MS AG uses false information and deception on SuperTalkMS

By Sandy . . . March 21 , 2022, Mississippi attorney general Lynn Fitch appeared on a talk show, the Gerard Gibert show, on SuperTalkMS. This was during Judge Ketanji Jackson’s questioning by the senate regarding  her fitness to serve on our nation’s highest court. On the program, Ms. Finch questioned that fitness  in regard to the judge’s prior sentencing in some of the cases before her. In her attempts to paint as sordid a picture as possible, Ms. Finch was misleading and deceptive in the examples she chose and the information she presented. I wrote to her and copied in the show’s host, Mr. Gibert, of my concerns with this. A week has gone by with no response from either of them, and I have now written of the matter to the editors of the top five newspapers in Mississippi. What I want — what we as an organization want — is acknowledgment not only of misinformation being used but, more importantly, acknowledgement of the actual facts.

This is the content of my letter to Attorney General Fitch:

Dear Ms. Fitch,

I watched you with Gerard Gibert on SuperTalkMS and heard you speak about the need to provide safety for our citizens and especially protection for our children. Those words resonate with me, for I also, a mother and grandmother, want the world kept safe and those I love protected.

However, I found as I listened that your arguments and reasons are not in line with what I know to be true and therefore not what I expect from an elected official.

You spoke of a study out “recently” in North Carolina in which 85% of the men who were imprisoned with federal charges of child pornography possession also admitted to hands-on offenses against children. Possibly that is all you know of the study. You were speaking of the Butner-Redux Study, done from 2002-2005 – not very recent. It consisted of fewer than two hundred men in prison for possession of illegal images. The findings immediately came under fire and criticism due to institutional bias, sloppy methodology, misrepresentational sampling, flawed data gathering, and subject coercion. Subjects who denied any hands-on offenses were punished with disfavor and ostracism; those who “admitted” such offenses were rewarded. The study is considered questionable at best, fraudulent at worst, today.

Secondly, you attacked Judge Jackson as being “soft on sex offenders” and “overlooking the value of the victims, these children.” Judge Jackson’s record is clear that her sentencing of those who came before her charged with a sexual crime was not “soft” nor neglectful of the victims in the least.  Your language seemed designed to terrify the public into believing that a crime wave will be unleashed on the nation if Judge Jackson is on the Supreme Court. In your criticism of the “left,” your subtext was that only judges considered “conservative” can stave off disaster.  I reject such scare tactics; this is not what I want from elected officials.

Thirdly, you attacked, as you have done previously, the American Law Institute’s recommendations for revision to the sexual crimes section of its Model Penal Code. You over and over misrepresented the results of dropping some offenses from registry eligibility. You used phrases such as saying this would be “done at the expense of the people,” that law enforcement “will not go after” individuals who commit these crimes, that it is “letting them off the hook,” that the law would be “protecting predators rather than victims,” and that victims “will have no recourse.” In this you are being not only disingenuous but also obfuscatory. The crimes you speak of will still be charged and prosecuted. Those who have broken the law and are convicted will still be punished. The legal establishment will not cease to function because some offenses do not qualify for a sexual offense registry. The legal establishment and the justice system functioned for many decades before sexual offense registries existed.

Everything that ALI recommends is in keeping with what years of solid research show most effective in promoting the safety for society that you and I desire. Judge Jackson’s comments, which predate ALI’s recommendations but are in line with them, are likewise consistent with a large body of empirical evidence which set the standard on which elected congressional representatives should build. I expect them to be cognizant of solid evidence and to base their bills and laws on it.

This is also what I ask of you. Be aware of the facts of an issue before you speak or write on the issue. Base your statements, opinions, and conclusions on the facts without twisting them to fit an agenda or resorting to scare tactics. This is what I expect of all public officials. This is what I expect of you.

Sincerely,

Sandy Rozek

image_pdfimage_print
Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

9 Thoughts to “MS AG uses false information and deception on SuperTalkMS”

Leave a Comment

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please don not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. Annoymous

    Thank you for standing up for what is right and defending research and the truth rather allowing misinformation to be spread unchallenged. The language she used is dangerous. As a researcher myself a PhD candidate, we are taught to be bias-free when conducting research. It is clear that Dr.Michael Bourke study is biased and is in favor of the State. Doing a little research on his back, discovered on his linkedin he listen several different types of jobs from United State Marshal, Adjunct faculty to Staff psychologist of sex offender treatment program and so on. He has volunteered in the majority of youth programs and is a part of groups such as the international police association and police and public safety psychology. This is an individual who would not be capable of being natural and bias-free. The research is based on 15% that completed treatment not on the overall population and rewarded thus who was coercion into making false statements for early release and time reduce. Unfortunately, this reminds me a lot of 2003 case Smith v. Doe 538 U.S 84 when Judge Kennedy used false misleading information about recidivism in sex offenders with unfounded statistics. This is why Lynn Fitch is misleading the public because she is covering up the truth. It is interesting to see the major shift from the white house defending Judge Jackson and providing words of encouragement for change. We should focus on what the white house is saying and supportive research to bring to light the truth about sex offender registry and the unconstitutionally. Smth v. Doe needs to be overturned and abolish the SOR.

  2. Tim in WI

    False info and deception is the null output from most of our political class on both sides. No different than the precedent set in Smith V Doe majority, so why would the AG set behave otherwise. That decision set a legal standard justifying the people’s plainly retributive actions under the guise of social welfare. It is obviously an absurd characterisation that public welfare advanced when factually engaging in the prohibited use of ex post language in law. The people point to recidivism, but this too has been the historical pattern of unconstitutional rulers who frequently adopted such tactics. No need for the foundational manifest to insist upon the prohibitions in Article 1, if history hadn’t already proven their use leads deterioration of liberty and self governance.

    This desolidifies the authority of the judicial branch and the necessary finality in resolution of all conflicts civil or criminal. The people substantially NEED to trust the courts for the system to work. In short, they need faith in them to restrain the other politicized branches. It also keeps the courts efficient as they’re not forced to reconsider ad nausium completely settled claims. (See Michigan)
    The attacks in the Senate upon Brown and Kavanaugh before her do great harm to the people’s perception of the judges themselves. One side and the other always take to opportunity to grandstand and morally aggrandize themselves and their respective party, while simultaneously degrading and demoralizing the other. Why would you expect Ms. Fitch be any different? I appreciate you letter to her and I plan to send her one myself. I will not be so kind to her delusions. I will also include the peer reviews which criticized that study.

  3. Facts should matter

    Sandy, when you call them on their BS, they unfortunately double down and dig their heels in deeper with their toxic fear and hate mongering. It’s as though they “take pride” in exploiting unwarranted fear for political gain.

    Maybe that’s because they actually do. Then they get huffy when called on their highly speculative nonsense. .

    1. CJB

      Facts Should Matter…

      As One Seasoned and Retired Politician, Once Told Me,(And Most AG’s are Politicians), it is Only About Their Re-election Campaign; The Minute They Are Elected, They Begin Immediately on Their Next Election Campaign….YOU gotta keep those Donations or Illegal Contributions Coming IN……Think About this: Our Tax dollars Pay for These SMUCKS!
      -We Pay For Them To Exist!
      OXYMORON, AT BEST!

      ( And, Ms. Sandy, Does a Great Job at Exploiting This

  4. A Mistake They Made

    Thanks for standing up for registrants Sandy!

  5. Dr.

    @sandy,
    I tip my hat to you, that was the perfect response to that attorney general, will supertalkms give you equal time on the air ? I’m in Michigan but I’ll pitch in to cover the cost of getting you on the air down there.

  6. Screwed over in Mississippi

    I live in Ms. The laws are crooked the lawyers and judges are worse. The cops make you a criminal if they can’t find what they want the lie. They keep changing make the men and women on the registry life harder and harder to live. All those good news stories you read will never be about Mississippi. Creating S.O. is to lucrative to make this Bs stop.

  7. Jeremy from Indiana

    I dealt with this exact thing when I was locked up. They forced you to admit past sexual transgressions in the treatment program and you were “denied” incentives if you failed to do so. What they considered previous hands on victimization was quite skewed as well. If you were playing house with a family member at 8 years old, that was considered a “hands-on” offense. If you had a consensual encounter as a child with another child, but there were elements of coercion or persuasion involved, it was considered hands-on. If you ever had any sexual encounter with someone who had one drop of alcohol, it was considered non-consensual. I’m surprised with these skewed statistics that it wasn’t higher than 85% for that “study”. When I took statistics in college, this study would’ve gotten me a big fat F.

  8. Flossy

    That was incredibly well written and powerful! Great job!!!