Thursday, December 19, 2013 1:45:25 AM
Judge says giant cross must be removed from San Diego mountain
Visitors gather at the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego in July of 2006.
By Lateef Mungin and Mayra Cuevas, CNN
updated 1:52 AM EST, Fri December 13, 2013
(CNN) -- A giant cross that has stood on a Southern California mountain for decades must be removed because it violates the constitutional separation of church and state, a judge ordered this week.
The order Thursday by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns continues a long legal battle about the 43-foot cross atop Mt. Soledad in San Diego.
Burns ordered that the cross would have to be removed within 90 days. But the cross may be able to stay if the case is appealed, the judge ordered.
"Of course we are disappointed in what the ruling is -- that is to take the cross down," Bruce Bailey, president of the Mount Soledad Memorial Association told CNN affiliate KGTV.
Bailey said his organization plans to appeal, which would mean the cross would stay as the decades-long legal battle continued.
Long legal battle
The cross was erected in 1954 in honor of Korean War veterans and has been the subject of near constant judicial back and forth since 1989, when two Vietnam War veterans filed suit saying it violated the California Constitution's "No Preference" clause.
Since the first lawsuit in 1989, the city of San Diego twice tried selling the property beneath the cross to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, only to be stopped by the courts.
In 2004, the parties involved reached an agreement that would have moved the cross to a nearby church, but two congressmen intervened and inserted a rider into the 2005 omnibus budget bill that designated the property a national veterans memorial and authorized the federal government to accept the donation of the property.
This led to more fights and more court filings.
In 2006, three congressmen pushed through a bill calling for the government to seize the property by eminent domain -- calling it "a historically significant war memorial." The federal government took possession in August of that year.
A lawsuit was filed challenging that transfer almost immediately and that has led to Thursday's ruling.
© 2013 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/13/justice/california-cross-battle/ [with (over 13,000) comments]
*
Mt. Soledad Cross Ruled Unconstitutional, Again
Proponents of the cross said they might again petition the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.
December 12, 2013
A federal judge in San Diego issued an order from the bench Thursday declaring that the government's display of a 43-foot cross atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The federal display was challenged in a 2006 lawsuit by the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America and several local residents, all of whom were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial counties.
"We support the government paying tribute to those who served bravely in our country's armed forces," said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. "But we should honor all of our heroes under one flag, not just one particular religious symbol."
The cross was erected in 1954 and was dedicated at an Easter Sunday ceremony describing the monument as a "gleaming white symbol of Christianity."
[...]
http://lajolla.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/judge-rules-mt-soledad-cross-violates-us-constitution [with comment]
*
Giant cross ordered removed in San Diego; supporters hope for appeal
December 13, 2013
[...]
One of the strongest supporters of keeping the cross has been Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine), a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. His spokesman, Joe Kasper, said Burns' ruling was not unexpected and "the true test will come if and when the U.S. Supreme Court decides to take the case."
"Without the cross, the memorial loses its identity as an unforgettable symbol of appreciation to generations of sacrifice," Kasper said. "It's still too soon to say that the cross won't stay right where it is."
[...]
The decision on whether to appeal Burns' ruling will be made by the Department of Justice.
Built in 1954, the 43-foot cross is one of the most visible landmarks in San Diego. Starting in the early 1990s, plaques honoring military veterans have been placed on walls surrounding the base of the cross.
Jewish war veterans and the ACLU have argued that having the cross on public property is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.
Defenders of the cross have argued that it is a war memorial, not exclusively a religious symbol.
In 2011, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the cross violated the 1st Amendment. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the issue, sending the case back to the trial court in San Diego.
"In spite of many secular changes to the memorial, its long sectarian history, as found by the 9th Circuit, effectively prevents the government from purging the religious connotation in any other way," Burns wrote in removal order.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-giant-cross-ordered-removed-in-san-diego-supporters-hope-for-appeal-20131213,0,4438509.story [with embedded video report, and comments]
*
Judge Rules Against Cross on U.S. Land
December 12, 2013
[...]
After a previous cross at the site was knocked down in a windstorm, the current cross was erected on city property in 1954 by the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, a veterans’ group, who called it a monument to Korean War veterans. In 1989, Philip K. Paulson, a Vietnam War veteran and an atheist, sued the City of San Diego to have the cross removed, and the case has remained in court ever since.
Supporters of the cross have argued that it remains a war memorial, not a religious symbol, even though few if any commemorations of war victims were at the site until after Mr. Paulson’s lawsuit.
The federal government seized the land on which the cross sits through eminent domain in 2006 as part of an effort to save the cross.
But in 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled the cross violated the First Amendment ban. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case last year, sending it back to the trial court.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs celebrated Thursday’s ruling. They said no one wanted the cross destroyed, and hoped the federal government would now negotiate to move it elsewhere.
“This is a win for religious liberty,” said Daniel Mach, who argued the case for the American Civil Liberties Union. “The government can and should honor those who served and died for this country, but not by playing favorites with faiths.”
Supporters of the cross indicated they planned to appeal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/us/judge-rules-against-cross-on-us-land.html
--
'Kidnapped For Christ,' Planned Documentary, Aims To Expose 'Ex-Gay' Experiences In Christian Reform Schools
By James Nichols
Posted: 12/12/2013 10:52 am EST
"Kidnapped for Christ [ http://www.kidnappedforchrist.com/ ]" is a compelling new documentary that follows the experiences of several American teenagers after they were kidnapped from their homes and shipped to Evangelical Reform schools located in the Dominican Republic. Many of these teenagers' parents discover their children are either gay or experience same-sex attraction, and are sent to “therapeutic Christian boarding school[s]” in order to "transform into healthy Christian adults [ http://www.kidnappedforchrist.com/#!about ]" in an environment outside of U.S. law.
Directed Kate S. Logan with Lance Bass cited as an executive producer, the film is currently engaged in a Kickstarter campaign in order to be fully funded. The Huffington Post sat down with Logan this week in order to better understand the function of these reform camps, the experiences of kidnapped youth go through while there, and why this film is important.
The Huffington Post: Why did you feel this documentary was necessary?
Actually, when I originally got the idea to make the film, I had no idea that there was anything controversial about this school. I was under the impression that it was just an alternative therapy program with a cultural exchange element. It wasn't until I got permission to film and started investigating that I realized what I had gotten myself into. Once I saw what was really going on at Escuela Caribe, I felt I needed to help expose the truth of what this school was doing in the name of "therapy."
Why do you think the majority of the public knows so little about these reform institutions?
I think it's because the victims of these programs are teens and children and they are often so traumatized by their experiences that they don't speak about it for years -- if at all. Also, a lot of times former students of reform schools get labeled "bad" simply because they were sent to a place for "bad" kids, so no one believes their stories. Some of the things that go on in these places are, quite frankly, so bizarre and horrible that it's hard to believe if you aren't there to see it yourself. With the Internet it's easier for teens who have been sent to these places to speak out and connect with others who've gone through the same thing, but it's still a relatively small group who are talking about it.
What do people undergo in these camps?
I mean, how much time have you got? The "treatment" was called "Culture Shock Therapy" by the administrators. So their actual methods involved jarring kids enough that they were more malleable emotionally and mentally. That was Step One, and it involved strenuous and intense physical labor and exercise, constant repetition of religious and program-written texts, and severe punishments for students who "acted out." Those punishments could be hours of manual labor, exercising, or actual physical beatings, which they called "swats."
That was the program. All of that stuff is in their handbook. Then there was so much physical and emotional abuse that went on besides that, combined with a generally oppressive atmosphere of conformity and helplessness. These kids were afraid to speak out, afraid to tell their parents about was was going on, and as a result a lot of them just felt helpless and alone, like they were stuck in this horrible place with no one to talk to and no one to help them.
What can viewers expect from the film?
Viewers can expect to be consistently shocked. Shocked at the fact that these camps exist, shocked that they are making money from the systematic abuse of teens, and shocked that nobody is doing a thing about it. But it's also a story about a community rallying around a friend and neighbor to help him out of the camp when he's at his most helpless and alone.
What are you hoping to accomplish with the film/what do you want viewers to take away?
We hope viewers will come out of the film outraged and ready to fight for these teens, knowing that it can be done from the story in our film. There's almost no regulation for these programs -- even for ones that are based in the U.S.; teens have died and continue to die in these camps, and the ones that don't are traumatized. We want viewers to come out set on making sure none of that happens to any teens ever again, and ready to engage with their senators or representatives to make sure legislation is passed to regulate this industry.
For more information on "Kidnapped for Christ" or to contribute to the project, visit the film's Kickstarter campaign [ http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kateslogan/kidnapped-for-christ ].
Copyright © 2013 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/kidnapped-for-christ_n_4427968.html [with a non-YouTube version of the above YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOR77tWVxKc (with comments), of the trailer embedded, and comments]
--
Ryan Loskarn in court on child pornography charges
By JOHN BRESNAHAN and RACHEL VAN DONGEN | 12/12/13 2:11 PM EST Updated: 12/13/13 3:08 PM EST
Ryan Loskarn, the now ex-chief of staff for GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), appeared in federal court on Thursday after being arrested and charged with possessing and distributing child pornography.
A nervous Loskarn, whose hands were visibly shaking, was detained as a flight risk and because he is a threat given his alleged crimes involving children. Loskarn said nothing in court except his name and was wearing the same gray sweatshirt and jeans that he had on when he was arrested on Wednesday.
Possession of child pornography carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, while distribution of it carries a minimum of five years and a maximum of 20 years behind bars.
Loskarn’s next court hearing, when bail will be considered, is 9:30 a.m. on Monday. Loskarn’s lawer, Pamela Satterfield of Schertler & Onorato, LLP, would not comment on the charges against her client.
A “Statement of Facts” released by the Justice Department on Thursday alleged that Loskarn had been viewing and sharing child pornography with others for several years, a claim that stunned Alexander and Loskarn’s many friends and colleagues on Capitol Hill.
“The courts will determine his guilt or innocence, but the information in the complaint is repugnant and disturbing,” Alexander said in a statement. Other Loskarn friends were equally appalled, and the allegations set off a fresh round of e-mails and phone calls among congressional staffers and K Street operatives.
Alexander announced on Wednesday morning — apparently at the same time that agents were searching Loskarn’s home — that Loskarn was taken off his Senate payroll.
According to the complaint, Loskarn, 35, made “several purchases” between November 2010 and March 2011 from a Toronto-based movie production company operating a website that offered DVDs via mail and streaming video. The court documents said “the majority of these films featured young nude boys.”
Starting in October 2010, the U.S. Postal Service Inspection Service and the Toronto Police began investigating the company. A “review of the customer invoices and purchase summary” revealed Loskarn billing and shipping address in Washington, D.C., according to the document.
In October 2013, the postal service also found Loskarn’s residential IP address on the “Gnutella peer-to-peer network offering files with names that are consistent with child pornography broadcasting as a download candidate.”
Several extremely graphic files that appeared on the Gnutella network were downloaded and viewed by the Postal Service as part of the investigation into Loskarn’s alleged activities. They included a 28-minute portion of a file of a young girl who was raped in the woods by her “father.” The court document states the video had the “exact same hash value as a file offered for download on Oct. 5, 2013 from Loskarn’s IP address.”
It is unclear why it took federal agents almost three years to question or detains Loskarn after his name and address first emerged in a child pornography probe.
On Wednesday afternoon, Loskarn was arrested at his home. Agents from the Postal Service used a battering ram to break down the door after they weren’t allowed to enter.
Before agents entered his home in the quiet Hill East neighborhood, the court document states that Loskarn was observed “leaning outside the middle second window” and “appeared to be in a nervous state looking right and left.”
“After approximately three to five seconds, Loskarn made a motion as if he were placing something down outside the window and closed the window,” the document states.
When Postal Service agents entered the home, they examined that area and discovered a computer hard drive. The agents noted there was snow on the roof and ledge where the drive was found from a storm the day before, but no snow on the hard drive.
Loskarn was read his Miranda rights but waived them and spoke with the agents. Loskarn confirmed that he had a hard drive but “did not admit” discarding it.
The hard drive was later examined by the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Child Exploitation and Obscenity section, and a computer forensic examiner found digital videos depicting child pornography, the document states.
One graphic scene on the hard drive contained a prepubescent girl standing next to an “erect penis” and then being directed to pull down her pants and underwear. “In addition, hundreds of videos depicting underage boys engaged in sexually explicit conduct were located on the same external hard drive,” the document states.
The hard drive also contained Gnutella peer-to-peer sharing software.
Loskarn is one of the most well-known Hill staffers and an influential policy aide. He is also very well-liked in the Senate, and the small community of those who work on the Hill was shocked by the news.
After graduating from Tulane University in 2000, Loskarn got a job working as a lowly staff assistant for former Rep. Wally Herger (R-Calif.).
Funny, smart and a good networker — all important qualities for a Capitol Hill aide — Loskarn was then hired as a deputy press secretary for the House Rules Committee, at that time chaired by ex-Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.). Loskarn moved on to become communications director for Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).
Loskarn got a big break in 2007, when he moved over to handle press for the Senate Republican Conference, run at that time by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). When Alexander took over as conference chairman, Loskarn stayed on as chief of staff, a senior post in Senate GOP leadership.
Alexander later stepped down from that post, but Loskarn remained with the Tennessee Republican, being named his chief of staff in Alexander’s personal office in 2012.
© 2013 POLITICO LLC
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/ryan-loskarn-court-child-pornography-charges-101088.html [with comments]
*
Ryan Loskarn, Lamar Alexander's Former Chief Of Staff, Seeks Release As He Faces Child Porn Charges
In this image taken from video and released by WJLA TV, U.S. Postal police walk with Ryan Loskarn, center, chief of staff for U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013, in Washington D.C.
12/14/13
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/14/ryan-loskarn-lamar-alexander_n_4446309.html [with comments]
*
Tenn. Sen.'s fired chief of staff ordered freed
December 16, 2013
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Tenn-Sen-s-fired-chief-of-staff-ordered-freed-5068141.php [no comments yet]
Visitors gather at the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego in July of 2006.
By Lateef Mungin and Mayra Cuevas, CNN
updated 1:52 AM EST, Fri December 13, 2013
(CNN) -- A giant cross that has stood on a Southern California mountain for decades must be removed because it violates the constitutional separation of church and state, a judge ordered this week.
The order Thursday by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns continues a long legal battle about the 43-foot cross atop Mt. Soledad in San Diego.
Burns ordered that the cross would have to be removed within 90 days. But the cross may be able to stay if the case is appealed, the judge ordered.
"Of course we are disappointed in what the ruling is -- that is to take the cross down," Bruce Bailey, president of the Mount Soledad Memorial Association told CNN affiliate KGTV.
Bailey said his organization plans to appeal, which would mean the cross would stay as the decades-long legal battle continued.
Long legal battle
The cross was erected in 1954 in honor of Korean War veterans and has been the subject of near constant judicial back and forth since 1989, when two Vietnam War veterans filed suit saying it violated the California Constitution's "No Preference" clause.
Since the first lawsuit in 1989, the city of San Diego twice tried selling the property beneath the cross to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, only to be stopped by the courts.
In 2004, the parties involved reached an agreement that would have moved the cross to a nearby church, but two congressmen intervened and inserted a rider into the 2005 omnibus budget bill that designated the property a national veterans memorial and authorized the federal government to accept the donation of the property.
This led to more fights and more court filings.
In 2006, three congressmen pushed through a bill calling for the government to seize the property by eminent domain -- calling it "a historically significant war memorial." The federal government took possession in August of that year.
A lawsuit was filed challenging that transfer almost immediately and that has led to Thursday's ruling.
© 2013 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/13/justice/california-cross-battle/ [with (over 13,000) comments]
*
Mt. Soledad Cross Ruled Unconstitutional, Again
Proponents of the cross said they might again petition the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.
December 12, 2013
A federal judge in San Diego issued an order from the bench Thursday declaring that the government's display of a 43-foot cross atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The federal display was challenged in a 2006 lawsuit by the Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America and several local residents, all of whom were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial counties.
"We support the government paying tribute to those who served bravely in our country's armed forces," said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. "But we should honor all of our heroes under one flag, not just one particular religious symbol."
The cross was erected in 1954 and was dedicated at an Easter Sunday ceremony describing the monument as a "gleaming white symbol of Christianity."
[...]
http://lajolla.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/judge-rules-mt-soledad-cross-violates-us-constitution [with comment]
*
Giant cross ordered removed in San Diego; supporters hope for appeal
December 13, 2013
[...]
One of the strongest supporters of keeping the cross has been Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine), a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. His spokesman, Joe Kasper, said Burns' ruling was not unexpected and "the true test will come if and when the U.S. Supreme Court decides to take the case."
"Without the cross, the memorial loses its identity as an unforgettable symbol of appreciation to generations of sacrifice," Kasper said. "It's still too soon to say that the cross won't stay right where it is."
[...]
The decision on whether to appeal Burns' ruling will be made by the Department of Justice.
Built in 1954, the 43-foot cross is one of the most visible landmarks in San Diego. Starting in the early 1990s, plaques honoring military veterans have been placed on walls surrounding the base of the cross.
Jewish war veterans and the ACLU have argued that having the cross on public property is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.
Defenders of the cross have argued that it is a war memorial, not exclusively a religious symbol.
In 2011, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the cross violated the 1st Amendment. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the issue, sending the case back to the trial court in San Diego.
"In spite of many secular changes to the memorial, its long sectarian history, as found by the 9th Circuit, effectively prevents the government from purging the religious connotation in any other way," Burns wrote in removal order.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-giant-cross-ordered-removed-in-san-diego-supporters-hope-for-appeal-20131213,0,4438509.story [with embedded video report, and comments]
*
Judge Rules Against Cross on U.S. Land
December 12, 2013
[...]
After a previous cross at the site was knocked down in a windstorm, the current cross was erected on city property in 1954 by the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, a veterans’ group, who called it a monument to Korean War veterans. In 1989, Philip K. Paulson, a Vietnam War veteran and an atheist, sued the City of San Diego to have the cross removed, and the case has remained in court ever since.
Supporters of the cross have argued that it remains a war memorial, not a religious symbol, even though few if any commemorations of war victims were at the site until after Mr. Paulson’s lawsuit.
The federal government seized the land on which the cross sits through eminent domain in 2006 as part of an effort to save the cross.
But in 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled the cross violated the First Amendment ban. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case last year, sending it back to the trial court.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs celebrated Thursday’s ruling. They said no one wanted the cross destroyed, and hoped the federal government would now negotiate to move it elsewhere.
“This is a win for religious liberty,” said Daniel Mach, who argued the case for the American Civil Liberties Union. “The government can and should honor those who served and died for this country, but not by playing favorites with faiths.”
Supporters of the cross indicated they planned to appeal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/us/judge-rules-against-cross-on-us-land.html
--
'Kidnapped For Christ,' Planned Documentary, Aims To Expose 'Ex-Gay' Experiences In Christian Reform Schools
By James Nichols
Posted: 12/12/2013 10:52 am EST
"Kidnapped for Christ [ http://www.kidnappedforchrist.com/ ]" is a compelling new documentary that follows the experiences of several American teenagers after they were kidnapped from their homes and shipped to Evangelical Reform schools located in the Dominican Republic. Many of these teenagers' parents discover their children are either gay or experience same-sex attraction, and are sent to “therapeutic Christian boarding school[s]” in order to "transform into healthy Christian adults [ http://www.kidnappedforchrist.com/#!about ]" in an environment outside of U.S. law.
Directed Kate S. Logan with Lance Bass cited as an executive producer, the film is currently engaged in a Kickstarter campaign in order to be fully funded. The Huffington Post sat down with Logan this week in order to better understand the function of these reform camps, the experiences of kidnapped youth go through while there, and why this film is important.
The Huffington Post: Why did you feel this documentary was necessary?
Actually, when I originally got the idea to make the film, I had no idea that there was anything controversial about this school. I was under the impression that it was just an alternative therapy program with a cultural exchange element. It wasn't until I got permission to film and started investigating that I realized what I had gotten myself into. Once I saw what was really going on at Escuela Caribe, I felt I needed to help expose the truth of what this school was doing in the name of "therapy."
Why do you think the majority of the public knows so little about these reform institutions?
I think it's because the victims of these programs are teens and children and they are often so traumatized by their experiences that they don't speak about it for years -- if at all. Also, a lot of times former students of reform schools get labeled "bad" simply because they were sent to a place for "bad" kids, so no one believes their stories. Some of the things that go on in these places are, quite frankly, so bizarre and horrible that it's hard to believe if you aren't there to see it yourself. With the Internet it's easier for teens who have been sent to these places to speak out and connect with others who've gone through the same thing, but it's still a relatively small group who are talking about it.
What do people undergo in these camps?
I mean, how much time have you got? The "treatment" was called "Culture Shock Therapy" by the administrators. So their actual methods involved jarring kids enough that they were more malleable emotionally and mentally. That was Step One, and it involved strenuous and intense physical labor and exercise, constant repetition of religious and program-written texts, and severe punishments for students who "acted out." Those punishments could be hours of manual labor, exercising, or actual physical beatings, which they called "swats."
That was the program. All of that stuff is in their handbook. Then there was so much physical and emotional abuse that went on besides that, combined with a generally oppressive atmosphere of conformity and helplessness. These kids were afraid to speak out, afraid to tell their parents about was was going on, and as a result a lot of them just felt helpless and alone, like they were stuck in this horrible place with no one to talk to and no one to help them.
What can viewers expect from the film?
Viewers can expect to be consistently shocked. Shocked at the fact that these camps exist, shocked that they are making money from the systematic abuse of teens, and shocked that nobody is doing a thing about it. But it's also a story about a community rallying around a friend and neighbor to help him out of the camp when he's at his most helpless and alone.
What are you hoping to accomplish with the film/what do you want viewers to take away?
We hope viewers will come out of the film outraged and ready to fight for these teens, knowing that it can be done from the story in our film. There's almost no regulation for these programs -- even for ones that are based in the U.S.; teens have died and continue to die in these camps, and the ones that don't are traumatized. We want viewers to come out set on making sure none of that happens to any teens ever again, and ready to engage with their senators or representatives to make sure legislation is passed to regulate this industry.
For more information on "Kidnapped for Christ" or to contribute to the project, visit the film's Kickstarter campaign [ http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kateslogan/kidnapped-for-christ ].
Copyright © 2013 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/kidnapped-for-christ_n_4427968.html [with a non-YouTube version of the above YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOR77tWVxKc (with comments), of the trailer embedded, and comments]
--
Ryan Loskarn in court on child pornography charges
By JOHN BRESNAHAN and RACHEL VAN DONGEN | 12/12/13 2:11 PM EST Updated: 12/13/13 3:08 PM EST
Ryan Loskarn, the now ex-chief of staff for GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), appeared in federal court on Thursday after being arrested and charged with possessing and distributing child pornography.
A nervous Loskarn, whose hands were visibly shaking, was detained as a flight risk and because he is a threat given his alleged crimes involving children. Loskarn said nothing in court except his name and was wearing the same gray sweatshirt and jeans that he had on when he was arrested on Wednesday.
Possession of child pornography carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, while distribution of it carries a minimum of five years and a maximum of 20 years behind bars.
Loskarn’s next court hearing, when bail will be considered, is 9:30 a.m. on Monday. Loskarn’s lawer, Pamela Satterfield of Schertler & Onorato, LLP, would not comment on the charges against her client.
A “Statement of Facts” released by the Justice Department on Thursday alleged that Loskarn had been viewing and sharing child pornography with others for several years, a claim that stunned Alexander and Loskarn’s many friends and colleagues on Capitol Hill.
“The courts will determine his guilt or innocence, but the information in the complaint is repugnant and disturbing,” Alexander said in a statement. Other Loskarn friends were equally appalled, and the allegations set off a fresh round of e-mails and phone calls among congressional staffers and K Street operatives.
Alexander announced on Wednesday morning — apparently at the same time that agents were searching Loskarn’s home — that Loskarn was taken off his Senate payroll.
According to the complaint, Loskarn, 35, made “several purchases” between November 2010 and March 2011 from a Toronto-based movie production company operating a website that offered DVDs via mail and streaming video. The court documents said “the majority of these films featured young nude boys.”
Starting in October 2010, the U.S. Postal Service Inspection Service and the Toronto Police began investigating the company. A “review of the customer invoices and purchase summary” revealed Loskarn billing and shipping address in Washington, D.C., according to the document.
In October 2013, the postal service also found Loskarn’s residential IP address on the “Gnutella peer-to-peer network offering files with names that are consistent with child pornography broadcasting as a download candidate.”
Several extremely graphic files that appeared on the Gnutella network were downloaded and viewed by the Postal Service as part of the investigation into Loskarn’s alleged activities. They included a 28-minute portion of a file of a young girl who was raped in the woods by her “father.” The court document states the video had the “exact same hash value as a file offered for download on Oct. 5, 2013 from Loskarn’s IP address.”
It is unclear why it took federal agents almost three years to question or detains Loskarn after his name and address first emerged in a child pornography probe.
On Wednesday afternoon, Loskarn was arrested at his home. Agents from the Postal Service used a battering ram to break down the door after they weren’t allowed to enter.
Before agents entered his home in the quiet Hill East neighborhood, the court document states that Loskarn was observed “leaning outside the middle second window” and “appeared to be in a nervous state looking right and left.”
“After approximately three to five seconds, Loskarn made a motion as if he were placing something down outside the window and closed the window,” the document states.
When Postal Service agents entered the home, they examined that area and discovered a computer hard drive. The agents noted there was snow on the roof and ledge where the drive was found from a storm the day before, but no snow on the hard drive.
Loskarn was read his Miranda rights but waived them and spoke with the agents. Loskarn confirmed that he had a hard drive but “did not admit” discarding it.
The hard drive was later examined by the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Child Exploitation and Obscenity section, and a computer forensic examiner found digital videos depicting child pornography, the document states.
One graphic scene on the hard drive contained a prepubescent girl standing next to an “erect penis” and then being directed to pull down her pants and underwear. “In addition, hundreds of videos depicting underage boys engaged in sexually explicit conduct were located on the same external hard drive,” the document states.
The hard drive also contained Gnutella peer-to-peer sharing software.
Loskarn is one of the most well-known Hill staffers and an influential policy aide. He is also very well-liked in the Senate, and the small community of those who work on the Hill was shocked by the news.
After graduating from Tulane University in 2000, Loskarn got a job working as a lowly staff assistant for former Rep. Wally Herger (R-Calif.).
Funny, smart and a good networker — all important qualities for a Capitol Hill aide — Loskarn was then hired as a deputy press secretary for the House Rules Committee, at that time chaired by ex-Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.). Loskarn moved on to become communications director for Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).
Loskarn got a big break in 2007, when he moved over to handle press for the Senate Republican Conference, run at that time by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). When Alexander took over as conference chairman, Loskarn stayed on as chief of staff, a senior post in Senate GOP leadership.
Alexander later stepped down from that post, but Loskarn remained with the Tennessee Republican, being named his chief of staff in Alexander’s personal office in 2012.
© 2013 POLITICO LLC
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/ryan-loskarn-court-child-pornography-charges-101088.html [with comments]
*
Ryan Loskarn, Lamar Alexander's Former Chief Of Staff, Seeks Release As He Faces Child Porn Charges
In this image taken from video and released by WJLA TV, U.S. Postal police walk with Ryan Loskarn, center, chief of staff for U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013, in Washington D.C.
12/14/13
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/14/ryan-loskarn-lamar-alexander_n_4446309.html [with comments]
*
Tenn. Sen.'s fired chief of staff ordered freed
December 16, 2013
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Tenn-Sen-s-fired-chief-of-staff-ordered-freed-5068141.php [no comments yet]
Greensburg, KS - 5/4/07
"Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty."
from John Philpot Curran, Speech
upon the Right of Election, 1790
F6
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
