A recent study done by Jay Rosen, for The Normal Lear Center, determined that local news broadcasts focus much more on crime, entertainment, and national news than they do on things like local government.

The study found that local news broadcasts devoted an average of 22 seconds of each broadcast to local government, but devoted almost 3 minutes to stories on crime. Not only that, but nearly 15 minutes of each 30 minute broadcast consisted of commercials and teasers.

The study also found that 1 in 3 broadcasts led with a story on crime, while only 1 in 10 led with a story about local government. So the next time you ask yourself why the local news is so scary and why you don’t know what is going on at city hall, this might be an explanation.

For more details on the study, check out a video explanation by Jay Rosen embedded below.

James Gunter is the editor of The Crime Map and the director of social media for CrimeReports.com.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Anthony Stancl coereced male classmates into sending him nude photos, then used those photos to blackmail them into participating in sexual abuse

Anthony Stancl was a student at Eisenhower High School New Berlin, Wisconsin. He was considered a bit of a braggart, a bit of a jerk, who generally didn’t fit in well. He initially harassed and then made overtures to a known and popular gay, male student at the school, which brought him additional ridicule. He had a part-time job after school as an application developer and seemed to get along well with the adults there.

And on Facebook, he posed as a female Eisenhower student and tricked at least 31 young male students at the school into sending him naked images of themselves. He used those pictures to coerce 7 of the young men into performing sex-acts with him on camera. This was not discovered until he created a fake bomb threat, resulting in his computers being searched. (Read more details about this case here.)

This story provides us with a lot of discussion points, but this article is going to focus on just two: Why were these boys willing to provide such risky images to an unverified person, and why did none of these boys ask for help?

Educating Teens on Cyber Safety

Before digital cameras, taking a naked picture of oneself would be a risky and comparatively complex process. Sharing a picture with your significant other usually meant involving the person running the machine at the photo shop – not an option for most people. These days, however, you point, click, look at the view screen to make sure it worked, auto correct, crop as needed, adjust the file size, and send it. You can do it all from a good phone in less than 2 minutes.

It’s very likely the parents of those 31 boys didn’t think to tell their kids, “Don’t send naked pictures of yourself to anyone, ever, because digital files never go away once you share them.” It’s not widely portrayed in sitcoms, our parents didn’t bring it up to us, and most schools don’t send home information fliers on how to have that discussion.

Technology always changes, but what doesn’t change are these three rules: people online should always be treated as strangers until they’ve verified their identity; taking pictures of yourself naked or sexualized is demeaning and can actually land you in jail; and, once you put something out in the internet, you cannot ever get it back. These three rules are a few of the basic tools that kids need to know how to use before they get started on social networking and cell phones.

Have ‘The Talk’ More than Once

When something does go wrong, online or off, kids need to be able to ask for help. 31 boys were tricked into sending explicit photographs – they didn’t think they were in a situation where they needed guidance or help. However, 7 of those boys were coerced into performing sex acts—some multiple times—in front of a camera.  None of these boys asked for help. Why? Without interviewing the parents and adults in the community, we likely won’t know.

What usually happens is that children don’t know what words to use, or they’re afraid that their already bad situation will be made worse by drama and stress associated with reporting. That means parents need to encourage kids to discuss these topics and report as needed by providing neutral, constructive, and consistent conversations on these issues.

Parents and other safe adults need to initiate ‘what if’ and ‘just so you know’ type discussions. Ex: “What if someone asked you to do something that made you uncomfortable? Just so you know, whatever happens, you can always come to me. I might get upset, but I won’t be mad at you, and we’ll work through it together.”  The key point here is that you need to keep having the ‘what if’ and ‘just so you know’ conversations even after your kids really want you to stop bringing that stuff up.

Kid: “Yeah yeah, Dad, I hear you, of course I would never __,”
Dad: “Good, I trust you to do the right thing; I just need you to know that I have your back no matter what.”

Bethan Tuttle, CIPP, is mom to two and Executive Director of CommunityWatch, a non-profit that provides empowering crime-prevention education for kids, families, and communities. Learn more at CommunityWatch.us and follow @ComWatch on Twitter for empowering crime prevention updates.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

John Gardner is accused of killing Celsea King and suspected of killing Amber Dubois

John Gardner has been accused of the death of 17-year-old Chelsea King and suspected in the slaying of 14-year-old Amber Dubois, who disappeared early last year and whose body was recently recovered. What makes this case even more disturbing is that Gardner was a convicted sex offender who had already served a prison sentence for child molestation and imprisonment.

Inevitably, the question being posed by parents and community leaders is, “why is this man free?” From there, many want to create “tougher” laws to deal with these offenders ( as I wrote about last week in this post). The problem is that there are already numerous laws in place to deal with sex offenders like Megan’s Law and Jessica’s Law that both deal with keep sex offenders away from children. The problem lies in enforcing those laws.

To explain more about this problem, I’ve posted an excellent news report by NPR that covers community outcry and the problems with the current system. Take a couple minutes to listen to the report:

James Gunter is the editor of The Crime Map and the director of social media for CrimeReports.com.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by ryme-intrinseca via Flickr

Just a few months ago, the Honolulu PD announced that it was starting a new program aimed at shaming DUI offenders online, in hopes of dissuading other citizens from driving drunk. I wrote about the program last November as part of a series on the benefits and drawbacks of public shaming as a form of punishment and deterrent.

This week they announced that they had to stop the program. Although the police hoped it would act as a deterrent, defense lawyers claimed that posting weekly mugshots of recent DUI offenders to the department’s website was unfair to the defendants because their cases had yet to go to trial and they had not yet been found guilty of a crime. In other words, lawyers were claiming that the Honolulu PD’s program came a little too close to labeling suspects guilty before proven innocent.

So, while other “naming and shaming” tactics are still alive and kicking in other parts of the country. The Hawaii PD’s incarnation has been suspended for the foreseeable future.

What do you think? Does posting DUI mugshots online irreparably harm defendant’s cases? Leave your thoughts below.

James Gunter is the editor of The Crime Map and the director of social media for CrimeReports.com.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by San Jose Library via Flickr

In a Web world that is saturated with sexual images, you may wonder: Is there anything I can do as a parent to protect my child from the dangers of pornography?

Dr. Michael Rich, the director of the Harvard Center on Media and Child Health, says we probably can’t shield our children from everything, but there are still very important things we can do.

“I’m not completely convinced that in this day and age parents can totally protect their children from anything that’s out there,” he said. “So I think what’s really important is to introduce media use to kids at times when they are developmentally able to manage it, when they are developmentally capable of the kind of critical use of media, understanding what they’re seeing, what they’re hearing, [and] how it may affect them.”

He also said it is vital that, as a parent, you provide a support structure for your kids when they bump into harmful things on the Web. Children need a caring adult to help them navigate these negative experiences in the most effective way.

At the Internet Keep Safe Coalition we plead with you to be an informed and involved parent. We recommend these additional three keys to success:

1. KEEP CURRENT with the technology your child uses.
2. KEEP COMMUNICATING with your teen about everything they experience through connected technologies.
3. KEEP CHECKING their cell phone and Internet activity. Review text messages and Internet histories. Let them know that you will keep checking because you want to help them protect their digital reputation and avoid danger.

iKeepSafe also recommends that parents use a product to help manage their child’s Internet experience. Norton’s OnlineFamily, AOL Parental Controls, and K9 Web Protection are excellent, free products that help parents filter and monitor Web content and activities as well as set limits on screen time.

You can hear more advice from Dr. Rich on this subject by viewing the video below:

Samuel Hislop is a regular contributor to the official internet safety blog of the iKeepSafe Coalition.You can learn more about child internet safety and ethics by visiting iKeepSafe.org.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by Malingering via Flickr

Yet again, we find ourselves faced with the gruesome killing of a young girl at the hands of a registered sex offender. 17-year-old Chelsea King, was recently raped and murdered at a San Diego park, and John Albert Gardner has been charged with the crime. Gardner has already been charged with the attempted rape of another young woman in the same park and was originally convicted of molesting a 13-year-old girl, ten years ago—the crime that put him is jail for almost 6 years and landed him on the sex offender registry.

In the aftermath of this most recent case, I have read and seen news stories that have called for better enforcement of sex offender laws. Even Chelsea’s family recently called for tougher laws against sex offenders.

It is at these times, after unspeakable events occur, that parents, community leaders, and politicians, cry out, demanding “more,” “tougher,” “stricter,” and “harder” laws concerning sex offenders. Politicians expand the definition of sex offender to include sexting teens and “Romeo and Juliet” romances and they pass laws to further isolate sex offenders and retard their recovery.

However, writing recently in the Press-Enterprise, Sarah Burge, wrote that

The public has unrealistic expectations about the ability of tools like Megan’s Law to prevent sex crimes—especially the rare cases such as Chelsea’s involving lethal attacks by strangers.

The simple fact of the matter is, says Franklin Zimring, a professor at the UC Berkeley School of Law, “There’s no way to create a zero-risk universe for this. That’s not merely hard, that’s impossible.”

Even if we enact harsher sentences for convicted sex offenders, 70% of sex offenses are committed by relatives or close friends, and as many as 90% of sex offenses are committed by first-time offenders—meaning that the offender has no prior sex offense that would have put them on a registry. The registry, although helpful in warning us when convicted sex offenders live nearby, also creates the false sense of security that potential sex offenders are not around us all the time.

The best way to protect our children is not through over-legislating an already bloated sex offender system. The best way to protect our children is through education and trust. We need to be better at teaching our children how to respond when PEOPLE THEY KNOW touch them inappropriately—including telling us about it. Predators succeed because they manipulate children into keeping quiet. We need to teach our children that they can talk to us about ANYTHING, even if it involves something they think is scary.

We cannot discount our children’s feelings and intuitions. Listen to them and build a relationship with your children where they feel comfortable talking with you about sexual issues and about things that make them feel uncomfortable.

In the end, we are never going to be able to prevent tragedies like Chelsea King’s murder 100% of the time. There will always be random acts of violence that disrupt our lives and take the lives of the most innocent in our society. But we can help make sure that the 90% of first-time offenders don’t have a chance to go undetected among us.

For more information on red flags for pedophiles see: Profile of a Pedophile

James Gunter is the editor of The Crime Map and the director of social media for CrimeReports.com.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by @ThetaState via Flickr

This is a guest post by crime analyst Scott Dickson and was originally published at The Crime Analysts’ Blog.

There’s a story over at the Dallas Morning News regarding online access to Dallas PD’s offense reports. Dallas PD allows access via it’s website of reported offense data that is subject to the Open Records Act. However, there’s an allegation that the department asked the vendor to make it harder for users to find certain offense data via the site.

In early January, a new vendor went live with an updated version of the department’s online police reports system. The system allows the user to search for details of a crime by the offense from a drop-down sorting menu, or by other criteria, such as date, location, victim name or police report service number.

But the software was tweaked to remove some serious crimes, such as rape and murder, from the easy-to-use drop-down menu.

“I’m still confused about what exactly happened and who made the decision,” Police Chief David Kunkle said Thursday morning.

“My position has always been that as much as you can, we should have online access to any information that we know is going to fall under open records,” he said. “I want people to have an interest in making neighborhoods safer.”

Open records laws have really changed the way that government and law enforcement in particular do business. I have written in the past that many believe that recent drops in crime are due to law enforcement agencies being held more accountable for their performance. You can read some of these posts, here, here or here. An important component of this accountability is transparency.

But there is a certain resistance to this transparency. Not all the resistance is motivated by nefarious reasons. Don’t get me wrong, I am a strong believer in transparency. However, I want to bring this up so people understand why some departments are hesitant to embrace transparency.

One reason departments are hesitant is that some crime issues get blown out of proportion and departments then spend more time trying to do damage control then they spend in solving the original problem. As cops we’d much rather spend time and effort into putting bad guys in jail than we do holding press conferences.

Another reason is that cities are often times trying to promote their cities as attractive places to live and work. Many times, city leaders feel that if they admit there was any crime in the city then they will have failed in their mission to promote the city.

Another reason is that heads of police agencies can and will often lose their jobs over “bad” crime stats. No one wants their job security to hinge on the actions of another. Often times, it takes years to turn a city’s crime problem around.

Communities can go a long way to ensuring that their cops embrace transparency. Let me offer a few suggestions to further that end.

• Resist the urge to storm City Hall with torches and pitchforks in hand when a crime problem comes to light. Express your concern, but also express your support of your department and your willingness to work together and partner with them to solve the problem.
• Ignore those who would use a crime problem to further a backbiting political agenda. They will cause your department to waste time in a political fight rather than focusing on fighting crime.
• Help your city leaders to see that it is not realistic to think that a city will have no crime. I would much rather see them promote the city as having an effective police department that is responsive to crime problems. People aren’t stupid, they know that any city will occasionally have crime.
• When a crime problem comes to light, give your Chief an reasonable opportunity to solve the problem. Don’t immediately demand his head.
• Demand transparency from your department. Push your city leaders to formulate a plan to make all of it’s operations more transparent. You could even volunteer to serve on a committee to develop that plan.

Transparency in government is empowering. However, with that power comes a responsibility to use it wisely.

Scott Dickson is a crime analyst in Killeen, Texas. He blogs at The Crime Analyst’s Blog and can be reached via email at scott@crimeanalystblog.net

Get on the National Crime Map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by chrismaverick via Flickr

Consumers lose more than $40 billion—yes, $40 billion—a year to telemarketing fraud. People over 60 years of age are especially vulnerable and account for over 50 percent of all victims, according to a recent study by the American Association of Retired Persons. Professional scam artists often target older people, knowing they tend to be trusting and polite toward strangers and are more likely to be home and have time to talk with callers.

Tip-Offs to Phone Fraud

Many scams involve phony prize offers, bogus travel packages, get-rich-quick investments and fake charities. Con artists are skilled liars who spend a lot of time polishing their sales pitches. As a result, it can be difficult to see through their scams.

Some Tip-Offs:

• You must act “now” or the offer expires.
• You’ve won a “free” gift, vacation or prize—but you must pay for “postage and handling.”
• You must send money, give a credit card or bank account number, or have your check picked up by courier immediately.
• You’re told it’s not necessary to check out the company with anyone like the Better Business Bureau.
• You’re told written information about the company is not necessary.
• You can’t afford to miss this “high-profit,” “no-risk” offer.

Protection Against Telemarketing Fraud

Urge your parents or anyone troubled by calls to resist high-pressure sales tactics. Legitimate businesses respect the fact that a person is not interested.

• Tell telemarketers to remove you from their call list. If they call back they’re breaking the law—hang up!
• Ask for written information only to be sent to you about the product, service, investment opportunity or charity.
• Hang up if you’re asked to pay for a prize. Free means free, nothing else.
• Never give information about your bank account, credit card, social security number or anything considered personal information.
• Hang up if a telemarketer calls before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m.
• Check out any company with your state and local consumer protection office before you do anything.
• Finally, do not send money—cash, check or money order—by courier, overnight delivery, or wire to anyone without investigation.

If you suspect a scam, call your state attorney general. The Federal Trade Commissions Telemarketing Sales Rule gives state law enforcement officers the power to prosecute fraudulent telemarketers.

It’s the Law

It’s helpful for people who are targets of fraudulent telemarketers to know their rights under federal law:

• It’s illegal for a telemarketer to call you after you’ve asked not to be called.
• Telemarketers must tell you it’s a sales call, the name of the seller and what they are selling, before they make their pitch.
• If the call is a prize promotion, they must tell you that you don’t have to buy anything to enter or win.
• Before you pay, telemarketers must disclose the total cost, any restrictions or that a sale is final or non-refundable.
• Telemarketers may not withdraw money from your checking account without verifiable authorization.
• You do not have to pay for credit repair, recovery room, advance-fee loan, or credit services until all services are delivered.

For More Information
Contact: The Consumer Response Center
Washington D.C. 20006
(202)-835-3323

Stay Safe.

George Feder is a former master jewel thief and former America’s Most Wanted Correspondent. Visit GeorgeFeder.com or follow him on Twitter (@GeorgeFeder) to go inside the criminal mind and get tips on how you can stay safe.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

Photo by ~ashleymorganphotography~ via Flickr

In communities across the United States, there is a strong schism between our spoken determination to protect kids and our unreasonable methods of dealing justice to kids.

Speaking as a mom, I can comfortably state that young children don’t write hopeful Career Day reports describing their future as prostitutes, drug mules, and sex offenders. They want to be teachers and doctors, cowboys and astronauts, and sports professionals.

As a society, we’ve generally acknowledged that children committing crimes have been led astray and need help to get back on track toward safe and constructive adulthood. However, also speaking as a mom, I can say that our juvenile justice system is largely the equivalent of smacking a kid and sending them to bed hungry. Not constructive and—for many types of juvenile crime—clearly not working.

We can use as an example the topic that sparked this post: child prostitutes.

Children cannot legally consent to sex, let alone take responsibility for their part in a financial transaction. Adults who are convicted of any level or type of sexual interaction with children typically face severe and life-long consequences.

And yet, children picked up as prostitutes, who also happen to be 5^th graders, can expect to spend the night in jail. These children also have a good chance of going into juvenile detention and then being sent back to the same environment that turned them into child prostitutes.

These children are obviously victims of horrific crimes, and yet we treat them as criminals. Instead of helping to build them back up from the desecration that was committed upon them, we punish them as though they were consenting participants.

We can call that justice, but is that a good word choice? The fifth grade girl in a jail cell could probably tell you ‘no.’

I would encourage parents and community members to think about this the next time they hear about a young person being arrested in the community. What consequence would you assign for the crime if your child was the perpetrator? And then spend some time finding out how the legislated consequence differs from your own. You’ll probably be surprised at how punitive it is, and how expensive it is.

With regard to child prostitutes, there is no question that change is needed. I once spent several months working with ‘delinquent’ girls in a very intensive therapy environment. For most of these girls, it was their second or third time in juvenile detention, and they felt very lucky (usually!) to be in such an intense program. All but two of the girls were in for prostitution. The youngest of those that had been arrested for prostitution was 11, and it was her second arrest.

Bethan Tuttle, CIPP, is mom to two and Executive Director of CommunityWatch, a non-profit that provides empowering crime-prevention education for kids, families, and communities. Learn more at CommunityWatch.us and follow @ComWatch on Twitter for empowering crime prevention updates.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com

A recent revelation from the Federal Trade Commission tells us that personal information was shared from the computer networks of nearly 100 organizations. They also said this information is accessible on peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing networks, and thus available for all users of each network. This is dangerous because users can utilize this information for identity theft or fraud.

P2P file sharing is “the ability to share files over the Internet directly from one Internet-enabled device to another” (Washington State Attorney General). This is not only a concern for large organizations—parents also must understand that a major source of spyware is the P2P file-sharing software commonly used to share music and videos over the Internet. These sites include Kazaa, Limewire, as well as bit torrent websites. Your data and information is at risk when your or your child uses P2P to download music or video.

If you choose to use a P2P file-sharing program, be sure to specify one folder for exchanging files. Many people accidentally share their whole hard drive, which exposes all the files on the machine to anyone that uses the file-sharing program.

For more information about how to keep you and your children safe from the dangers of P2P, you can view and download the free Parent’s Tech Tutorial video from iKeepSafe and Symantec.

More resources are available at iKeepSafe.org.

Samuel Hislop is a regular contributor to the official internet safety blog of the iKeepSafe Coalition.You can learn more about child internet safety and ethics by visiting iKeepSafe.org.

Search your neighborhood crime map at CrimeReports.com