|
Dear Virginia Voter,
Thank you for coming to PROTECT's website to get more information on Delegate Dave Albo and decide for yourself whether or not he deserves another term representing Virginia families and children in Richmond. On these pages, you will find the details about the shameful Albo record, as well as answers to most of your questions.
PROTECT, or the National Association to Protect Children, is a national pro-child, anti-crime group with members in all 50 states. Our record of working with both Republicans and Democrats is clear. We proudly call ourselves the “most nonpartisan lobby in America!”
If you agree that Dave Albo’s record on protecting children from child sexual predators is unacceptable, please send him—and every Virginia leader—that message on November 8th.
| |
|
  Since introducing H.B. 1054 in early 2004, Del. Dave Albo appears to have successfully quashed many inquiries into the Albo bill—through bluster, legal obfuscation and misdirection. He has also enlisted the support of legislative and Crime Commission attorneys to defend him. Since Albo was Chairman of the Crime Commission—and there are persistent rumors that these drastic penalty reductions were proposed at the behest of some Commonwealth's Attorneys—we urge you to treat claims from these sources with some scrutiny. We believe that even a lay person can, with reasonable diligence, understand the obvious, undeniable intent and effects of the Albo bill.
1. Did Albo really try to drastically lower penalties for child rape?
Yes, without a doubt. The Northern Virginia Journal (2/11/04) said that Albo’s bill “would have been a molester’s dream come true.” In the simplest terms, Albo’s bill took one of the weakest child sex crimes on the books in Virginia—Taking indecent liberties with a child by a person in custodial or supervisory relationship (§18.2-370.1)—and tried to shoehorn other crimes, rape, sodomy and other abuse, into its definition (without raising the penalty). Before the Albo bill, “custodial indecent liberties” was a Class 6 felony that covered things such as propositioning a child or indecent exposure to a child. By slipping rape and sodomy into this law, Albo would have made it possible to get probation or a fine for the most extreme forms of sexual abuse too.
This would be similar to taking a minor law against marijuana possession and slipping heroin trafficking in… without raising the penalty!
2. Can you show me technically how his bill worked, in simple terms?
Yes, click here for diagram.
3. Can you go into more detail about the Albo bill?
See further Questions and Answers here.
4. How do the Albo penalties compare to other crimes?
Dave Albo tried to make these crimes: “sexual intercourse,” “any act of carnal knowledge,” having a “child engage in sexual intercourse, sodomy or fondling of sexual or genital parts with another person”…
the same punishment as this crime: larceny of any poultry of the value of $5 dollars or more (§18.2-97)
5. What is Albo’s side of the story?
Albo Alibi #1: Just Another Option! Albo first claimed (very creatively) that his attempt to downgrade penalties for child rape would not actually be a reduction in punishment, because he left the originial, much tougher Rape law on the books as well. This is little different than if Albo had introduced a bill to make bank robbery a misdemeanor, then denied he had done anything wrong because felony bank robbery was still on the books as well.
Albo Alibi #2: What Are They Talking About? Albo next claimed that he could not understand PROTECT's objections at all, that they simply made no sense to any of his Richmond cronies. Yet he managed to remove every last word that we opposed under pressure from PROTECT and Virginia citizens.
Albo Alibi #3: Saving Sodomy… Albo has also claimed that his bill was an attempt to make sure laws against sodomizing children would still be on the books if the Supreme Court struck down Virginia’s sodomy laws for adults as unconstitutional (under the Lawrence v. Texas decision). This tortured argument ignores the fact that if Albo really believed the Supreme Court was addressing child sexual assault (and not just adult consensual sex) and he wanted to make sure he kept sodomy against children a crime, he should have made it a real crime, requiring mandatory prison time. But he didn’t. It also does not explain why he also included sexual intercourse and other acts in his expanded definition of “custodial indecent liberties.”
Albo Alibi #4: Protecting Teens… Albo also claims that House Bill 1054 would have been a new tool that actually increased penalties for sex with teens. They say that if an adult has sex with an older teenager who is in the adult's custody or under his supervision, it could be considered a misdemeanor (contributing to the delinquency of a minor). But the truth is, the Albo bill applies to babies and young children, not just teens.
6. Did PROTECT try to work with Albo in good faith?
Yes. In early December of 2003, PROTECT approached Dave Albo in his capacity as Chairman of the Crime Commission. We provided him with detailed spreadsheets, showing that in Virginia, punishment for sex crimes against children in the home or by adults in a custodial or supervisory relationship were outrageously low. Delegate Albo dismissed our concerns outright.
Within a few weeks, PROTECT heard a troubling rumor that the the Crime Commission might propose to lower penalties for sodomy against a child, but only in cases where the perpetrator was in a custodial or supervisory relationship with his vicitm. Alarmed, we had an Albo acquaintance (now a member of the Virginia state Task Force on Sex Offenders) contact Albo and ask if this could be true. Albo, in an email, dismissed it as absurd.
Then, in mid January, PROTECT attended a meeting with Albo at the Virginia Capitol, where he introduced his Albo bill. Albo had not only reduced the penalties for sodomy within the family, he had downgraded a whole range of other sex crimes as well. At this meeting, PROTECT asked him not to weaken the laws that protect children. Again, Albo dismissed our concerns, insisting that tougher penalties were still on the books. Only then did PROTECT go public in a successful campaign to stop the Albo bill.
Once the Virginia news media began investigating the Albo bill, Delegate Albo, through legislative staff, asked PROTECT to temporarily remove content from our website critical of the legislation. This request was made as a “good faith” request, to give the legislative staff time to “fix” the problems with Albo’s bill. PROTECT, in an attempt to be reasonable, complied. Within days, reporters and others told us that Delegate Albo was telling them that PROTECT removed information from our website because we “knew” we were wrong. We immediately posted the information again.
Despite the many changing excuses Dave Albo has offered for trying to gut punishments for child rape and molestation, there is one he has never offered. Dave Albo has never claimed to have made a mistake. Knowing that Albo is a former prosecutor and currently a criminal defense lawyer, we believe he always knew exactly what he was doing.
7. Why on earth would anyone want to lower penalties for child rape?
We know of only three reasons:
|
a. |
Lighter penalties benefit criminals and criminal defense lawyers.
|
|
b. |
Some prosecutors—wanting unfettered discretion to plea bargain away even the most serious sex crimes (and those with physical evidence)—might have wanted a minor “catch-all” crime, allowing probation for virtually any and every child sexual abuse crime.
|
|
c. |
Some people believe that incest and sexual abuse in the home should not be treated as a criminal problem, but rather a family problem, best dealt with through counseling and family reunification. The vast majority of child sexual abuse is committed by adults the victim knows—such as parents, step-parents, mother's boyfriends and others in position of authority. Those who view these circle of trust crimes as minor are treating most abuse as minor. |
8. Is it true that Albo helped kill a modest bill to require clergy to report certain child sex abuse?
Yes. In 2003, following a national scandal about priests sexually abusing children, Senator Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) and Jay O’Brien (R-Fairfax) introduced legislation to require members of the clergy, under certain circumstances, to report child abuse and neglect. The bill was very modest: making an exception for “information required by the doctrine of the religious organization or denomination to be kept in a confidential manner.”
The Howell-O’Brien bill passed the Virginia Senate by a vote of 38-1.
Then it ran into Dave Albo’s committee, House Courts of Justice. Despite the support of a broad coalition of religious groups for the Clergy Reporting bill, Albo fought it, in public and behind the scenes. “They’re not licensed,” he said, trying to explain why they should not be subject to the law. “They’re not licensed by any state organization.” As victims of clergy abuse were joined by religious leaders, pressure on Albo built. He began to talk about a flip-flop: “If the lietenant governor is going to come up here and produce a whole lot of leaders of different churches saying they want it,” Albo said, he might vote for it. But while waiting for the clergy, he never stepped up to do the right thing for children. Child crime victims were sold out in a quiet, committee room deal.
9. Is PROTECT politically-motivated?
Protecting children from abuse should not be a partisan issue. PROTECT’s record shows that we work closely with both Republicans and Democrats. Our members include Americans from all walks of life, and span the spectrum from strong social conservatives to Hollywood liberals. But they all agree on one thing: politicians, judges, prosecutors and other public servants must be held accountable when they refuse to protect children. We hope you’ll hold Dave Albo accountable on November 8th.
|
