Do You Know Who Your Landlord Is?

April 26th, 2011

Would you give the keys to your house to a convicted rapist?  Maybe you’re waffling, having thoughts about being a bigger person, taking the high road and giving them a second chance since his conviction was over 20 years ago.  Let me add some more background to help you make up your mind.  In September of 1987, William Barnason was in prison for sexually abusing a 5 year old girl.  He   was sentenced to 10 to 20 years after pleading guilty to rape, sodomy and sexual-abuse charges related to an attack on three Suffolk County girls between ages 5 and 7.  It’s fairly certain that at this point you have a pretty clear idea of your response to the question posed at the opening of this article.

Barnason is a level three high risk offender.  Unfortunately, now I have to tell you that someone already gave this man the keys to your house, and 49 of your neighbors. If you’re stunned, afraid, going out to buy a gun, pissed off, or all of the above, you will understand how the residents of an apartment building in the Upper West Side feel. Shortly after his release in 2001, he obtained a job as super of three apartment buildings owned by a Stanley Katz. That means that he has keys to all 50 apartments where he does maintenance and collects rent.

This has come to light because some of the women renting apartments there had enough and filed lawsuits related to sexual harassment. There were repeated claims of Barnason shaking women down for sex, especially when they fell behind on the rent.

The residents were shocked and can’t believe he was allowed to be super of the building, especially considering there are elementary schools close by. Katz’s attorney claimed in a statement that Katz had only recently learned of Barnason’s criminal history, and there were no plans for his dismissal.

Considering that a background check is required for most jobs, and even before one can move into most apartments, it is mind-boggling that Katz did not know of Barnason’s past. The absolute disregard for his tenant’s safety and betrayal of their trust is stunning. You probably had to agree to a background check when moving into a new apartment. However, doing your own anonymous search to find out who your manager and maintenance people are might not be a bad idea.

Immigration, Court Records, and Fearful Politicians

April 19th, 2011

Everyone knows that a politician in an election year is a nervous politician.  After all, it’s not everyone that has a job review with such a final outcome.  A clever twist in the plot is that their particular mandate can change any time.

The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts last year saw a collective wince from politicians around the country, and his fellow republicans were no exception.  They are all too well aware of what running on a platform of “not the other guy” can cost. For example, it can cost a presidential election.

The result is of course paralysis. By such an unexpected show of voter ire, the heat is on and politicians are left wondering what it means for them and their policies.  Unpopular measures no longer stand a chance. This leads to the question of why these unpopular measures are being considered in the first place.  Tuition assistance for illegal immigrants? What the hell! Where else in the world, where it seems to be all the rage to bash America, would an illegal immigrant even be tolerated?

It’s time for Americans to realize political correctness is going to choke the life out this great nation. Nitpicking belongs in a bar room, not a legislative chamber.  This type of behavior is typically from politicians with the single aim of making sure they stay in office. Rather than seeking to do what is best for the country as a whole, they try to please every single group of their constituents no matter the cost.

Another issue that in Massachusetts has consensus as being important is an overhaul of the Criminal Offender Record Information system. It is generally agreed that the system is a mess, as has been noted on bestbackgroundcheck.org.  Once again, skittish legislators may shelve it based on this or that political baloney.

Naturally, it is vitally important that politicians listen to their constituents and pay attention to what is important to them. After all, that is how democracy works.  However, they need to listen carefully and filter the special interest bullshit from what is really being asked for. In this particular election in Massachusetts, it is quite obvious that the issue of the day is the economy. This is not to say that everything else is not important and should be discarded. Rather, it’s simply saying to politicians; get your priorities in order! Once you have taken care of the issues that are most urgent, you can get on to the others. After all, if there is no Massachusetts, then a debate on overhauling the criminal records system or providing tuition assistance to illegal immigrants becomes entirely moot.

Criminal Records Can Cast a Long Shadow

April 14th, 2011

It is often said that people get the leaders they deserve. In the case of the political tussling in Colorado involving the withdrawal in December of Stephanie Villafuerte as candidate for US attorney, one has to wonder who the good citizens of that state pissed off. What makes the whole situation so bizarre is that it revolves around a criminal background check on an illegal immigrant drug dealer.

It all started in 2006 when ICE (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement) officer Cory Voorhis sent the results of a criminal background check to John Marshall, whom he believed to be a congressional staffer for Bob Beauprez. He was prompted by a news article in which Bill Ritter, now governor of Colorado, blamed immigration problems on federal agencies.

Voorhis was concerned about an immigration plea deal policy of the Denver district attorney’s office that he felt was a threat to public safety. The damning case was one in which a certain Walter Ramo received a plea deal from the DA’s office while Bill Ritter was DA. Walter Ramo was an illegal immigrant and small time heroine dealer. He was later arrested in California under the alias Carlos Estrada Medina for child molestation. The reason this was such a kick in the nads for Ritter is that at the time this information came into the hands of John Marshall, Marshall was campaign manager for Bob Beauprez in his campaign against Ritter for governor. This plea deal promptly received attention in political campaign ads.

In the ensuing political backpeddling by the Ritter camp, Stephanie Villafuerte, who was working on Ritter’s campaign, was caught up in the back and forth with the district attorney’s office to try to find ways to save face for Ritter. The debate about whether she and the DA’s office were involved in illegally accessing the National Crime Information Center has been raging since, and resulted in her withdrawal as President Obama’s nomination for US Attorney in Colorado.

Voorhis was acquitted at trial over his role in this scandal, but has not been reinstated in his job at ICE. He testified in the final day of a hearing on Thursday, January 28 that will determine whether he gets his job back.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Access to Public Records in Wisconsin is in Jeopardy!

April 10th, 2011

MADISON, Wis. – Court officials in Wisconsin are concerned that Wisconsin’s court’s data management system could be on the chopping block if the governor’s proposed budget breaks up its funding mechanism. The popular court records site allows practically anyone with an interest to easily look up the criminal records of friends and neighbors.

Gov. Scott Walker, who seems to relish a fight with practically anyone, proposed a budget that would stop dedicated funding for the Consolidated Court Automation Programs (CCAP), the data management system for the state courts system. Currently, state law grants the system $6 out of every $21.50 charged as part of the Justice Information System Surcharge included in most court filing fees.

Under the new proposal, all fee revenue would go to the Department of Administration (DOA), which would give the money to CCAP and a range of other programs. It would also cut CCAP’s funding by 10 percent. To me this smacks of more needless government control that is focusing on the short term versus keeping the long term interests and safety of the public in mind. An issue that is rampant in Washington first and foremost.

Jean Bousquet, CCAP spokeswoman, said the switch would allow DOA to move money to other programs in the future. If that happens, the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (WCCA) database, along with your access to it, would likely be near the top of the list of cuts. That’s the database used by millions  of individuals every year, who depend on it for making safe decisions.

The WCCA database provides current information on all past and pending court cases in the Wisconsin circuit courts system and anyone with an Internet connection can access it. Bousquet said the system would likely deal with budget cuts through gradual moves. “We do pretty much instantaneous updates of court records now,” Bousquet said. “Maybe we would delay updating the database and do it nightly or daily. It’s just the concern that could be there if this goes through as written.”

Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson also indicated that CCAP itself could be jeopardized by the change and urged the Joint Finance Committee to keep the funding stream in place. “CCAP’s revenue sources need to remain stable and under the court’s authority.” said Abrahamson in testimony to the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee. “Without a strong, stable CCAP, the court system, indeed the entire justice system, cannot function in an effective and efficient manner.”

Cullen Werwie, a spokesperson for Governor Walker, said Abrahamson’s claims are “simply not true” and that the change was made because dedicated funding made the fee too difficult to administer. Werwie also said the 10 percent cut was in line with across the board department cuts and is needed to balance the state’s $3.6 billion budget deficit. Typical…sounds like more fiscal irresponsibility. Instead of trying to figure out exactly why there is a deficit, the politicians are simply making more “broad strokes” cuts in an unsustainable manner.

The WCCA site averages between 2 and 3 million hits a day. Those are huge numbers and a few state legislators have criticized the site’s openness, saying the information can be routinely abused. Former Democratic Rep. Marlin Schneider of Wisconsin Rapids introduced a bill in 2009 that would limit public access and remove records until a judgment has been rendered. The bill died at the end of the legislative session, but debate over the site continued in a special Legislative Council committee. That committee drafted a bill in March that would only clarify that expunged records should be removed from the site. This was an issue that I wrote about in an earlier article.

Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, has touted the site as providing citizens with essential information and said that any cutbacks to the WCCA site would have “significant consequences.”

“The bottom line is that it saves the state money overall, because the availability of this information online means the individual clerks of courts in different counties aren’t being constantly asked to provide it,” Lueders said. “If you make it less useful in any respect, you’re going to increase the burden on clerks of court.”

I don’t know about you, but this kind of thing gets my hackles up. Instead of trying to figure out where the deficit came from, the government is once again simply taking money from a very successful program and using it to pay off other areas that need addressing. There are no “cuts” being made here. It’s the same thing that’s been happening in Washington. The government uses a program, e.g. Social Security, to fund some other sink hole while ensuring both will be nothing but empty shells when all is said and done.

Anyway, if you need to do any public records searches in Wisconsin, you had better get on it before they decide to shut down everything all together. And of course, leave your comments below. I would love to know what others think about this.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Social Media Can Destroy Your Career if The Boss Does His/Her Own Background Check

April 7th, 2011

If you have ever had any doubts about what kind of impact social media and networking has on your hiring chances, this should clear it up once and for all.

I have done some research on the matter and you are going to be surprised. So, you may want to start cleaning up all the questionable content you may or may not have posted.

Did you know that up to 70% of hiring managers say they reject job applicants because of information they find online. Facebook might be a good place to tell the world how you got hammered last night or good that weed was. But, be warned, your prospective employer is going to be on the lookout and you might just be screwing your chances of being hired.

The data come from a survey of 1,200 human relations managers and consumers in the United States, Britain, Germany and France. Microsoft commissioned it last November.

Almost all of the pool of surveyed individuals said they go online to “research” candidates who apply for a job, and also mentioned they feel entirely justified in doing so.

Now get this, only 7% of prospective employees think the HR department does any kind of research online except for the standard background check.

The recruiters said they search for information about candidates through search engines, on social networking sites, personal Web sites and blogs, gaming sites, online classified sites and through professional background checkers.

Of course you are going to ask exactly what kind of information is going to blast your chances of being hired. Recruiters gave these figures.

  • 58 percent say data on lifestyle.
  • 56 percent say inappropriate written text.
  • 55 percent say inappropriate photos.

The report was released on International Privacy Day, which in Washington will be marked with a conference at the Newseum. Reputation Defender and privacy groups will discuss how legislators and regulators are responding to a growing push to address online privacy.

However that is the least of it. Anything you post about yourself online opens the door a little wider to identity theft. Go take that and smoke. Be careful about what sordid details you reveal to the rest of the world and save yourself some trouble. The major online background check companies offer a social network search exactly for this purpose. Do your own social network search and see what’s out there.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,