionary dollars, according to the Pew Center on the States.

That crisis affects both parties, and state Democratic leaders have also been looking for ways to reduce prison populations. But it is conservatives who have been working most conspicuously to square their new strategies with their philosophical beliefs — and sell them to followers long accustomed to a lock-'em-up message.

Much of that work is being done by a new advocacy group called Right on Crime, which has been endorsed by conservative luminaries such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Education Secretary William J. Bennett, and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.

The group has identified 21 states engaged in some aspect of what they consider to be conservative reform, including California.

On its website, the group concedes that the "incarceration-focused" strategies of old filled jails with nonviolent offenders and bloated prison budgets, while failing to prevent many convicts from returning to crime when they got out.

"Maybe we swung that pendulum too far and need to reach a cost-effective middle ground here," said Marc Levin, director of the Center for Effective Justice at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which launched the advocacy group last month. "We have to distinguish between those we are afraid of and those we are just mad at."

The right's embrace of ideas long espoused by nonpartisan and liberal reform groups has its own distinct flavor, focusing on prudent government spending more than social justice, and emphasizing the continuing need to punish serious criminals.

Even so, the old-school prison reform activists are happy to have them on board.

"Well, when the left and the right agree, I like to think that you're on to something," said Tracy Velazquez, executive director of the Justice Policy Institute, a Washington think tank dedicated to "ending society's reliance on incarceration."

Julie Stewart, founder of Families Against Mandatory Minimums, even believes that Republicans, with their tough-on-crime credentials, may have a Nixon-in-China cover to push reform further than Democrats.

"There is a safety conservatives have," she said. "And for better or worse, Democrats don't always have that luxury."

Levin has a PowerPoint presentation he shows to doubters. One slide features a photo of Ronald Reagan, and a quote from 1971 boasting of the rehabilitation and parole systems he presided over while governor of California.

Texas' pendulum swing began in 2003, Levin says, when the Legislature mandated that small-time drug offenders be given probation instead of jail time.

Four years later, he said, the state made a "historic shift" when, instead of building more prisons, it spent $241 million on treatment programs for nonviolent criminals. The 2010 state budget funded 64 "reentry transitional coordinators," who help prisoners returning to society find housing and jobs.

Serious crime in Texas is on the decline. Between 2007 and 2008, the incarceration rate fell 4.5%, while states on average saw a 0.8% increase. And the state has avoided building 17,000 prison beds it once thought it needed, resulting in a savings of more than $2 billion.

Levin believes government should still be tough on violent criminals and respectful of crime victims, whom he considers "consumers" of justice. In 2008, he noted, Texas probationers paid $45 million in victim restitution, ostensibly because they were able to work. Those in prison paid less than $500,000.

There are other conservative elements to the argument, including a criticism of the "overcriminalization" of business and a push for more incentive-based policies, like a 2009 California plan that pays cash bonuses to county probation agencies that lower recidivism.

Reform in Texas has been relatively well received among conservatives, in part because of the results, and in part because of a good sales job. Texas is among a number of states that have received guidance from the Pew Center's Public Safety Performance Project, which promises that reforms will be data-driven and not affect public safety.

In March, two research companies polled 1,200 U.S. voters and conducted focus groups for Pew, then suggested "effective messages" for lawmakers interested in reform. Among the tips: Focus on the success in Texas, given its "strong law-and-order reputation." And avoid arguments based on "racial justice concerns."

But even conservative reform has its critics.

The Assn. of Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys is opposing a criminal justice overhaul supported by Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels that would, among other things, shorten sentences for selling cocaine and methamphetamine.

Velazquez, of the Justice Policy Institute, said conservative prison reform advocates now share a vulnerability with their more liberal counterparts: the political reckoning that may come when a parolee or probationer commits a spectacular crime. Will conservative voters favor reform then?

"The challenge," she said, "will be when something bad happens."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-conservative-crime-20110129,0,5495938,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gun safety hearings rejected by chairman of House Judiciary Committee

Sixteen Democrats on the panel sent a letter to Republican Rep. Lamar Smith requesting hearings in the aftermath of the Tucson shootings. Smith rejected the request, saying they could prejudice the shooting suspect's upcoming trial.

by James Oliphant, Los Angeles Times

January 28, 2011

Reporting from Washington

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on Friday rejected a request from Democrats to hold hearings related to gun safety in the aftermath of the shootings in Tucson earlier this month.

All 16 Democrats on the committee, which has jurisdiction over firearms laws, sent a letter to Rep. Lamar Smith, the Texas Republican who recently took charge of the panel, asking him to convene hearings on the use of high-capacity magazines and improving background checks to prevent the mentally ill from obtaining guns.

"It is more important than ever that we examine our gun safety laws and regulations," said Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the top Democrat on the committee. "It is simply common sense to limit the availability of high-capacity magazines, and ensure that individuals banned by law from owning firearms are, in fact, prevented from buying guns."

But Smith, in a statement released by the committee, said any such hearings could prejudice the upcoming trial of the shooting suspect, Jared Lee Loughner.

In the letter, the Democrats noted that the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 would have banned the magazine Loughner allegedly used to kill six and injure 13, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, outside a Tucson supermarket Jan. 8. "It has been widely reported that Mr. Loughner used a magazine that allowed him to fire over 30 rounds and that only when he attempted to reload was he able to be subdued," they said. The issue "should be reviewed," the Democrats said.

Democrats also suggested that at least 1.6 million "disqualifying" records of mentally ill people are missing from the national database used by firearms dealers to check the backgrounds of gun buyers. Because Loughner "may have had mental health issues," the letter said, the database's effectiveness should be examined, the Democrats said.

Smith, in his response, said the committee should review the database, known as the National Instant Criminal Background Check System "at the appropriate time." But hearings now might affect criminal proceedings in which Loughner's "mental status is likely to be a key issue," he said.

"Jared Loughner has not been found to be mentally ill," Smith said. "It is inappropriate for Congress to hold hearings on NICS that presume otherwise while Loughner is facing trial."

Since the expiration of the assault weapons ban, gun-control efforts on Capitol Hill have been lonely endeavors. Republicans, along with an increasing number of Democrats, have embraced gun rights and resisted most attempts at regulation.

After their colleague, Giffords, was shot, some House Democrats introduced bills that would ban high-capacity magazines and close a loophole in background checks relating to gun shows, but that legislation isn't expected to go forward.

Members of the California delegation who signed the letter included Reps. Howard Berman, Zoe Lofgren, Maxine Waters, Judy Chu, and Linda Sanchez.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gun-safety-hearings-20110128,0,7033269,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Parolee arrested on suspicion of making threats against Diane Watson

A 41-year-old South Los Angeles parolee was arrested early Friday in connection with a series of recent phone calls threatening to kill retired U.S. Rep. Diane Watson, authorities said.

Sheron Nelson was arrested in South L.A. at the office of his parole agent, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department said in a statement.

Sheriff's Lt. Kent Wegener said authorities had recovered the telephone used to make the calls to Watson. The telephone belonged to the suspect, Wegener said. The suspect “implicated himself” during questioning, Wegener said in the Sheriff Department's statement.

A search of the suspect's home revealed no weapons but did turn up “numerous stolen electronic items,” the sheriff's office said.

Nelson was booked on suspicion of making felony terrorist threats against Watson, as well as on suspicion of felony identity theft, the Sheriff's Department said. He is not eligible for bail since he is on parole on an unrelated terrorist threats conviction, the department said.

Investigators are seeking a motive for the threatening phone calls. Watson and her assistant answered the phone, and each was threatened with death, said Capt. Mike Parker, a Sheriff's Department spokesman.

Watson, 77, who announced her retirement last year after almost a decade in Congress, is aware of the arrest, Parker said.

Watson, a pioneering African American lawmaker in California, is also a former member of the Los Angeles school board and the California Senate.

Plugging the airport security gaps

Post-9/11 security has done its job, but we must continue to adapt. To foil endlessly resourceful terrorists, we need to improve in three areas.

by Kip Hawley

January 29, 2011

After this week's airport bomb attack in Moscow, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev declared that there was a "systemic failure to provide security." That is difficult to dispute. But the claims of Domodedovo Airport's spokesperson that "we fully met all the requirements in the sphere of air transport security for which we are responsible" was probably also correct. Yet ultimately, dozens of people are dead and dozens more wounded. So who is to blame? What's wrong with the system? And are we in America also at risk?

In the United States, we divide security responsibility according to who performs the activity. For example, Transportation Security Administration personnel search carry-on bags at checkpoints, while airport law enforcement officers patrol the airport perimeter. TSA also requires that airports make public address announcements and not allow vehicles to park at the airport curb, and that airlines inspect aircraft food trays. Each activity costs money, so TSA requires only what it can justify, write down and audit.

But security that depends on an auditable checklist of written requirements is always going to be vulnerable to an enemy that can change the method of attack based on those regulations. Once TSA publishes what is required, three things happen: vulnerability is embedded where those measures are weak; the minimum required becomes the maximum undertaken by the security players; and the regulated party feels protected from blame because it did what was required. Unfortunately, in counter-terrorism, regulations alone are not enough.

When responsibility is finally determined in Russia, there probably will be a gap between what Domodedovo Airport was required to do and what it could have done to prevent the attack. But top-down rules allocate responsibility in slices, fragmenting responsibility, thereby eliminating any one party's accountability in security's overall outcome. A corollary vulnerability is that no government can issue regulations quickly enough to cover every conceivable angle of attack. Therefore, if compliance with set rules is our system, it is a system born to fail.

Post-9/11 security has done its job, but we must continue to adapt. To foil endlessly resourceful terrorists, we need to improve in three areas.

First, we need multiple layers of security deployed throughout the airport that are changing regularly and, to outsiders, seem unpredictable. Layers such as K-9 teams, random inspections and behavior detection agents, by their very randomness, prevent terrorists from identifying a security gap and exploiting it.

Second, ownership of the security result must be jointly shared. TSA, the airports, airlines, law enforcement, vendors and, yes, the traveling public all share responsibility for our security outcomes. The fear of blame within a security apparatus leads to bureaucratic inaction, which eventually leads to gaping security holes.

And last, we need active assessment and allocation of risk-management resources that balance what I call risk tradeoffs.

Effective security is, in fact, risk management. Our political leaders and security authorities make judgments about where to set the risk-management needle. They have chosen to take the minimum possible risk at airport passenger checkpoints, resulting in pat-downs and plastic bags. The needle registers a little more tolerance in the maintenance area, or so-called backside of airports, and more still in the public areas. But how much risk do we want to accept in these public areas? And how much more hassle can we take?

When we call for more security in public areas, we should be searching for a risk balance that protects us yet is sustainable.

The victims' families in Russia, or anywhere, do not care about excuses from segments of security that each claim it did its job according to the rules. When responsibility is diffused in systemic failure, we may tweak procedures, assure ourselves that we have fixed the problem, while disregarding the truth that static security based on regulations isn't enough. Risk management must be constantly assessed and depends on each of the participants accepting ownership and being actively involved in how resources are deployed.

Before we hear the words "systemic failure" again, we should take another look at regulation-based security and recognize that compliance with procedure is not enough when it comes to stopping terrorism threats.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-hawley-tsa-20110129,0,5114328,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the New York Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Russia Adopts Color-Coded Terror Alert System

by ELLEN BARRY

MOSCOW — Under intense pressure to ratchet up security measures after the terrorist attack Monday at the airport here, Russian lawmakers on Friday fast-tracked the introduction of a color-coded alert system similar to the one adopted by the United States after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The decision came as the Obama administration scrapped its color-coded system, which officials said provided the public with little helpful information. In a speech on Thursday, the homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, said the United States government would now identify threats as either “imminent” or “elevated,” explain the threat as fully as possible and suggest specific responses.

Russia began discussing a color-coded system months ago, after two suicide bombers exploded in Moscow's subway, killing 40 people. After Monday's attack at Domodedovo Airport, however, President Dmitri A. Medvedev 's angry response has focused almost exclusively on transportation security, and agents who he said act “entirely passively” as soon as the initial shock of an attack has passed.

“After a terrorist attack, in many cases, metal detectors were put in place at transport facilities,” he said. “They worked in the beginning, with everyone being sent through them, but then everything stopped, and people could come and go as they pleased.”

The Russian system would categorize threats as blue, yellow and red, in order of seriousness. The bill was presented Friday by the deputy director of the Federal Security Service, the domestic successor to the K.G.B., and the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian Parliament, approved it in the first of three required readings.

Fred Burton, a counterterrorism expert at the global intelligence company Stratfor, said the United States had modeled its system on coded alerts used on military bases, which would then dictate security measures like vehicle searches. He said that it was “a knee-jerk reaction” and that it proved impossible to control how people would respond.

“Nobody really understands it,” he said. “I've been a counterterrorism agent, but I couldn't tell you on any given day what color code you were in, because it doesn't really mean anything.”

He said that France used such a system, and that Britain adopted one and then dropped it.

A video of Monday's attack — which was saved on a remote server despite the demolition of the camera — revealed that the bomber, dressed in a black baseball cap and jacket, stood calmly in a crowd for about 15 minutes before detonating the explosives, keeping his left hand in his coat pocket the whole time. At times he appeared to be waiting for someone, a law enforcement official told the Interfax news agency on condition of anonymity.

Investigators concluded that the explosion was conducted at a predetermined time.

“The fact is that the terrorist had a chance to detonate the explosive device when the concentration of people around him would be at his maximum, however he did not do so,” the official said, adding that it appeared that the bomber worked alone. At least 35 people were killed.

After examining video from the airport's arrivals hall, the police did not believe that a man named whose name was leaked to the news media as a suspect, Vitaly Razdobudko, was the bomber, a law enforcement official told the RIA-Novosti news agency. After Mr. Razdobudko's name was leaked, his image — that of a young Slavic man who had embraced fundamentalist Islam — dominated news reports for a day and a half.

The video “clearly shows that it is a different person,” the official said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/world/europe/29russia.html?_r=1&ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

President Is Likely to Discuss Gun Control Soon

WASHINGTON — Administration officials say that President Obama, largely silent about gun control since the Tucson shooting carnage, will address the issue soon, potentially reopening a long-dormant debate on one of the nation's most politically volatile issues.

The officials did not indicate what measures, if any, Mr. Obama might support; with Republicans in control of the House and many Democrats fearful of the gun lobby's power, any legislation faces long odds for passage. Among the skeptics is the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada.

Still, Mr. Obama has come under increased pressure to speak out from gun-control advocates, including urban Democrats in Congress and liberal activists and editorial writers. They would like him to at least support a bill that would restore an expired federal ban on the sort of high-capacity ammunition magazine that was used in the Jan. 8 shootings in Tucson that killed six people and injured 13, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Democrat of Arizona.

The advocates, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York, were critical after Mr. Obama did not propose any measures in his State of the Union address Tuesday night to address gun violence. In interviews since, senior White House advisers have said without specifics that Mr. Obama would address the issue in coming weeks, though just how has not been decided.

“I wouldn't rule out that at some point the president talks about the issues surrounding gun violence,” Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Wednesday. “I don't have a timetable or, obviously, what he would say.”

David Axelrod, a senior adviser to the president, separately told reporters that Mr. Obama would “no doubt” speak out before long.

Mr. Bloomberg, who is co-chairman of a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said in his weekly radio address on Friday that he was newly “encouraged” because “some of the president's staff said that he was planning a speech on the problem and on guns and what he would do, and I think that's great if he does that.”

When several White House aides were asked about that comment, each referred to Mr. Gibbs's earlier comment.

Representative Carolyn McCarthy, a Democrat of New York who has introduced legislation to ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, said she was hopeful that Mr. Obama would now respond to “the pressure that's been coming out from all the different groups and almost every paper I know of.”

Such a ban was part of a broader law banning many assault weapons that was enacted in 1994 by a Democratic-controlled Congress and allowed to expire 10 years later when Republicans were in control. Many Democrats have shied from gun legislation ever since 1994, blaming the loss of their House and Senate majorities that year partly on the assault weapons ban, which enraged the gun lobby, in particular the National Rifle Association.

Ms. McCarthy, who won election in 1996 as a gun-control crusader, three years after her husband was killed and her son injured by a man who opened fire on passengers on a Long Island commuter train, said, “I don't see how anybody could get the assault weapons ban passed in this kind of climate with the N.R.A.”

But a ban on high-capacity magazines is possible, she said, adding, “If I didn't think I could pass something, I wouldn't push as hard as I've been pushing.”

Mr. Obama supported gun-control legislation as a state senator in Illinois, and as a presidential candidate he opposed laws allowing concealed weapons and endorsed those requiring tougher background checks of gun buyers and a permanent assault weapons ban. But as president he has been a big disappointment to gun-control groups.

A year ago, one of the main groups, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, gave him an “F” for his first year in office. Its report cited, among other things, his signing of a law permitting people to carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked luggage on Amtrak trains, and his failure to name a director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

“Not only did he not champion the cause, he actually signed bad legislation into law,” said Dennis A. Henigan, vice president of the Brady Campaign.

Mr. Obama recently nominated Andrew Traver, chief of the firearms bureau's Chicago office, as director of the agency. Mr. Traver immediately drew N.R.A. opposition, throwing his Senate confirmation into jeopardy. And the administration recently proposed rules to require gun sellers in states bordering Mexico to report multiple sales of rifles and shotguns, to stem gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels.

Mr. Henigan called those actions “encouraging signs.” He added, “The White House has certainly been sending signals that it realizes that it can't go forward avoiding the word ‘gun,' which is basically what it did for two years.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/us/politics/29obama.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Department of Justice

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women Meeting

Washington, D.C. ~ Friday, January 28, 2011

Thank you, Sue [Carbon]. Let me also thank your team in the Department's Office on Violence Against Women – as well as my colleagues in the Office of Justice Programs, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the COPS Office, and our partners from the Department of Health and Human Services and other federal agencies – for your work in bringing us together today.

This is an extraordinary group. And it's a pleasure to welcome this circle of law enforcement officers and judges, attorneys and advocates, nonprofit leaders and health experts, researchers and policymakers, and social workers and service providers, to the Department of Justice.

On behalf of the entire Department – and on behalf of Secretary Sebelius, who, unfortunately, could not be with us today – thank you all for being here. Your presence today – and your participation on this National Advisory Committee – is encouraging. And it's so important.

Though you represent many different areas of expertise, each of you has one thing in common: a commitment to protecting the safety, and potential, of our young people, especially our young women and girls. This is critical work – and the challenges that young people across the country now face could not be more urgent.

In America today, more than three out of five children have been exposed to crime, violence or abuse – in their neighborhoods, in their schools, or in their own homes. Almost forty percent of children have been direct victims of two or more violent acts. And approximately 10% of adolescents nationwide report being the victim of physical violence at the hands of an intimate partner.

Teens who experience dating violence are more likely to suffer long-term negative behavioral and health consequences, including suicide attempts, eating disorders and drug use. And we've seen that adolescents in abusive relationships can carry these unhealthy patterns of violence into future relationships.

We cannot ignore these consequences. And we must break this cycle.

Today, we can all be encouraged that the Obama Administration is committed to engaging a broad spectrum of community partners to help stem teen dating violence and safeguard our children. This is a Cabinet-level priority. But Secretary Sebelius and I recognize that, in meeting the goals and responsibilities that we share, government can't do it alone. To succeed in assisting and empowering young women and girls, we need your help. And we'll be relying on your guidance – and your commitment to collaboration.

We've learned that – in combating youth violence and preventing teen dating violence – doctors can inform the work of teachers, researchers can broaden the perspective of lawyers, and social workers can educate judges.

I think that Amber Johnson, a 16-year-old youth advocate from Providence, Rhode Island – and the youngest member of this committee – put it best when she explained why, in addressing youth and teen dating violence, policymakers must start examining legal, educational, and health systems together.

“You guys would be amazed,” she said, “at how much this stuff is intertwined.”

Amber is right. We know that girls can't do well in school when they are unhealthy or in danger. We know that emotional stability is the foundation for academic success. And we know that greater access – to information about the warning signs of violence and to medical and legal services – can be critical to ensuring justice.

So, I am deeply grateful for your willingness to come together, to take on this new challenge, and to help inform and advance the work that the Departments of Justice and HHS are leading.

For me, the issue of children's exposure to violence has been both a personal and professional concern for decades. As our nation's Attorney General, and as a parent of two teenage daughters, addressing violence rates – and implementing bold, innovative and collaborative solutions – is a top priority.

That's what the National Advisory Committee – and today's meeting – is all about. By working together, I believe we can empower adolescents to understand and to develop healthy relationships before violence and abuse can begin. And I am confident that we can help more young people identify signs of abuse, and assist them in locating services.

These are the goals of this Committee – goals that I'm hopeful we will come closer to meeting today, as we work toward the creation of a strategic, comprehensive action plan. In this effort, your insights and expertise are critical. And I look forward to hearing from – and working with – you all.

Once again, I want to thank you – for your service, for your enthusiasm, and for your vision of a world where our young people, especially our young women, are no longer exposed to violence.

I am grateful, and proud, to call you my partners. And I look forward to what we will accomplish together.

Thank you.

http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2011/ag-speech-110128.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Georgia Man Sentenced to Life in Prison for Child Sex Abuse Offenses

WASHINGTON - Dwain D. Williams, 37, was sentenced today by U.S. District Court Judge W. Louis Sands to life in prison for child sex abuse offenses, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Michael J. Moore of the Middle District of Georgia.

Williams, of Pelham, Ga., was convicted on Aug. 19, 2010, by a federal jury in Valdosta, Ga., of one count of traveling in foreign commerce and engaging in illicit sexual conduct, one count of aggravated sexual abuse and one count of abusive sexual contact of a child under 12 years of age. The aggravated sexual abuse and the abusive sexual contact charges were committed while Williams was accompanying a member of the Armed Forces outside of the United States in violation of the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA).

At trial, the female victim testified that Williams had repeatedly raped her starting from when she was nine years old until she was 13.

This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys' Offices and the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov

The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Leah McEwen of the Middle District of Georgia and Trial Attorney Mi Yung Park of the Criminal Division's CEOS. The case was investigated by the FBI and the Office of Special Investigations for Moody Air Force.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/January/11-crm-122.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From ICE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ICE most wanted fugitive arrested at JFK on human trafficking charges

Extorted more than $1 million in earnings from victims

DETROIT - Special agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) arrested today one of ICE's top ten fugitives at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.

Veniamin Gonikman, 55, was charged in Detroit in 2005 in a 22-count indictment with trafficking in persons, forced labor, alien smuggling, money laundering, extortion collection and conspiracy, among other charges. He absconded from the United States before being formally charged.

Gonikman, a U.S. citizen, was arrested in Ukraine yesterday, before being deported to the United States. HSI special agents assigned to ICE's attaché office in Germany coordinated Gonikman's arrest and deportation with Ukrainian officials.

According to court records, he came to the attention of HSI special agents in Detroit in 2005 when one of his victims escaped and agents later confirmed he was operating a company called "Beauty Search, Inc.," in metro Detroit.

The indictment alleges that Gonikman, along with his co-conspirators, formed and operated Beauty Search as a corporate cover for a human trafficking operation which smuggled and harbored Eastern European women in the United States. The women were exploited and abused by forcing them - through threats, coercion and isolation - to work as exotic dancers for the economic benefit of the Beauty Search partners.

The women primarily staffed strip clubs in Detroit, where it is alleged they were forced to work 12 hours a day and have all of the proceeds extorted by Gonikman and his associates. The indictment and other court papers allege that the women gave the co-conspirators more than $1 million of their earnings.

In an effort to highlight the global threat of human trafficking, one of the conspiracy's victims testified before the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary in 2007 about her treatment at the hands of the Beauty Search partners.

"They forced me to work six days a week for twelve hours a day," she said. "I could not refuse to go to work or I would be beaten. I had to hand over all of my money. I was often yelled at for not making enough money or had a gun put to my face. Every week I handed over around $3000 to $4000. I was their slave."

Gonikman will make an initial appearance tomorrow in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. He is scheduled to be extradited to the Eastern District of Michigan at a later date to face the current charges.

"This arrest is a potent example of ICE's unyielding resolve to bring human traffickers to justice," said ICE Director John Morton. "Victims in forced labor cases are particularly vulnerable targets who are lured with promises of employment and stable lives and then end up in abusive and deplorable situations."

Gonikman's associates including his son Aleksandr Maksimenko, Duay Joseph Jado, Evgeniy Prokopenko and Michail Aronovo were previously convicted and sentenced on similar charges. They are currently serving prison sentences ranging from seven to 14 years.

Three other defendants in this case were also convicted.

Gonikman, like all defendants, is presumed innocent until proven guilty. If convicted, he faces a maximum of 20 years in federal prison, plus potential fines and restitution.

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1101/110127detroit.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ICE arrests 5 criminal sex offenders in the Rio Grande Valley

HARLINGEN, Texas - Five south Texas men, who were convicted of sexual offences against children, were arrested this week by officers with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) in an operation targeting convicted criminal aliens. The enforcement activity was conducted by ICE ERO Fugitive Operations and the Criminal Alien program units. The operation was designed to locate and arrest at-large criminal aliens with sex offense convictions.

"ICE takes a prioritized approach to immigration enforcement, focusing first on identifying and removing aliens who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety," said Michael J. Pitts, field office director of ICE ERO in San Antonio. "Our operation this week is yet another example of the critical role that targeted immigration enforcement plays in protecting our communities."

A top priority for the San Antonio Field Office is to first focus on identifying and removing aliens who a pose a danger to our national security or a risk to public safety," said Michael J. Pitts, field office director for ICE ERO in San Antonio. "This operation is yet another example of the critical role that targeted immigration enforcement plays in protecting our communities."

All five men are Mexican nationals who were administratively arrested for violating U.S. immigration laws. They are all being held in ICE custody pending immigration court proceedings or deportation. Following is a list of the convicted criminal aliens who were arrested by ICE officers and agents during the operation; they have been placed into deportation proceedings: (For privacy reasons, ICE does not release the names of aliens who have been administratively arrested.)

A 46 year old convicted of aggravated assault of a child and Indecency with a child by sexual contact;

• A 35 year of old convicted of Indecency of child by sexual contact;
• A 71 year old convicted of Indecency with a child by sexual contact;
• A 62 year old convicted of Indecency with a child by exposure; and
• A 24 year old convicted of sexual assault of a child.

ICE ERO places a high priority on combating illegal immigration, including targeting illegal aliens with criminal records who pose a threat to public safety.

This enforcement action was spearheaded by ICE's Fugitive Operations Program, which is responsible for locating, arresting and removing at-large criminal aliens and immigration fugitives. ICE's Fugitive Operations Teams (FOTs) give top priority to cases involving aliens who pose a threat to national security and public safety, including members of transnational street gangs and child sex offenders.

Largely as a result of these initiatives, ICE last year removed a record number of more than 392,800 aliens from the United States; of that number, more than 195,700 were aliens with criminal convictions.

ICE's Fugitive Operations Program is just one facet of the Department of Homeland Security's broader strategy to heighten the federal government's effectiveness at identifying and removing dangerous criminal aliens from the United States. Other initiatives that figure prominently in this effort are the Criminal Alien Program, Secure Communities and the agency's partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies under 287(g).

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1101/110128harlingen.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Human Traffickers Indicted

Massive Case Involves 600 Thai Victims

01/28/11

It seemed pretty straightforward: labor recruiters in Thailand approached impoverished rural farm workers—who made around $1,000 (U.S.) annually—and offered jobs on American farms for higher pay.   

Many, hoping to provide a better life for their families, accepted the offer, which was made through an American company called Global Horizons, in the business of recruiting foreign workers to work in the U.S. agricultural industry. But once in the U.S., the Thai workers soon discovered a harsh reality: they worked for little or no pay, and they were held in place with threats and intimidation.  

Eventually, their plight became known to law enforcement, and earlier this month, after a multiagency investigation, two additional defendants—accused of being part of the scheme to hold 600 Thai nationals in forced agricultural labor—were indicted in federal court in Honolulu. They joined six individuals who had been indicted last fall.

Among those indicted? The CEO of Global Horizons, several Global employees, and two Thai labor recruiters.

The latest indictment alleges a conspiracy among those indicted that began in 2001 and ran until 2007.

How the scheme worked.

Thai recruiters allegedly met with rural farm workers, promising them good salaries, lots of hours, decent housing, and an employment contract that guaranteed work for up to three years. All the workers had to do was sign the contract…and pay a “recruitment fee.”

The recruitment fees were substantial…anywhere between $9,500 and $21,000. And even though they were given the option of paying a portion of the fee upfront and the rest while working in the U.S., the workers still had to borrow money to pay the smaller amount and up their family's land as collateral.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., Global Horizons was soliciting client growers—at various agricultural conferences and through mailings—with offers to supply foreign agricultural workers.   

Conditions were tough.

According to the indictment, once in the U.S., workers found that the work was not as plentiful as they had been led to believe, the hours not as long, and the pay not as good (that is, when they were paid at all).  

While working on farms in places like Hawaii and in several other parts of the country, they sometimes lived under brutal circumstances: at one place, workers were crammed into a large shipping container, with no indoor plumbing or air conditioning. Guards were sometimes hired to make sure no one escaped the living quarters. And workers sometimes witnessed threats of violence or experienced it first-hand.

They were made to feel as though they had no way out: workers' passports had been confiscated upon their arrival and they were told if they escaped, they would be arrested and sent back to Thailand, with no way to repay their debts and possibly leaving their families destitute.

Human trafficking investigations like these are—and will continue to be—a priority under the FBI's Civil Rights Program . During fiscal year 2010 alone, we opened 126 human trafficking investigations and made 115 arrests, with the assistance of our law enforcement partners often working together on task forces and working groups.

But perhaps more gratifying, we were able to completely dismantle 12 human trafficking organizations. And resulting prosecutions led to $2.7 million in fines and restitution for the victims of human trafficking.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/january/trafficking_012811/trafficking_012811

.