The group, GA SafeKids, is composed of individuals from Cherokee County who wish to remain anonymous.
A spokesperson for the group said they are a branch of Operation SafeKids, whose Facebook page states the group is “a not-for-profit collective of people that have come together to have Facebook remove child porn, sex trafficking and pedophilia from the social network.”
“After death of Jorelys, we realized people in Cherokee County didn’t realize sex offenders lived across street from them, so we started doing something more local,” a GA SafeKids spokesperson said.
GA SafeKids’ Facebook page, created on Saturday, instructs Facebook users to do do two things: report Facebook pages of convicted sex offenders by notifying GA SafeKids on their Facebook page or via email, and report the pages of convited sex offenders listed on the GA SafeKids page to Facebook.
Facebook policy states that sex offenders are prohibited from using Facebook.
“Once we are able to verify a user’s status as a sex offender, we immediately disable their account and remove their account and all information associated with it,” reads the Facebook policy.
Facebook accepts the following forms of documentation to verify a convicted sex offender’s status: a link to a listing in a national sex offender registry, a link to an online news article, a link to a court document and/or documentation verifying the report attached to the sex offender report form.
“If Facebook gets enough reports, they take the person’s page down,” the spokesperson said. “We consider that a victory.”
GA SafeKids administrators then report these violations to local authorities to attempt to prevent future pages from going up.
“If it’s a web address containing (child porn), we send the information to the web hosting site and FBI to have the site taken off the web while the FBI can investigate the person trafficking,” an administrator wrote in a Facebook comment on Sunday.
Though GA SafeKids says it forwards information to law enforcement, there may be little authorities can legally do.
“There’s no Georgia law that I’m aware of that prohibits convicted sex offenders from using social media,” Georgia Bureau of Investigation spokesman John Bankhead said.
Lt. Jay Baker, spokesman for the Cherokee Sheriff’s Office, also said there are no state laws that apply to what a convicted sex offender can and cannot do on Facebook.
“With that said, some convicted sex offenders have restrictions on all types of activities they do on their computer,” Baker said, adding that it would fall under the conditions of that individual’s probation.
Baker noted that the Cherokee Sheriff’s Office welcomes any information from citizens or groups involving potentially criminal activity.
The GA SafeKids spokesperson said this was an effort of three local individuals who pursue child predators in their free time, adding that they will likely be more successful with the help of others.
“The more people that hear about [GA SafeKids,] the more people are going to feel comfortable reporting different things,” the spokesperson said, adding that the FBI have so far been cooperative with their efforts.
So far, GA SafeKids has successfully removed one Facebook page.
To contact GA SafeKids about a convicted sex offender, email gakids@hushmail.com.
This is the truth to what has happened behind the doors of the legislation office---
A)The Legislation is a business that bank-rolls on exploitation of sinful nature;
B)The Legislation is ran by business men and woman with college degrees in Economical Studies---
SO HOW CAN IT BE PROVEN THAT THE LEGISLATION USES THE SO REGISTRY TO MAKE MILLIONS?
1st--- It is said in the legislation that registration is not a punishment but a method of MAINTAINING RECORDS to prevent recidivism acts among SOs. !!!
WITH THIS BEING SAID... I am going to show you how these suited men and women behind that door forced the general public into a frenzy and made millions off of keeping and maintaining a record....
but, first I want to say one thing.... AND that is that the general public needs to be aware of the number of sex offenders that we now have--- and then think back decades ago, when Ted Bundy and Jeffry Dohmer were at large--- AND ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION????
DO WE REALLY HAVE HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF TED BUNDIES AND JEFFRY DOHMERS running around?
The is is "NO".
But those people in those suits and ties behind the doors to the offices that write the legislation would want it to seem that way in order to side track the general public's eye from the millions of dollars they make off of THE REGISTRY by implementing harmful offenders living among us in public.....
NUMBER ONE REASON OF PROOF---THE REGISTRATION IS A MONEY MAKING METHOD--- WHEN Ted Bundy And Jeffry Dohmer were caught, where did they spend the rest of their time?
IN PRISON---never to see daylight again...
Now, if everyone on the SO registration was so LABELED a MONSTER AND A PREDATOR--- THEN why do the states allow these offenders back into society???
DUH--- THEY AREN'T monsters !!!
USE YOUR COMMON SENSE----
THE LEGISLATION doesn't have a REGISTRY to make money off of if it cannot release people back into society... DO YOU KNOW WHAT GOES ALONG WITH SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION ? BESIDES THE REGISTRY FEES there are counseling fees to pay---- there are millions of dollars being made...
Now, for those people who say why don't they make a MURDER REGISTRY or a REGISTRY FOR OTHER OFFENSES?
Actually, anyone's charge can be looked up... simply go to the courthouse where the crime was committed get on a database computer, type in their first and last name and search their history it's free to look... roughly 75 cents a copy if you wish to print and you can view anyone's criminal history...
Now the thing with the SO registry--- the legislation says they try to make the general public aware of a person who committed a sexual offense... well, what they're really doing is making all these folks out to look so bad in the eyes of the public, that the public can't see all the money they're raking in.....
People like GAsafe fall right on into their "BLIND SIDING TRAP"..
GAsafe, why hide in the darkness?
I'm not knocking what you are trying to accomplish. You thought you could all get together and form a group that would help---you thought you were doing something right.
BUT ACTUALLY--- you're all proceeding with complete ignorance. You don't understand that the BOTTOM LINE to the entire registry is TO MAKE A DOLLAR BILL...
Sunny Perdue had this ad that he ran back in 2006 when being elected for government.... he'd spend millions on GBI and Local Authority sting operations on the internet to catch predators...
ha----ha-----
Facebook has guidelines... 18 years or older... if your child is on facebook... then shame on you GAsafe parents....
THE INTERNET IS THE DANGEROUS PLACE IN THE WORLD HANDS DOWN... you can learn to make drugs, bombs, date pyschos, still people's bank accounts, identities--- and harass people until they meet you in person and murders occur...
And you want to stop SEX OFFENDERS from using facebook... there are FEDERAL GUIDELINES in place that say MUST BE 18 YEARS OR OLDER----
GAsafe do you know why they are in place???
Because of the internet being the most dangerous place you dummies...
IF YOUR CHILD HAS A FACEBOOK PAGE---then you should be arrested for CHILD ENDANGERMENT !!!! BY simply letting your kids online on a facebook site... you are placing your child in danger....
Now, what Sunny Perdue should have done... is spent millions to make sure your child isn't online in underage chat rooms, and places like my space and yahoo Messenger...
Adults are adults they can be held responsible for their actions.... BUT CHILDREN need not to be in these interactive places...
NUMBER ONE REASON----it's dangerous...
NUMBER TWO REASON----Your ignorance to remove sex offenders off of internet is even more dangerous than trying to get your own KID OFF
SEE you'll be more successful---educating your child not use the computer to access sites that ADULTS are on.....
YOU HAVE TO CUT THE ROOT OUT--- the children are the root... NOW GAsafe group members go be a good parent and tell your child you are sorry for placing them in danger by allowing them to have a facebook account....
TELL YOUR CHILDREN--- you have placed them in danger out of ignorance.....
...now, on the other hand---I think a LAW SHOULD BE PASSED that any PARENT who knowingly or UNknowingly has a child with a facebook page should be arrested for CHILD ENDANGERMENT !!! for not watching over their children and allowing accessible means to all the danger online...
THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN not protect every child...
YOU as a child has to say, "Okay kids, no Facebook--the internet is dangerous---and then password protect your computer so they can't go behind your back and use it."
See, Governor Perdue, couldn't eliminate all sex offenders effectively from being online... that would be an ongoing process that would take millions of your tax paying dollars----years... years that they would still be making money...
When if they weren't out to make money... then they would tell you what I just told you...
MAKE SURE YOUR OWN CHILD DOESN'T GET ONLINE TO SITES THAT ADULTS INTERACT ON!!! CHILDREN DO NOT NEED TO BE EXPOSED TO ADULT SITUATIONS.. and that even goes for just ADULT JOKES online.....
but by every parent safeguarding their computer and internet access at home, eliminates your child from being a target of a predator... YOU ARE AT HOME.... LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN'T BE IN EVERY HOME watching every child's activity.... THAT'S EXACTLY why Sonny PERDUE didn't spend money to educate you on this.. because if he simply told you get the chilren off line... then he couldn't keep taking your tax dollars by saying.... "oh, we're in a lengthy process to get all internet predators off line"...
You see GAsafe--- you're ignorant to the bottom line... that THE LEGISLATION is a business, and not a child protection agency---- remember that next time your child gets on FACEBOOK...
GAignorance is what you need to change your name to.
I certainly agree with you that people who earn money from the Registries or from flimsy organizations whose goal is supposedly to "protect children" are scumbags. In fact, people who earn money from the Registries, prisons, or pretty much anything having to do with the prison industry, are scum. They will burn in hell. It is immoral to earn money by imprisoning or harassing people. Governments that "outsource" their prison businesses are morally bankrupt.
Having said that though, I don't know that people who work for the "child protection" scam organizations do it for "job security". Surely even those scumbags can get jobs elsewhere? But I'm sure plenty of them do it because they can get paid more there than they would ever be able to earn elsewhere. Take Mark Lundsford, for example. That moron could barely make minimum wage if he hadn't become a professional idiot/harasser.
But I would still like to think that some of the "child protection" do-gooders actually do have some good intentions. They are not all scum. I think John Walsh is likely a decent person. He is just misguided and deluded too though.
I don't think there is a large number of Romeo-Juliet cases on the Registries. And there are no intelligent people who think they should be on there. But that focus and arguing about Romeo-Juliet cases takes away from what the real focus should be. Even though most of the people listed on the Registries did bad or very, very bad things, there should be no Registries. They simply should not exist. They do nothing beneficial that we couldn't handle better some other way. They aren't protecting anyone. They are stupid, immoral, and counterproductive. Anyone who believes otherwise is a fool. Further, if the Registries are so wonderful, there are absolutely no legitimate excuses why we do not have millions more people Registered. That alone is plenty of reason why the zealots who support the Registries have no credibility.
Because Facebook has the worse-than-worthless policies that they do, it is a misguided, pathetic, ugly, un-American company. They have no principles and will do whatever they think will give them the best PR.
Because the Registries themselves are immoral and the adjunct idiocy that they have enabled is even more so, I do everything that is legal to ensure that not only is it all useless but that it is even more counterproductive that it naturally is (all experts have stated that Registration and the rest of the witch hunt is counterproductive, anyone remember? Or care?).
What that means is that because and only because of the Registries, vigilante companies like Facebook, and vigilante groups like GA UnsafeKids, I have been on Facebook for years and I always will be. If Georgia’s lying, criminal legislators make it illegal to be on Facebook, I will find a legal way around it. That's a promise. It doesn't matter what anyone tries to do to change that. Those weak, terrible people will fail.
GA UnsafeKids is smart to remain anonymous. The harassment that they are doing is legal and surely supported by most people in the U.S. However, there are people like me who are not putting up with their immoral, un-American witch hunt and will gladly do anything that is legal to harass them and disrupt their lives. They harass me, my spouse, and my children so the very least I can do is return the favor and plenty more.
I also spend a great deal of time around children, again, because the witch hunt is immoral. It is the right thing to do. People who think the panacea Registries are a good idea are uninformed fools.
You are absolutely correct. Misguided GA SafeKids contributed to the murder of poor Jorelys as much as did anyone listed on a nanny government SEX OFFENDER Registry.
The fact is, as usual, every single second that these vigilante groups, law enforcement, and other people spent on talking about "Registered SEX OFFENDERS!!!!!" was a second that was wasted and not spent actually trying to solve the murder. Their grandstanding was a waste of time as usual. But of course, good law enforcement people know that they should not waste resources on such witch hunts but should instead focus on the clues. Yet a show still has to be put on for the least informed.
And these vigilante groups will use any excuse they can to further their witch hunt.
I would just like to make a couple of other points:
1. People who cannot stop harassing other people (e.g. these vigilante groups) are terrorists. People who are Registered and all good Americans should be at war with these terrorists. They are harming Registered people, their spouses, and their children. They should not just be negated, they should be retaliated against. By any means that is legal.
2. Governments must take all of their content off of Facebook. Facebook actively attempts to prevent U.S. citizens from using their site. Therefore, governments have no business having any presence on Facebook. They must take everything off. If they won't, they should be sued.
If they feel a need to make a public spectacle of themselves,just to make GAKids look bad, then so be it. Everybody thinks they are right and are somehow guided by righteousness.
The safety and well being of children is, and always will be, more important than the opiniions of sex offenders. Let's suggest they argue with the legislators about Romeo & Juliet and peeing outside...
If sex offenders feel such a strong need to be on Facebook, MySpace, or any social network, then maybe they should start their own network. Maybe then you could kick off the people who don't see kids as sex objects. SexOffenderBook, or maybe SexOffenderRegistry,has a nice ring to it, ehh?
I don't mean to be redundant, but other commenters are correct when they say that not all sex offenders are after children, not all sex offenders are on Facebook for the purpose of finding victims, and the people most likely to sexually abuse a child - 95%, in fact - are people who are not on the registry and therefore not labeled as sex offenders. Considering this, your group seems to be spending a lot of resources on a cause that percentage-wise will not help many children at all.
Since you do seem to be aware of some of the more important statistics - recidivism of SOs being so low (3-8%) and the likelihood of children being victimized by someone they know and trust - why is it that you are not choosing to focus on prevention and education? I believe that more children and adults become victims of sex crime precisely because of how off-target SO legislation and public opinion is. Can you explain why you choose to focus on such a relatively small issue when there are much larger ones that need attention?
Also, I have to say I think your group would gain more respect if the members weren't anonymous. You seem to be respectful and informed, and I think you could get more support if you differentiated yourself from the vigilante groups out there who blatantly ignore facts.
We find it interesting that your group out of NYC chooses to follow ATL news. Enforcing the Facebook EULA is the first stage and is receiving the community support we are hoping for. As a community, with education, we can prevent future people from becoming victims. Enough about us though, let us focus on your questions.
If the community was aware of the high number of SO's in your area, do you believe your SO would have made better choices in his life with more education? As discussed in our email to you, we are a community group and feedback from the community in the prevention, education, and involvement are welcome. As a person directly involved with a SO and dealing with the hardships of employment, security checks, etc. Your insight could be valuable in preventing new offenders from being on the list and helping parents and kids in the community become more aware of some of the signs they should be looking for.
Our group will remain anonymous for several reasons. Our group and several individuals have been placed on the SO Issues vigilante photo album. As said before, this is a community taking action. Would you ask Perverted Justice to post pictures of their users, administrators, or supporters?
We have seen posts from people associating GA SafeKids with vigilante groups, but the truth still remains that those pages were added as news sources in removing child porn from the net. Several news pages have been added to the page as news sources. We follow the links provided by Facebook to report profiles that we have checked against the GBI website. This is the same method any other should use.
Again, we know the numbers are small. Educating is a huge part in prevention, and we would welcome an email from you discussing some ideas in more community involvement in prevention.
1. Jorelys was not killed by a registrant.
2. Banning registrants from FB violates free speech and is discriminatory (after all, a growing number of media outlets are using FB as a sole way to comment or correspond with the media).
3. I find it ironic that this advocacy group hides in the shadows. Then again, if they ARE linked to "Anonymous," then they are engaging in criminal activity of their own.
4. Not every registrant is a threat to children.
This "advocacy" group is woefully misinformed.
2.-False.-Free speech can be done anywhere. Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, and most other social networking sites choose to not allow sexual offenders from using their services. Some other ways of communicating include phone, email, or written letters. Facebook is only one outlet, and it is Facebook's choice to not allow sex offenders to use their site. If this is an issue, please refer to the Facebook help topics.
3.-We are not linked to "Anonymous." We would like to think of this group as a community without putting up a figure head. The "Likes" you see on the page are for news sources. You fail to mention that we also "Like" Fox 5 Atlanta, War Against Child Abuse (W.A.C.A.), ProtectChildrenOnline.org, Save a Child Report Child Abuse, Stop Sex Trafficking, etc.
4.-But every registrant on Facebook agreed to the terms and conditions and has violated the terms.
It would appear you are using a slippery slope reasoning in making an argument, but anybody can sound informed when making assumptions. Thank you for taking the time to read the news article and share your opinions.
I agree with your sentiments (read the other comment I just posted prior to this one). However, Facebook is not violating any "free speech" or anything else. It is their company, they can do what they want. Of course, as I said in my other comment, they are misguided, pathetic, ugly, and un-American. But again, they can do what they want.
I would suggest that instead of worrying about little twits like GA UnsafeKids, that you use your time to harm Facebook by any legal means that you can. Why not? They are the AOL of this day. The more incompetent and uninformed a person is, the more likely he/she will love Facebook. One place you should definitely turn your attention is to attack any government that does anything on or with Facebook. Governments have no business do anything anywhere or with anything that restricts U.S. citizens from access. They need to get off of Facebook and stay off.
GA SafeKids 005 responded to you and seemed to make a big deal about people violating Facebook's EULA. BFD, I say. Who cares what Facebook's EULA is or what they want? They're are idiot scum for cluelessly and mindlessly supporting the witch hunt.
Lastly, of course you are absolutely correct that a large majority of people who are Registered are no danger to children. In fact, certainly there are millions of convicted criminals who are more dangerous to children and yet the "moral" "do-gooders" just can't seem to bring themselves to even talk about getting ALL the other Registries started that we need for those convicted criminals. Here's just one little example - a person can use Facebook to lure a child somewhere and then nearly beat the child to death and that person won't even be Registered anywhere or ever banned from Facebook.
Also, did you check their page? They are associating themselves with the criminal hacker group Anonymous, which should send up a red flag.
They are simply a list of growing vigilantes who like to target ex-sex offenders to help themselves get a vigilante business going, and to harass others. Harassing people on the registry is a crime, is it not?
Also, they like to be anonymous, but sex offenders can as well, they do not have to use real names, but keep it up, and you will force Facebook and other places to require photo ID and real names, then they cannot be anonymous anymore, and then, if they do this, be prosecuted for harassment.
And just because someone wears the "sex offender" label, doesn't mean they are using social networks to hunt down and harm kids, they use it just like everyone else does, to keep track of family and friends, so stop side stepping the constitution and others rights, without eliminating your rights as well. Hypocrites!
As stated before, the community was not aware of the people living in the community. This is one outlet to inform people.
As stated before, we have several "Likes" on our page. They are news sources. Have you seen the other ones, or are you distorting the truth to make your point seem stronger than it is? We are removing profiles from Facebook through the links provided by Facebook, not hacking.
You keep referring to GA SafeKids as a business? We are confised...where do you send donations, what have we sold, and where is the store? This is not a business, it's a community action to remove sexual offenders from Facebook.
Harassment is such a strong word. We in fact have never contacted any of the profiles we have removed. By wearing the "sex offender" label, means they should not be on Facebook in the first place. Simple.
Other groups taking the same actions were not mentioned in your notes. Why? And why not attack your law makers for the registry, Facebook for their policy, or the offenders for violating terms of use? You seem to be the hypocrite when these questions are asked.
If, however, someone who happens to be on the registry signs up to Facebook under their real name, they probably aren't going to be using it for anything nefarious, since it'd be too easy to link the name to their account. That and considering that a guy can end up on the registry for dating a freshman girl when he's a senior in High School... Honestly, as long as they're not friending minors, I really don't think there's much to worry about.
But hey, if it makes you feel like your accomplishing something... I'd just prioritize spending time with your own kids over this pseudo moral crusader stuff.
Please send us an email at the gakids@hushmail.com with your ideas. This, being open to the community is dependent on people such as yourself contributing ideas and solutions. GA SafeKids is aware of the statistics involving these types of crimes. We have developed a three stage plan, but to get the community involved we needed a way to have people contribute and share.
FYI, first time offender means that a person has NEVER been in any kind of trouble with the legal system. Many of them have been on the registry for more than a decade without re-offending and only want to be left in peace. Their only thoughts are to keep a roof over their families heads, food in their bellies and keep their families safe from harassment and vigilantism. They may have been arrested for anything, including sexting, consensual teen sex, playing doctor (now criminalized as fondling), public urination, streaking, etc. There are more than a quarter of a million people on the registry now, 95% of which are not even considered a risk, and according to experts, DO NOT belong on the list. Law enforcement is so overwhelmed with trying to monitor all of these people that they virtually have NO TIME to monitor the truly dangerous. HOW IS THIS protecting your children?
If the internet is such a dangerous place, FB in particular, why are children under 18 allowed (by their parents) to be members. It is also against FB terms of agreement for anyone under 18 to have a page, so why do so many parents allow children as young as 6 or 8 years-old to have a page?
Because we decided to keep names out of the paper other than the group name, we do not see how this act of enforcing social networking EULA terms benefits anybody in our group. We believe the paper was correct in stating that the criminal charges also included rape. Please comprehend that ignorance was not a factor in deciding to take offenders off of social networking sites, and that "sticking our heads in the sand" was accomplished when the people did not know and were amazed that there were several offenders living in Cherokee County. We as a group are actively seeking out profiles that can be verified as belonging to offenders and removing them. As with any idea or cause though, we expect walls to be put up, and people to disagree with what we are accomplishing. Thank you for your opinions and observations about the arrested persons prior criminal history.
Enforcing the Facebook EULA is not a witch hunt, and our acts are not random. True, not all sex offenders are not after little kids. What is also true is that we do not discriminate when removing profiles of sex offenders, or reporting found material to the authorities.