No where in the story did this man say, he wanted to live near a school, instead the man said 'he wants to live with his partner and the mother of his three children.' So why does the media report something in a manner that implies a reason not expressed by the person? Sensationalism, attacking the person by purposefully misconstruing his intent; twisting facts for sensationalism.
3-18-2009 New Hampshire:
FRANKLIN, N.H. (AP) — A convicted sex offender who wants to live in Franklin is challenging an ordinance that prohibits him from living within 2,500 feet from a school.
Frank Singleton, III, represented by the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union, asked a judge to order the mayor and police chief not to enforce the sex offender registry ordinance that would prevent him from living with his partner and the mother of his three children.
Singleton, who's in the State Prison in Concord, was eligible for parole on Jan. 22. However, his pleading states his pending release requires he live with his companion.
Singleton pleaded guilty in 1998 to endangering the welfare of a child. He was found guilty last year of possessing a narcotic drug and failing to report as an offender. ..News Source.. by SeaCoastOnline.com Information from The Citizen (see below)
Sex offender wants to live near Franklin school
A convicted sex offender has notified Franklin city officials of his intent to challenge the Franklin city ordinance that prohibits him from living within 2,500 feet from the boundary of a school.
In a plea for injunctive relief, Frank Singleton, III, who is represented by the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union, has asked the Merrimack County Superior Court to order Mayor Kenneth Merrifield and Police Chief David Goldstein, in their capacity as enforcers of city codes, not to enforce the sex offender registry ordinance that would prevent him from living with his partner and the mother of his three children on Bow Street.
Singleton is incarcerated in the State Prison in Concord and was eligible for parole on Jan. 22. However, his pleading states he has remained behind bars because his pending release requires he live with his companion.
"Mr. Singleton suffers actual harm each and every day that he remains incarcerated despite the parole board's grant of parole," reads his pleading.
In May 2007, and after numerous revisions and discussions, the nine members of the Franklin City Council voted unanimously to enact City Code Ordinance 247 that prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet — about one-half mile — from any school, day-care facility, public playground or similar public area.
Neighboring Northfield and Tilton also passed similar ordinances in the ensuing months.
In September 1998, Singleton pleaded guilty to endangering the welfare of a child in the Hillsborough County Superior Court and was subsequently required to register as a sex offender with police within five days of moving to a community.
In November 2008, Singleton was found guilty in Merrimack County Superior Court of possessing a narcotic drug and failing his duty to report as a offender against children. Court records list a previous address in 2004 as 95 Park St. in Northfield, which Northfield Police Chief Stephen Adams said, according to the Northfield ordinance, is too close to the Union Sanborn Elementary School.
Also in November 2008, he was convicted of an October 2007 felony violation for failing to report to the Tilton Police his then-address of 9 Hill Road in a timely manner.
Judge Larry Smukler, sitting in Belknap County Superior Court, sentenced him to state prison in November 2008, allowing both the Merrimack and Belknap sentences to run concurrently. Smukler did not recommend that Singleton complete a sexual education program.
In his suit, Singleton claims the Franklin ordinance "fails to take into consideration the fact that [he] is not dangerous," that he is at a "low risk" to reoffend and that his record indicates "he was convicted of a single offense of endangering the welfare of a child over a decade ago."
He claims the ordinance violates his right of due process because "the ordinance is so vast that it cannot be rationally related to any legitimate governmental objective..."
Through his attorney, he also says the ordinance violates the equal protection clause because it restricts only a certain class of people — registered sex offenders.
Counts three and four challenge Ordinance 247 because it accuses the City Council of "acting beyond its authority" and deals with an area of legislation exclusively occupied by the state.
A city with 8,200 residents, in May of 2007 Franklin has 27 registered sex offenders according to the New Hampshire Sex Offender Registry's online website. A check of the same site on Tuesday indicates the city now has 20 registered sex offenders, providing some anecdotal evidence that the ordinance has had some effect. Northfield had eight registered offenders when its ordinance passed and now has seven. Tilton's numbers dropped from seven to five.
During their development stages and in public hearings, ordinances similar to Franklin's have not gone unopposed.
In Northfield, in a widely attended public hearing that attracted statewide media attention, Barb Keshen — the N.H. Civil Liberties attorney representing Singleton, spoke to the same potential civil rights violations as are iterated in Singleton's suit.
Tilton resident Patrick Clark also spoke against both Tilton's and Northfield's ordinances citing evidence that these laws don't work, using a recommendation from the Iowa Attorney Generals that recommended revoking similar state legislation in that state.
Both the Northfield and Franklin ordinances also came under fire from landlord associations that opposed clauses in their codes that placed the enforcement onus on landlords.
"In a way, I'm glad somebody is challenging this so the Legislature can step up and make it a state law," said Adams on learning of the Franklin suit.
As a named respondent, Franklin Police Chief David Goldstein declined to comment.
Likewise Merrifield also declined to comment directly, citing advice of counsel, but said he supported the ordinance during its development phase when he was a city councilor. ..Source.. by GAIL OBER