Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit PowerIsKnowledge's column >>

POWERISKNOWLEDGE

Home Page
Gashki'ewizi
Articles Posted: 150  Links Seeded: 1793
Member Since: 9/2008  Last Seen: 5/17/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Disgusting: State paid sex offenders as baby sitters - BlackListedNews.com

Seeded on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:45 AM EDT
Read Article
odd-news, rape, sex-offenders, child-care, human-services, rapist, chicago-tribune, convicts, cornelius-osborne
Seeded by PowerIsKnowledge
Advertise | AdChoices

Cornelius Osborne may not seem like baby-sitting material.

He was convicted of raping two women. A succession of felonies, from robbery to failing to register as a sex offender, repeatedly sent him to prison, state records show.

But over more than two years, the state paid Osborne nearly $5,000 to baby-sit two children, before his latest conviction — for dealing drugs — put him back behind bars.
Osborne, of Chicago, wasn't the only sex offender paid by taxpayers to baby-sit, according to a Tribune investigation that found cases of convicted rapists, molesters and other violent felons given access to children over the past decade. The money comes from a $750 million-a-year program that subsidizes child care for more than 150,000 impoverished Illinois families.

The state Department of Human Services poorly vetted baby sitters for years — and when a 2009 law forced better checks, it took nearly 18 months to start them, the newspaper's investigation of the Child Care Assistance Program found.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

  • PowerIsKnowledge's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Chicago
  • Public Discussion (25)
PowerIsKnowledge

They should have. The program has long barred those convicted of sex crimes and the most violent felonies. But Osborne wasn't spotted because of how the form was filled out. It asked him if he had been convicted of any crimes and, if so, which ones. His response showed "drug trafficking" — a crime that at the time didn't disqualify him.

He didn't mention the prison stints for rape, robbery and kidnapping, which would have.

And there's no record anyone checked further.

Not only does this sounds like a state that doesn't value its children, it sounds like the staff working in the agency is lazy.

  • 7 votes
Reply#1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:48 AM EDT
Arieus

Why be surprise? A judge just handed over a teen kid to a mother that killed two of her own kids.

WTF is the world coming to when we have judges and a system that have little to no respect for the kids in America that need the most protection from all these sickos.

  • 6 votes
#1.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:46 AM EDT
Reply
blazera

So, only one case, and it was a man babysitting his sister's kids with her consent.

  • 1 vote
Reply#2 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:15 AM EDT
PowerIsKnowledge

blazera, you missed the point of the article.

  • 2 votes
#2.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:17 AM EDT
blazera

the point was sensationalism. Read the title, government pays sex offenders to watch children. In reality, it's one case of a man babysitting his sister's kids. The fact that the government paid him for it is cause for outrage, but that's not the what the article's about.

    #2.2 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:47 PM EDT
    Reply
    prozacprincess

    This is so repulsive, it made my stomach upset. What kind of idiots are hired by the bureaucrats?

    • 2 votes
    Reply#3 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:18 AM EDT
    PowerIsKnowledge

    This is so repulsive, it made my stomach upset. What kind of idiots are hired by the bureaucrats?

    Says alot about those of us who'll read this and forget about it before the end of the day.

    • 2 votes
    #3.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:56 AM EDT
    Reply
    smallstuff

    Well I believe I would take this guy babysitting my kids over Eric Cantor R-Virginia as a babysitter.

    Americans have developed this weird double standard about ex-cons. On one hand you have people like Michael Vick who commits a most vicious crime, serves years in jail and then is offered a 6 year 100 million dollar deal to play professional football for the Philadelphia Eagles. Lindsay LoHan who commits crime after crime and ends up doing house arrest and being given every second reprieve in the world. Karl Rove who has been connected with all sorts of scandalous conduct is a major conduit for the Ultra Right Evangelical fanatics and paid big bucks just to fart.

    Then we have Mr. & Mrs. Average Joe and Jane Dough who may have (1) misdemeanor conviction on a lifetime record that is otherwise clean and pristine and cannot even get a job as a slave at a car manufacturing plant or a job at Walmart. Heaven forbid a teaching degree and the very people who forbid these people the right and opportunity to return to a normal part of civility are probably the same ones who praise Lindsay Lohan, Worship the Karl Roves and Pay Michael Vick's salary.

    I continue to reiterate that America is not for the average American and it is so paranoid as a nation that it commits some of the gravest social injustices known to man. The Republican Party and The Tea Party are but a symptom of the overall ridiculous foibles that America has developed.

    I employ ex-convicts and have had (2) bad experiences in 20 years.....just (2). I will take them, train them and pay them well above minimum wage after 90 days and keep them for as long as they wish to stay as long as they are productive and play the game straight.

    I would hire more if business were better and I would hire more ex-cons before I would ever hire someone like Newt Gingrich, who he himself a presidential slothful has had his own problems with his personal credibility and dubious activities but conservatives love him!

    • 4 votes
    Reply#4 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:21 AM EDT
    US Houtkop

    Here we go! Whybturn this seed into a political diatribe? There are plenty of other sites where you can voice your opinion,so take them there!

    Oh and would you like your cigar back Mr. President?

      #4.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:48 AM EDT
      0pinion8ed

      I appreciate reading your experiences with ex-cons smallstuff and wish you much success in your further efforts with second chances and giving them. Keep it up.

      • 2 votes
      #4.2 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 12:07 PM EDT
      smallstuff

      US Houtkop- I can voice my opinion anywhere I please, thank you! I did discuss the subject matter of the article and I also interjected my own thoughts and words. If it bothers you that much, just put my handle on IGNORE and you won't be bothered with reading my posts.

      That will solve your problem nicely.

        #4.3 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:27 PM EDT
        smallstuff

        Opinion8ed- Thank you and we will do our best.

          #4.4 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:28 PM EDT
          Reply
          mochabeans

          The money comes from a $750 million-a-year program that subsidizes child care for more than 150,000 impoverished Illinois families.

          One felon was paid 5000.00 after being hired to babysit his neices/nephews out of a 750 million dollar program!!! And he was hired by his sister!!

          Obviously, this program needs to be shut down! The other 149,999 families must be protected from this evil program!!

          • 4 votes
          Reply#5 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:36 AM EDT
          0pinion8ed

          Mocha, you must be a Rick Perry kind of Texan. No punishment is ever enough. Shut down an entire program that helps many just to satisfy your sense of indignity? The baby really doesn't mean very much to you after all if you are ready to throw them out with the bathwater.

          The actual circumstances do not seem to justify the sensationalism.

          • 2 votes
          #5.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:44 AM EDT
          PowerIsKnowledge

          Why shut down the entire program, Mocha, when it can be repaired?

          • 1 vote
          #5.2 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:48 AM EDT
          mochabeans

          Sorry guys!! Forgot the sarcasm tag! Of course 149,999 families should not suffer because one jerk with the help of his sister managed to con the system! Just trying to point out that this is really non-news.. (also, in defence of my comment your own sarcasm detector may be inoperable)

          • 2 votes
          #5.3 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:51 AM EDT
          mtpromises

          i figured it was sarcasm :)

            #5.4 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:09 AM EDT
            0pinion8ed

            Sorry if it was over-the-top. Just provoked an uncomfortable memory of something that happened to a grandson in a day care center furnished for young college students. I would far rather see them in a one-on-one with someone who loves them than in a group unit.

            • 2 votes
            #5.5 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:42 AM EDT
            PowerIsKnowledge

            Just trying to point out that this is really non-news..

            Why do you consider this non-nes, mochabeans?

            • 2 votes
            #5.6 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:15 PM EDT
            mochabeans

            I think a con man and his sister bilked the system for 5K, I would think this type of thing happens a lot with every system put in place to help legitimate people in need. I do not think this program should be put in jeopardy because of it nor do I think, as your headline suggests, that the government is actively recruiting rapists to look after children. Sensationalist story.

              #5.7 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:03 AM EDT
              PowerIsKnowledge

              The media has always used sensation headlines to draw our eyes to the story so we can purchase their print. It's up to the individual to do what they want with it. Now that this story is in the hands of the people of Illinois, they can do with it what they will.

              If someone discovered that this was happening in my state, I would want to know so I can join others in making a change because one pedophile can harm many children. The sensation of the headline wouldn't matter to people who would want to band together to stop the crimes on children.

              • 1 vote
              #5.8 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:44 AM EDT
              scar_tissue

              I would want to know so I can join others in making a change because one pedophile can harm many children.

              Nobody mentioned in this article was ID'd as a pedophile. Apparently what they came up w/ was 82 ppl had addresses that matched up w/ one of the 60K private babysitters & were on the sex offender registry, but it didn't say they were child molestors. The guy at the start of the story raped 2 women, the guy near the end had sex w/ an underage girl (age of consent in Illinois is 17, but it didn't give his age at the time) w/ no other details given about it, but nothing at all on these findings of matching addresses.

              Ppl are put on the registry for stuff that has nothing to do w/ sex, like mooning, streaking, public urination, boob flashing, skinny dipping (sometimes unintentional, bathing suits do pop off now & then), b/c they all fall under the *indecent exposure* umbrella & apparently the courts have nothing more pressing on their calendars than to ruin stupid teenagers' lives by charging them.

              Like w/ the recent surge in *sexting* cases where some dumb girl sends a naked pic to her BF & he shows his buddies & the next thing you know he's charged w/ being in possession of & distributing kiddie porn. Or the type of cases where the BF is 18 but the GF is 16 & her parents don't like him, so when they discover they're having sex they file statuatory rape charges on the BF. None of that belongs in the sex offender registry, sorry. That was intended for just child molestors at its inception & now it's completely out of control.

              There isn't a clue given in that article about why those ppl are on the registry. They aren't the babysitters. They *matched addresses* to where DSS sent babysitter checks. Doesn't even mean the babysitter lived there (used a friend's or relative's address for mail), or still lives there if they did, or if those listed are still around, that they know the babysitters at all in the case of multiple unit housing, or that they're pedophiles.

              I think if it had been discovered that any of them were pedophiles, it would've definitely been noted in the story simply b/c it would've caused a greater furor. It certainly noted the sex crimes convictions of the 2 male babysitters under discussion, neither involving children. So I think it's erroneous to make the determination this involves pedophiles when it wasn't stated it did.

              • 1 vote
              #5.9 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:15 PM EDT
              Reply
              rtg-

              This wouldn't be a problem if all child molesters got castrated.

                Reply#6 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:55 PM EDT
                PowerIsKnowledge

                rtg-, from your comment, you don't know what castration is.

                • 1 vote
                #6.1 - Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:15 PM EDT
                Reply
                scar_tissue

                WTF has this country come to w/ all this (pardon the bad pun) *nannying*?

                Cornelius Osborne may not seem like baby-sitting material.

                He was convicted of raping two women. A succession of felonies, from robbery to failing to register as a sex offender, repeatedly sent him to prison, state records show.

                But over more than two years, the state paid Osborne nearly $5,000 to baby-sit two children, before his latest conviction — for dealing drugs — put him back behind bars.

                So he re-offended at the same & only crime he listed on his *application to be a babysitter*, which was found perfectly acceptable when he was approved. Oy. Are we noticing the sm fortune he was pd, BTW? $5K in over 2 yrs. Either babysitters are still getting $1/hr, or he didn't do it all that much & is being used to sensationalize the story.

                The state Department of Human Services poorly vetted baby sitters for years

                Babysitters have to be vetted? When I was 12 I started babysitting for $1 an hr & managed to never harm anyone's kids despite being one myself, now adults are seen to be unable to be competent at it? Nowadays anyone leaving an infant or even 2-3-4 schl-age kids w/ a 12 yo would be hauled up on child neglect & abandonment charges & don't tell me they wouldn't. Which is why day care is now such a huge, expensive industry (why I don't know, they certainly only pay their employees min wage or less) & one of the biggest sources of fraud in the DSS programs list w/ their rip-off rates that are much higher for *vouchered* kids than those whose parents can pay. Lots of *licensed* places hire ppl under the table, so that's no guarantee of anything as far as staff. DSS themselves place untrained cash assistance recipients in day care centers sometimes for their *workfare* requirement.

                "You're talking about not only the state sanctioning, but the state creating, an economic incentive for someone with a criminal record to be in a room with a kid," Murphy said.

                I'd hardly call what this guy got pd *economic incentive* if he turned back to selling drugs! Convicted felons are ineligible for cash assistance, so they have to work somewhere, don't they? Kids are in rms w/ *criminals* often & no one knows it. Some even in their own homes. Don't know a thing about what happens w/ felons but it seems to me there's 2 choices here, either keep them 4ever at state expense or get them a *real* job that pays enough so recidivism looks like too much effort for them.

                "This is a program that is absolutely essential if we are going to, with a straight face, tell families that if they work and if they continue to develop themselves, we can help them make a difference for their families," she said.

                I don't even see how that's cost-effective, b/c it costs 2-3x as much for a child to be in FT day care while Mom works some min wage job & still qualifies for peripheral assistance than it would to go back to the old rule of letting Mom stay home & *babysit* her own kids until they're schl-aged. But they can pacify ppl by citing stats that show less ppl *on welfare* while not explaining how it costs more to make ppl work.

                All it took for Osborne was a 2004 application mailed with the help of his sister, whose two children he would be paid to watch in her Englewood apartment.

                He was babysitting his sister's kids. I guess she might know if he was going to be a danger to them or not.

                The program has long barred those convicted of sex crimes and the most violent felonies. But Osborne wasn't spotted because of how the form was filled out. It asked him if he had been convicted of any crimes and, if so, which ones. His response showed "drug trafficking" — a crime that at the time didn't disqualify him.

                And yet pot is illegal. Go figure. *Drug trafficking* sounds like a pretty serious offense to me! I bet no one even reads the applications if that one slipped by.

                Osborne joined the ranks of more than 70,000 child care providers paid by the program — 60,000 of them unlicensed.

                Babysitters now need to have a license or it's a bad thing? No, they just need common sense.

                The issue increasingly became a topic in Cook County courtrooms, where defendants with long rap sheets mentioned their baby-sitting jobs during proceedings.

                "That profoundly concerned me," said longtime Circuit Judge Nicholas Ford.

                The fact that you get what you're willing to pay for didn't concern him? Private babysitters are incredibly cheap compared to day care centers. It's why DSS prefers them when possible.

                he learned nobody ran full background checks on unlicensed baby sitters.

                So Grazian called Sen. Murphy, who pushed a law to require background checks.

                Background checks for babysitters. *Your tax dollars* at work, but still cheaper for DSS than conventional licensed day care providers. All this mess could've been avoided had they just stuck to that alone, if they were really so worried about the children they were forcing to go hang out w/ strangers all day while Mom took the bus to McDonald's & back. They weren't. They wanted it done on the cheap.

                83 baby sitters lived at addresses where sex offenders were registered, according to the auditors' report.

                I suppose subsidized housing never came up in this? Same address doesn't necessarily mean same apt. Even *sex offender* doesn't necessarily mean child molestor or rapist w/ how that's snowballed to incl *sexting* teens etc.

                The audit didn't name the offenders, but one may have been Tremayne Huey, who was convicted in 2004 under an alias for having sex with an underage girl

                OK, age call on this one, which info it doesn't give. This is why teenagers having sex or kids sending ea other pix of their naughty bits (or taking a leak or being silly & mooning or streaking & getting an *indecent exposure* conviction) should not be on sex offender registries w/ rapists & pedophiles.

                The Department of Children and Family Services blamed the delay on legal hurdles and manpower shortages in an era when government is expected to do more with less.

                I think those might be considered *shovel ready jobs*, then, huh? Vacancies begging to be filled, yet no one is hired to fill them. That just oozes concern for the children to me pffft. They don't want to hire ppl & likely don't need to do so. DSS plays that *we're so overloaded w/ cases* nonsense every time their actions are questioned & have done so for decades. Not a new thing.

                Along the way, Davis was convicted in 2008 of felony marijuana possession — a crime that program administrators said should have prevented him from being reapproved as a child-care provider under state rules.

                But the guy we started out w/ who was babysitting his sister's kids wrote down he had been convicted of *drug trafficking* & that was acceptable? They can't be rdg these applications.

                Advocates say more thorough checks are being done on longtime baby sitters — and those who live with them — as their cases come up for renewal, about every three to six months.

                Well, that explains why they don't have time to do anything, if they're making babysitters recertify 2-4x/yr! That's insane. And why should *who lives w/ them* matter? They're not the babysitters.

                By law, a baby sitter can't watch children in a home with any residents who wouldn't pass the background checks.

                Unlicensed baby sitters who use their homes are now required to list who lives with them on forms mailed to the state.

                Got it. Then I guess DSS spends more $ to either place children in day care, or provide transportation $ to the babysitter to come to the kids' home. Bearing in mind that ppl who work in *licensed* facilities may also be liars or criminals or married to someone who couldn't pass a background check, too.

                The Tribune compared baby sitter addresses with prison data on parolee addresses and found 126 baby sitters received checks this summer at Chicago-area addresses where parolees were living.

                126 out of 70K. Yup, that's a really widespread issue that newspaper dug up for a headline! And we arrive full circle at the conundrum of just what are ppl supposed to do for a living when released from prison, or if DSS is willing to fire a gainfully employed babysitter & put her back on the *welfare rolls* b/c her husband got out of prison.

                This is nuts. Extend TANF *lifetime limits* & let mothers stay home w/ their own kids until they're old enough to go to schl, which is what the *mothers' pensions* of the 1930s were intended to do. It's way cheaper than child care vouchers, problem solved.

                • 1 vote
                Reply#7 - Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:29 PM EDT
                Leave a Comment:
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                FUN STUFF:
                • Leaderboard |
                • E-Mail Alerts |
                • Top of the Vine |
                • Newsvine Live |
                • Newsvine Archives |
                • The Greenhouse |
                COMPANY STUFF:
                • Code of Honor |
                • Company Info |
                • Contact Us |
                • Jobs |
                • User Agreement |
                • Privacy Policy |
                • About our ads
                LEGAL STUFF:
                • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com