The Awareness Center is The Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault (JCASA)
Case of Rabbi Alan Jay "Shneur" Horowitz, MD
(AKA: Shneor Altar, Mike Sonkin, Alan Horowitz, Alan J. Horowitz, Shneur Horowitz, Elisha Horowitz, The NAMBLA Rabbi)
Rabbi and Child Psychiatrist
(1964-1968) - Harvard University (graduating magna cum laude) - Boston, MA
(1971) - Duke University (receiving a M.D. and Ph.D.) - North Carolina
(1973-1976) Residency in Psychiatry, Medical College of Georgia - Augusta, GA
(1976-1978) Assistant Professor of Child Psychiatry, University of Iowa - Woodward, IA
Arizona
(1983) - Hagerstown, MD
Ohr Somayach (1983 - 1985) - Monsey, NY
(1985 - 1990) - Jerusalem and West Bank, Israel
(1990 - 1991) - Schenectady, NY
(1991) - Woodward, IA
Oneida Prison (2004 - 2006) - Oneida, NY
(2006) Albany, NY
(2006) - Tel Aviv, Israel
(2006) - Japan
(2006) - Thailand
(2006) - Hong Kong, China
(2007) - Sri Lanka
(2007) - Mahabalipuram, India
CALL TO ACTION:
"Defrock" Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz - Convicted Sex Offender
The Awareness Center, Inc. is demanding that the Orthodox Union (OU), the Rabbinic Council of America (RCA) and Agudath Israel of America make a public statements denouncing the actions and behavior of Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz. By not doing so is condoning this serial child molesters criminal behavior.
The Awareness Center, Inc. is also demanding that rabbis around the world find a way to remove Alan Horowitz's rabbinical ordination and that of other known sexual predators (who are ordained rabbis).
After Rabbi Alan Horwitz's 1983 conviction for child
molestation he was placed on probation. Arrangements were made for him to
live on the
Ohr Somayach campus in Monsey, NY. Ohr Somayach is a Yeshiva serving
young male students. Horowitz was treated by Dr. Joseph F. Chambers MD (Maryland)
and Dr. Yitzhak Twersky (Monsey, NY).
In the past both the RCA (Rabbinical Council of America), Orthodox Union and Agudath Israel of America have stated that there is nothing they could do regarding Rabbi Horowitz since was he not a member of their organization.
Rabbi Horowitz is a convicted sex offender. Be aware that it takes a village to raise a sex offender and to enable them to continue molesting children or raping adults. Rabbi Horowitz is everyone's responsibility, including all rabbinical organizations, rabbis and Jewish communities.
It is time for all of us to stop passing the buck. Do the right thing, publicly denounce this man and remove his rabbinic ordination!
Contact Information:
Rabbinical Council of America (RCA)
Rabbi Marc Dratch - Chairman of the RCA's Task Force on Rabbinic Improprieties
Phone: 203-858-9691
Rabbi Basil Herring, Executive Vice President
Phone: 212-807-7888 x 5
_____________________________
Orthodox Union
Rabbi Hershy (Tzvi) Weinreb
_____________________________
Agudath Israel of America
Rabbi Shmuel Bloom, Executive Vice President
Rabbi Avi Shafran,
(212) 797-9000
_____________________________
Background Information
© (2007) The Awareness Center, Inc.
Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz, MD, is a convicted sex offender who is also an ordained Orthodox rabbi. As a psychiatrist, Horowitz specialized in working with adolescents. His resume also includes volunteering time as a Boy Scout leader and being a writer for NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) publications. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University; and received his Ph.D. and medical degree from Duke University.
Alan Horowitz was born on April 4, 1947 in Brooklyn, NY. He has been married and divorced twice. Horowitz had a child with his first marriage. He hadseven stepchildren with his second wife, which were taken away by Child Protection Services (CPS) for failure to protect them from Horowitz.
In the past Horowitz was licensed to practice medicine in North Carolina and Maryland. He never obtained a license to practice in the state of New York.
Horowitz was an assistant professor of child dismissed from the UI in 1978, a university official told The Daily Gazette newspaper of Schenectady in a 1992 story, because he was not productive in research.
Alan Horowitz was first convicted back in 1983 in Maryland of performing an unnatural sexual act on the 12-year-old boy who was his patient and his eight year-old little brother. At the time Horowitz was sentenced to five-year probation.
The probation agreement included allowing Alan Horowitz to move to New York so that he could live study Torah at Ohr Somayach, Monsey, NY. He was court ordered to live on campus. Ohr Somayach is a Yeshiva serving young male students.
Dr. Horowitz was also court ordered to be in counseling under the care of Dr. Joseph F. Chambers (Maryland) and Dr. Rabbi Issac Twersky (Monsey, NY). As like many others who thirst in learning Torah, Alan Horowitz ultimately ending up studying abroad in Israel.
Alan Horowitz twice violated his probation from the sentencing in 1983. There is no documentation of how he violated it the first time, yet the second time was in November 1985, was when he made aliyah and moved to Israel. He returned to the United States in November, 1990 when he learned new charges were being investigated relating to him allegedly molesting children in the West Bank (Israel).
Past newspaper accounts stated Rabbi Alan Horowitz picked Schenectady in hopes of securing a rabbinical appointment. Apparently each time Horowitz moved he changed his name, using the alias Shneor Altar in Israel, Alan Horowitz in New York and Mike Sonkin in Iowa.
Not much time pasted for there to be new allegations made of child sexual abuse. In 1991, allegations were made that Horowitz molested three boys under the age of fourteen and a 14-year-old girl in Eastern Parkway and Niskayuna, New York. It was around this time that authorities in New York contacted Interpol and learned that the investigation in the West Bank (Israel) was still being investigated.
Upon Horowitz learning that new charges in the US were being made against him, he attempted to elude the authorities by moving. This time to Woodward, Iowa. Once located he was extradited back to New York.
During the new police investigation, the New York officials found a trail of sexual abuse of patients dating back to the late 1960s when Horowitz worked for a community organization that helped impoverished, inner-city children.
On August 27, 1991, Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz, MD was charged in the Supreme Court in the state of New York on 34 counts of sodomy in the 1st degree. He was also charged with two counts of Sodomy in the 2nd degree, one count of sexual abuse in the 3rd degree, and 4 counts of endangering the welfare of a child. During these court procedures a North Carolina man showed up during the court proceedings claiming he was sexually abused by Horowitz as a child. It is also mentioned that Horowitz molested children in the state of Arizona, yet no more information about those allegations is known.
On June 29, 1992 , Rabbi Alan Jay Horowitz, MD pled guilty to one count of 1st degree sodomy.
In a county Probation Department report Horowitz admitted that he was a pedophile, but a "normal pedophile," which Horowitz defined as someone who has consensual sex with children.
During August, 1992, Alan Horowitz made the news one more time. This time was regarding a complaint that the county jail diet did not provide for his religious needs. He asked a state Supreme Court judge to direct the sheriff to provide more kosher food.
There were many attempts to stop Rabbi Horowitz being released on conditional parole on November 1, 2004 (Oneida Prison, NY), yet these attempts failed. At the time of his release he was Designation: Sexually Violent Offender and Predicate Sex Offender level three sex offender). Horowitz served a little more than 13 years before New York officials said they were forced to release him after he served two-thirds of his maximum sentence.His parole was to last until 2011.
In 2006, Horowitz illegally left the United States violating his probation. At first it was believed he was in Israel, yet instead flew to Japan and on to Hong Kong, Thailand, Sri Lanka and India -- leaving a trail of newly sexually victimized children along the way.
In India he used his title of "rabbi" in his attempt to give himself credibility This is one of the reasons why The Awareness Center implemented it's "CALL TO ACTION" to have his rabbinic ordination revoked.
On May 22, 2007, Rabbi Alan Horowitz was caught in India. Horowitz was in violation of his parole since June, 2006. He was extradited back to the United States on July 8, 2007.
Your Financial Support is Needed!
Make
a Donation
Email Groups for the Awareness Center This link will bring you to a list of different mailing lists offered by The Awareness Center. We offers several different email groups,which include our general mailing list, press-releases, Jewish survivors of childhood sexual abuse, Parents of children who were molested, Family members of sex offenders, etc.
Disclaimer: Inclusion in this website does not constitute a recommendation
or endorsement. Individuals must decide for themselves if the resources meet
their own personal needs.
1986
Sexual Misconduct Can Bring Disissal (09/07/1986)
1991
1992
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Former Rabbi Arrested (05/22/2007)
CALL TO ACTION:"Defrock" Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz - Convicted Sex Offender (05/22/2007)
Global manhunt ends child molester's flight (05/22/2007)
Ex-UI professor wanted for child abuse caught (05/23/2007)
NY rabbi convicted of sexually abusing children arrested in India (05/23/2007)
No Place Safe When You're Hunted by AMW (05/23/2007)
The Makeup of A Predator? (05/23/2007)
US rabbi convicted of child sex abuse arrested in southern India (05/23/2007)
Fugitive child sex abuser arrested in India on Interpol Red Notice (05/24/2007)
Interpol: Wanted - Alan Horowitz (05/24/2007)
US paedophile held in Tamil Nadu (05/24/2007)
American paedophile arrested in Tamil Nadu (05/24/2007)
American, Accused Of Paedophilia, Arrested In India (05/24/2007)
US paedophile arrested in India (05/24/2007)
Notorious paedophile in police net (05/25/2007)
United States Marshals Service (05/25/2007)
Rabbi Convicted of Abuse Nabbed in India (05/25/2007)
Arrest in India of a delinquent pédosexuel in escape following the publication of a red note Interpol (05/29/2007)
United States Marshals Office (07/08/2007)
Wanted Rabbi returns to the United States (07/08/2007)
Molester who fled U.S. being returned (07/08/2007)
Alan Horowitz to be extradited from India (07/08/2007)
Wanted Rabbi returns to the United States (07/08/2007)
Child molester back in U.S. custody (07/09/2007)
Perv-Rabbi Bust (07/09/2007)
Fugitive U.S. Doctor Convicted Of Child Molestation In Custody (07/09/2007)
Fugitive child molester in custody (07/09/2007)
Wanted child molester arrested (07/11/2007)
Fugitive pedophile returned to region (07/12/2007)
Is Rabbi Avrohom Braun attempting to rewrite history - Case of Rabbi Alan Horowitz (07/13/2007)
Molester's flight ends at jail - Alan Horowitz, who fled country while on parole, returned to Schenectady (07/13/2007)
Background Information and The History of Rabbinical Ordinations (07/19/2007)
Parole hearing today for fugitive child molester (08/29/2007)
Judge will decide if Horowitz should finish sentence (08/29/2007)
Convicted child molester faces hearing for parole violation (08/29/2007)
Judge to decide pedophile's fate (08/30/2007)
Also see:
Recidivism of Sex Offenders (U.S. Department of Justice: Center for Sex Offender Management)
When A Family member Molests: Reality, conflict, and The Need For Support
Professional
Discipline Order Regarding Rabbi Horowitz
Please use the following two links to download the pdf files relating to this case. They are the copies of the original professional discipline order regarding Rabbi Horowitz.
http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/disciplineorder1.pdf
http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/disciplineorder2.pdf
Highlights of the discipline order 1983 (Maryland):
On August 31, 1983 Rabbi Alan Horowitz was convicted of one count of perverted
sex practice by the Circuit Court of Washington County, State of Maryland.
He was then placed on probation with the following special conditions:
Horowitz will participate in and complete a course of psychothearpy to be conducted jointly by Joseph F. Chambers, M.D., Chairman on Physical Rehabilitation of the Medical and Chirugical Faculty of Maryland, and Dr. Issac (Yitzack) Twersky of Monsey, New York; said psychotherapy is to continue on a regular basis until released by Order of the Circuit Court for Washington County, MD.
Horowitz is to reside on the campus of Ohr Somayach Instititution, Monsey, New York, and shall not change his residence without prior approval of the Cirucit Court for Washington County.
Highlights of the discipline order 1992 (New York):
On August 27, 1991, Rabbi Alan J. Horowitz, MD was charged in the Supreme Court for the State of New York on 34 counts of sodomy in the 1st degree. He was also charged with two conunts of Sodomy in the 2nd degree, one count of sexual abuse in the 3rd degree, and 4 counts of endagering the welfare of a child.
On June 29, 1992 , Rabbi Alan Jay Horowitz, MD plead guilty to one count of 1st degree sodomy.
On July 27, 1992 Rabbi Alan Horowitz was sentenced by the Honorable Clifford T. Harrigan to an indeterminate period of imprisonment with a maximum term of twenty years and a mandatory minimum term of ten years. Horowitz did not appeal the judgement of the court. He was incarcerated at the Clinton Correctional Facility in Dannemore, NY.
On November 23, 1994, the Office of the Attorney General filed a petition to revoke Horowitz's medical license. Dr. Rabbi Horowitz had until January 6, 1995 to show cause why his license should not be revoked. No response was received.
Horowitz was initially licensed to practice medicine in the State of Maryland on July 29, 1981.
On Agust 31, 1993, the Maryland Commission on Medical Discipline issued Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Ordered Horowitz's medical license by suspened. It also stated that Horowitz could petition for reinstatement of his license after a five year period. Horowitz did not petition for the reinstatement of his Maryland medical license.
Background Information and The History
of Rabbinical Ordinations
(2007) By Rabbi Yaakov Siegel
The Awareness Center - July 19, 2007
Part 1
In recent months, The Awareness Center has issued articles and opinions about the giving and revoking of Smichah (rabbinical ordination). I would like to clarify certain things in this regard, and to offer some suggestions that might be helpful.
First of all, our ordination is not an unbroken chain from Moses. There was indeed such an ordination, but it died out (or, more correctly was killed out) in the fourth century c.e. by a systematic Roman decree (anyone giving or receiving ordination, as well as all Jewish residents of the town it was given in, or if outside a town, then the nearest town, would be killed). That is why the early Rabbis of the Talmud have the title rabbi, and the later ones rav, the latter indicating that while a sage, he lacked official ordination.
Maimonides opines that the chain could be restarted if all the sages in the Land of Israel would ordain one man, that man would resume the chain. There were several unsuccessful attempts to do this, most notably in the 16th century. There is currently another effort in this direction, but, so far, has met with little support.
After the 4th century, sages were looked to for guidance and instruction, but there was no ordination process. It should be noted that there is no currently observed Jewish ritual that needs a rabbi. Any Jew can perform any function, provided he knows all the applicable laws, and abides by them. The function of a rabbi at a wedding, for instance, is to ensure that all rituals are done properly. This is in contrast to Christian marriage, where the priest or minister make the marriage. In Judaism, the couple and witnesses make the marriage. The rabbi is a sort of legal adviser.
Part 2
Around the year 1300, a prominent German rabbi was troubled by the phenomenon of unqualified people presenting themselves for communal positions (nothing new under the Sun!). He instituted a rule in Germany that no one could serve as a rabbi unless he was authorized by a recognized figure. This authorization was called smichah, although it had little to do with the original smichah. It was, in effect, a letter of recommendation, as good aw the person giving it. This procedure was challenged by many (the great North African rabbi, Yitzchal ben Sheshet, wrote a responsum that a rabbi is made not by a letter, but by the acceptance of the community [Teshuvot HaRivash 271]). However the practice spread, and became standard in most Jewish communities.
It should be clear that a rabbi's legitimacy depends on his knowledge and integrity, not on his ordination. One very prominent East European rabbinical figure of the late 19th and early 20th century was without ordination nearly all of his life. When the Polish government required him to get an official ordination, he simply went to one of his disciples to be ordained!
Since the 14th century, most communities required a rabbi to be certified (ordained) by known and respected figures. A rabbi might have several such smichot to show the extent of his acceptance. In ultra-Orthodox circles this is still the norm. I personally have seven Smichot.
In modern orthodox circles, as well as non-Orthodox circles, institutional (Yeshiva or Seminary) ordination has largely replaced private Smichot.
Now we may understand why a particular body can not "defrock" a rabbi whom they did not ordain, or even recognize. It isn't an "either you do or don't have Smicha" situation. The Smicha is as good as the person giving it. If a particular rabbi or seminary felt that one of their ordainees was no longer worthy, they may issue such a statement. No one else could.
In Israel, the Chief Rabbinate has legal standing. Rabbinical positions are, in effect, civil service positions, funded jointly by the Ministry of Religious Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior. Only those
either ordained by the Chief Rabbinate, or those who have been personally approved by one of the Chief Rabbis (some positions require approval of three members of the Supreme Rabbinical Council too) may serve as a rabbi. That is why in Israel an official rabbi may be "defrocked" i.e. no longer recognized by the institution of the Chief Rabbinate. People outside the "system" i.e. rabbis without the authorization of the rabbinate, have no legal status anyway.
Part 3
Before we can discuss how to deal with our "bad apples" and the rabbis and institutions who seem insensitive to the situation, I think we need to understand the dynamics of the situation. There was and is a tiny minority of "rabbis" who sell smichot. However, these are widely known (years ago there was even one who advertised the sale of smichot in the newspapers), and shunned by other rabbis.
There is, however, a danger to unsophisticated congregations who don't do their homework when hiring a rabbi. Then there is another small group that gives ordination as a favor, usually to help someone get a position so as to earn a living. their motive is unselfish, but nevertheless dangerous to the community. However, even great rabbis may be lulled into silence for one of several reasons.
First, there is the fear of violating the prohibition of Lashon Hara-slander. There are many laws governing this grievous sin. Although there are clear rules when one may expose an evildoer, few rabbis have the resources to check out the veracity of charges. The feeling is "since I can't be sure, better I do nothing."
Second, there is the concern for causing the offender to lose his livelihood. Recently, a colleague of mine was studying with another rabbi in the study hall of a well known yeshiva. A menial worker at the yeshiva was insulted, or at least thought he was insulted, by a student in his early teens. The worker grabbed the student by the throat.
My friend came to the students defense, and was struck. The boy's father called the authorities, and the worker was arrested. That evening the man came to evening services at the yeshiva, and the Rosh Yeshiva (dean) stood up and shook his hand warmly.
My friend asked the Rosh Yeshiva for the meaning of his actions. He informed my friend that he had personally bailed him out. When my friend protested, the Rosh Yeshiva said "Don't you realize that this miserable job is this man's only livelihood?" Undoubtedly, the Rosh Yeshiva felt he was performing an act of ultimate chessed-kindness. He apparently felt that this came before the physical safety of the students.
Third, there is concern for the honor of the offenders family. While this is a legitimate concern, it must, of course, be balanced with the honor of the victim.
Fourth, there is a fear of getting the secular authorities involved. Although the Halachah (Jewish law) provides for cases where a person who is a danger may be given over to the police, the fear of doing so in a case which might not be true deters most.
Fifth, there is the fear of chillul Hashem-desecrating the Name of G-d were it to be known that a "rabbi" had committed unspeakable evils. This must be balanced with the principle "in a place of desecration of G-d's Name, we give no honor even to a rabbi."
Sixth, there is a concept of despising a scholar. Maimonides considers this a serious form of heresy.
Many will simply not believe that a earned man could do such base things. They usually are right, but, unfortunately, not always. So, protecting the offender is usually done from a feeling of misplaced altruism, fueled by the real feeling that the allegations may, in fact, be false.
Sexual Misconduct Can Bring
Dismissal
by ELIZABETH LELAND, Staff Writer
Charlotte Observer (NC) - September 7, 1986. Page: 1A
Some N.C. psychiatrists admit having sex with their patients.
One said he had intercourse several times with a woman patient on his office floor. Another said he was sexually attracted to schizophrenic boys.
The two men and at least three others have been charged in recent years with misconduct by the N.C. Board of Medical Examiners. Three medical doctors and one dentist have, too. Sex between doctors and their patients is considered unethical, and N.C. medical officials say they deplore it. Dr. Robert Ratcliffe III, a Greenville, N.C., psychiatrist on probation for having sex with two female patients, said Friday he regrets it.
``I don`t condone it and I certainly am not particularly proud of what I did,`` Ratcliffe said. ``I`m trying now to get my life, my practice back together.``
The board allowed Ratcliffe to keep his license, but placed him on probation in June 1984 and ordered him to undergo psychiatric therapy.
The board has been harsher on other doctors. In 1984, the board revoked the license of Wilson Crunk Rippy Jr., former director of child services at Cherry Hospital in Goldsboro. Rippy was charged in federal court with mailing obscene films of himself and young male patients engaged in sex.
Medical professionals cringe over such cases.
``I don`t believe it happens to a great extent,`` said Katherine Hux, director of the N.C. Psychiatric Association. ``Any organization reflects to some degree everybody at large . . . Bad apples show up here and there, but they are not the norm.``
The N.C. Board of Medical Examiners, which licenses the state`s 16,760 doctors, doesn`t keep regular count of complaints against doctors or disciplinary action. Its most recent figures show 31 doctors were disciplined between January 1984 and November 1985, with penalties ranging from reprimand to loss of license to reprimand. Reasons varied from Medicaid fraud to drug abuse, incompetence and sexual misconduct.
A recent survey by doctors at hospitals affiliated with Harvard University found 6 percent of psychiatrists nationwide admit having sex with patients, and many claimed the affairs benefited their patients.
``My suspicion is we`re just finding out about a lot of cases,`` said Dr. Margaret Dorfman, a psychiatrist at Dorothea Dix Hospital who chairs the ethics committee of the N.C. Psychiatric Association.
``One of the problems investigating this sort of thing is that clients involved often are very hesitant to come forward,`` she said. ``They fear that nobody would believe them and they may still have strong feelings for the person. Especially when it`s a psychiatric or psychological relationship, clients often have very strong feelings for the therapist.``
The N.C. Board of Medical Examiners has brought charges involving sexual allegations against nine doctors. Seven doctors were disciplined and charges against two others were dismissed.
The board has no public records on Dr. Bernard Bressler, a former Duke University Medical Center psychiatrist charged in three lawsuits in the past two years with having sex with female patients. But defendants paid a settlement, which a source put at $1 million, in a Cleveland County woman`s suit against Bressler.
In cases that are public record:
* The board charged Ratcliffe in March 1983 with unprofessional conduct with two female patients.
Ratcliffe, 53, admitted having sex with one woman during and after psychiatric treatment in his Greenville office. He said both he and the woman were having marital problems.
``I felt a particular kinship with her,`` he told the board. ``The result of this was on several occasions following the therapy sessions we had sexual relations in my office.``
He said the sex had nothing to do with the woman`s treatment.
The second case involved a receptionist at the Pitt County Mental Health Center, with whom Ratcliffe admitted having sex after work in a car and his office. He said the woman was a co-worker and that he had counseled her only on an informal, nonpaying basis.
The board revoked Ratcliffe`s license but suspended revocation providing that for the next five years he abstained from unethical conduct and underwent counseling.
* Rippy, 59, the child psychiatrist at Cherry Hospital, had undergone counseling for most of his adult life because of a sexual infatuation with young boys.
He was arrested in June 1977 after a film processor contacted the FBI with seven film cartridges showing Rippy having sex with young boys he had counseled at a Florida treatment center.
The board revoked Rippy`s license. But Rippy disappeared before notification and before his trial. Authorities have not heard from him since. * Harry Lee Hinson, 32, a Fayetteville psychiatrist, surrendered his license in January 1983 after he was charged with having sexual intercourse with patients in the 1960s and issuing drugs to nonpatients.
* Alan Horowitz, 39, a Maryland psychiatrist licensed to practice in North Carolina, surrendered his N.C. license in July after pleading guilty in Maryland to ``an unlawful and unnatural, perverted sexual practice with a 12- year-old male.``
* Adriaan Verwoerdt, formerly a psychiatrist at Duke Medical Center in Durham, had his license revoked for 90 days earlier this year for having sexual intercourse with a patient in 1981.
Verwoerdt told the board he was having marital problems and undergoing chemotherapy for lymphoma. He said the patient didn`t object to having sex, and that he never insinuated it was part of her treatment.
Verwoerdt, 59, retired from Duke at the end of April, his receptionist said Friday.
* Oscar Cunanan, 58, a Cary dentist, surrendered his license after a highly publicized court case stemming from charges that he raped a patient who was anesthetized and sexually assaulted seven others. Cunanan pleaded guilty to one charge of assault and received a one-year suspended sentence in 1981. The medical board had charged him with sexually abusing 16 women.
* Navy Dr. Howard Martin was charged with fondling a patient`s breasts in June 1984 and then having intercourse with her at the Camp Lejeune Urgent Care Clinic. The board hasn`t yet made the decision public.
Martin, 32, who specializes in emergency medicine, admitted in a tape recording that he had sex with the woman. Martin`s attorney argued that the woman had a history of accusing people of rape.
Martin was court-martialed in December 1984, sentenced to 12 months of hard labor and dismissed from the Navy for charges related to the same case. .
Schenectady Police Say Rabbi Molested Young
Boys
by Phil Brown Staff writer
The Times Union (Albany NY) - July 7, 1991 - Page: B2
A man identified by police as a rabbi and former psychiatrist
has been arrested on charges of molesting two young boys at his Eastern Parkway
home.
Alan J. Horowitz, 44, who moved to Schenectady late last year, is in an Iowa jail awaiting extradition on two counts of first-degree sodomy, according to Investigator Peter McGrath.
McGrath confirmed that Horowitz pleaded guilty in 1983 in Maryland to two counts of perverted sexual practices for assaults on a 12-year- old patient and the patient's 8-year- old brother.
He also said Horowitz is being investigated by Israeli authorities on similar charges.
Several states suspended Horowitz's medical license after the Maryland conviction, McGrath said, but Horowitz did not have a license to practice in New York.
McGrath said he believes Horowitz moved to Schenectady in November and had been looking for a rabbinical appointment.
He said Horowitz was arrested in Iowa on Wednesday a few hours after City Court Judge Louise Smith issued an arrest warrant.
"We knew where he was," McGrath remarked, adding that Horowitz apparently went to Iowa to try to escape authorities.
McGrath declined to divulge details about the case, but he said the county's Department of Social Services took part in the investigation.
Horowitz, who is married, has a young child of his own and seven stepchildren, according to McGrath. He added that all the children have been placed in foster care.
Rabbi Troubled By Unwanted
Publicity
The Times Union (Albany NY) - July 9, 1991, Page: B4
The arrest of a city man police identified as a rabbi and former psychiatrist has created some confusion for another city cleric with the same last name.
Alan J. Horowitz, 44, was arrested in Iowa last Wednesday and charged with two counts of first-degree sodomy for allegedly abusing two young boys in his Eastern Parkway home.
The arrest has caused some problems for Rabbi Jonathan Horowitz, who was recently installed at Congregation Beth Israel on Eastern Parkway in Schenectady.
Jonathan Horowitz said he has only been in town for seven months and has not yet met all the people who belong to his congregation. He said that he believed the arrest of another Horowitz might cause confusion, and that after visiting hospitals Monday he realized that the fear was "not a figment of my imagination."
Jonathan Horowitz said he also lives around the block from Alan Horowitz, further adding to the confusion.
"I feel like getting on TV and saying, 'It's not me!" Jonathan Horowitz said Monday.
Jonathan Horowitz said he and another rabbi have been assisting the children who were molested, and have been cooperating with investigators. He said Alan Horowitz attended his synagogue, but that he was not even sure he had been ordained a rabbi.
"They see this article, it says 'rabbi,' it's confusing," Jonathan Horowitz said. "I don't know what I can do about it. It's disturbing."
Sexual-Abuse Charges Tarnish Man's Once Respected
Image
The Times Union (Albany NY) - July 11, 1991, Page: B1
The name Alan J. Horowitz has ignited a flash of recognition among children Horowitz allegedly molested while holding positions of trust, authorities said.
The latest charges against Horowitz prompted a North Carolina man to show up for local Family Court proceedings, claiming he was sexually abused by Horowitz as a child, a source close to the investigation said.
Horowitz, a former psychiatrist whom police identified as a rabbi, is charged with sodomizing two boys under age 11 at his Eastern Parkway home earlier this year.
Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney said there are people "who have been adversely impacted by his behavior that don't forget about it."
Horowitz's respectable image as a psychiatrist was shattered when he admitted sexually assaulting a 12- year-old patient in Hagerstown, Md., eight years ago.
He pleaded guilty to performing an unnatural sexual act. Part of his five-year probation included extensive religious study, a pursuit that ultimately led him to Israel.
Horowitz lived there a couple of years when Israeli authorities began investigating allegations of child sexual abuse, Carney and Schenectady police Investigator Peter McGrath said.
Horowitz moved to Schenectady in November. City police and the county Child Protective Services began investigating Horowitz after Israeli officials notified them.
Citing a need to protect the children's identity, Carney and McGrath declined to give details on the circumstances surrounding the Schenectady charges.
Horowitz, 44, arrested last week in Woodward, Iowa, faces two counts of first-degree sodomy in Schenectady. He was arraigned in Dallas County Court on Monday, and is being held in Iowa until extradition is settled. McGrath would not say how police learned of Horowitz's whereabouts.
Horowitz's studies led him to Schenectady in November to seek a rabbinical appointment, Carney and police said.
The breadth of the investigation into Horowitz, as well as the dichotomies of his life, make the case unusual, Carney said.
He called Horowitz a "very bright individual who had every advantage in the world, and for some bizarre reason preys on children."
Horowitz is Harvard-educated, studied at Duke University and was once a Boy Scout leader, Carney said. He practiced psychiatry in Maryland before his 1983 conviction. "It's such a betrayal of his professional obligations," Carney said.
Memo: Schenectady charges prompt visit to Family Court by North Carolina man.
The Times Union (Albany NY) - July 15, 1991, Page: B4
Alan J. Horowitz, once convicted of sexually abusing a boy while practicing psychiatry, will be brought from Iowa next week to face charges that he sodomized two boys here. Horowitz, being held in Woodward, Iowa, waived extradition, allowing district attorney's investigators to bring him to Schenectady, said Assistant District Attorney Alan Gebell.
The 44-year-old former psychiatrist, also described as a rabbi by police, is charged with sodomizing two boys under age 11 at his Eastern Parkway home earlier this year. The case has yet to go to the grand jury.
Meanwhile, an Israeli investigation of allegations Horowitz abused children in that country has stopped just short of charges.
Interpol has told Gebell that "there is no further information in Israel at this time that would lead to criminal charges," though the investigation in the West Bank, where Horowitz lived, is continuing, he said.
Horowitz lived in Israel for a couple of years before moving to Schenectady in November. He apparently changed his name each time he moved, using the alias Shneor Altar in Israel and Mike Sonkin in Iowa.
He was convicted in Hagerstown, Md., in 1983 of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old patient under his care. He received five years on probation, including counseling and extensive religious study.
Ex-psychiatrist from Md. held in N.Y.
abuse
The Baltimore Evening Sun - August 29, 1991
ASSOCIATED PRESS - METRO: FINAL: F9
SCHENECTADY, N.Y. (AP) -- A former psychiatrist, convicted in 1983 of molesting a child in Maryland, now faces a 41-count indictment alleging sodomy and sexual abuse involving four children, authorities said.
Alan J. Horowitz, 44, of Schenectady, faces 34 counts of felony first- degree sodomy for alleged contact with two boys, ages 7 and 9, according to papers filed in Schenectady County Court.
Tuesday's indictment includes two counts of second-degree sodomy alleging Horowitz molested a 12-year-old boy, a single count of third- degree sexual abuse for his alleged fondling of a 14-year-old girl, and four counts of endangering the welfare of a child.
The indictment charges the alleged incidents occurred in 1990 at the Horowitz home and at a home in Niskayuna, a Schenectady suburb.
Horowitz, formerly of Hagerstown, Md., lost his license to practice psychiatry there in 1983, when he pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 12-year-old male patient.
At that time, Horowitz was sentenced to five years' probation and five years in prison. The prison term was suspended.
Horowitz moved to Schenectady late last year from Israel, then allegedly fled to Iowa after learning of the investigation by Schenectady County District Attorney Robert M. Carney.
He is being held in Schenectady County Jail in lieu of $75,000 bail.
Repeat Sex Offender Admits Sodomizing 9-Year-Old
Boy
By Michael Lopez
Times Union, The (Albany, NY) - June 30, 1992, Page: B4
A former adolescent psychiatrist accused of sexually abusing children in several states and in Israel admitted on Monday sodomizing a 9-year-old boy at his Eastern Parkway home last year.
Alan J. Horowitz, who faced one of the biggest sex-related indictments ever handed up in County Court, pleaded guilty to first-degree sodomy, and under the terms of the plea bargain he is expected to be sentenced on July 20 to 10 to 20 years in state prison.
The 45-year-old Horowitz made no statement during the plea, but simply answered the questions of Judge Clifford T. Harrigan in quiet, one-word replies.
The charge he pleaded to was one of 33 charges alleging that Horowitz sodomized two boys under age 11 between Dec. 1, 1990, and May 25, 1991.
Horowitz also originally was charged with two counts of second- degree sodomy, alleging sexual contact with a third boy under age 14, and third- degree sexual abuse, charging him with abusing a girl under age 17. He also faced four counts of endangering the welfare of a child.
District Attorney Robert Carney said, "It`s clear we wanted a lengthy prison term. ... So then, it`s only a question of balancing that goal with the difficulties inherent in bringing children to testify about such matters as sexual relations with an adult."
Assistant District Attorney Alan Gebell, who prosecuted the case, agreed. "The children could be traumatized by such testimony," Gebell said.
Horowitz`s attorney, Stephen R. Coffey, would not discuss details of the plea.
Carney said he believes that the plea arrangement struck that balance. The maximum sentence for first-degree sodomy is 12 1/2 to 25 years, and the minimum 4 1/2 to 9 years. Whether Horowitz, if convicted, would have received consecutive maximum sentences would have been part of the risk of going to trial, Carney said.
Horowitz will be sentenced as a predicate felony offender because of a 1983 conviction of performing an unnatural sexual act on a 12-year- old male patient in Hagerstown, Md.
Carney called Horowitz "very fascinating and at the same time diabolical."
According to police and prosecutors, Horowitz entered counseling and intensive religious study as part of his Maryland sentence. He went to Israel and lived on the West Bank before moving to Schenectady in November 1990.
Israeli authorities pursuing child sexual abuse allegations against Horowitz informed Schenectady police about his background.
"He has left a trail of victims all over the world," said Carney, alluding to allegations, but not convictions, that have come from North Carolina, Arizona and Israel.
Horowitz has been held at the county jail since his extradition.
Plea to Two Counts Settles 26 Sex
Charges
By Michael Lopez
Times Union, The (Albany, NY) - Page: B4
July 21, 1992
Alan J. Horowitz, 45, who pleaded guilty to sodomizing a 9-year- old boy last year, is expected to be sentenced Monday. An unfinished county
Probation Department report precluded Monday`s scheduled sentencing.
Under the terms of a plea bargain satisfying an indictment including 33 sex-related charges, the former adolescent psychiatrist will receive a 10-to- 20-year prison sentence.
He is being held in the county jail.
Ex-Analyst Sentenced for Sodomizing Boy
by Michael Lopez
Times Union, (Albany, NY) - July 28, 1992, Page: B3
As former adolescent psychiatrist Alan J. Horowitz was sentenced Monday for sodomizing a 9-year-old boy here, a Maryland mother and the son Horowitz was charged with abusing 10 years ago watched in order to help heal the wounds of sexual abuse, they said.
Horowitz received a 10-to-20-year sentence in County Court Monday for first-degree sodomy, one of 41sex- related charges the plea bargain satisfied. In Schenectady, Horowitz, 45, was charged with sexually abusing two boys under age 11, a boy less than 14 years old and a girl under the age of 17 in 1990 and 1991.
But allegations of child abuse have followed Horowitz. In Maryland, he was convicted in 1983 of performing an unnatural sexual act on the 12-year-old boy who was his patient.
Monday, the boy`s mother and his younger brother - whom Horowitz also was charged with abusing - were in County Court to embrace a sense of justice. "I just feel that justice has finally been done," said the woman. Both she and her son requested anonymity.
The mother said Monday`s sentencing was a relief. "I`m very much at peace now. I feel now he`s got to answer to God," she said.
Her son, who now is 18, said he simply wanted to witness the sentencing. "I`m pretty sure I`ll get over it, since he`s sentenced." He said he believes that his brother also has recovered.
Assistant District Attorney Alan Gebell honed in on what he called a "double tragedy."
"Here you have an educated man, a doctor, a psychiatrist who could offer great things to the community. Instead, he`s using that ability to take advantage of these kids," Gebell said.
Horowitz in a county Probation Department report admitted that he was a pedophile, but a "normal pedophile," which Horowitz defined as someone who has consensual sex with children, Gebell said.
Defense attorney Stephen R. Coffey said discussing the report or debating Gebell`s comments would not change an agreed-upon plea bargain.
He told Judge Clifford T. Harrigan, "I could give you all kinds of answers, why the probation report is wrong. ... With all due respect, you have to sentence him to the plea bargain."
Gebell and District Attorney Robert Carney said the plea bargain was arranged to spare the children from testifying, and because they may not have achieved a longer sentence by a trial conviction.
Both mother and son said they wanted Horowitz to serve more time.
Horowitz received five years` probation for his Maryland conviction.
The mother called the sentence a "slap on the wrist."
"I believed it would happen again. I`m sorry it didn`t happen during the term of probation," she said.
Horowitz pleaded guilty to first- degree sodomy in Schenectady County Court on June 29. He has been in the county jail since his extradition from Iowa in July of 1991. Israeli authorities pursuing child sexual abuse allegations when Horowitz lived there tipped off city police about Horowitz`s background. He moved to Schenectady in November of 1990.
Memo: A former victim witnesses the court proceedings in Schenectady.
Inmate Demands More Kosher
Food
Times Union, (Albany, NY) - August 5, 1992, Page: B10
Dissatisfied with a county jail diet he says does not provide for his religious needs, convicted child molester Alan J. Horowitz is asking a state Supreme Court judge to direct the sheriff to provide more kosher food.
Attorneys on Thursday are scheduled to argue Horowitz`s petition to Judge Robert E. Lynch.
Filed against Sheriff William W. Barnes, the petition maintains that Horowitz on April 17 informed jail staff he would no longer eat non- kosher foods.
"Since that time, I have received a diet of unacceptable kosher status," Horowitz wrote.
The 45-year-old former adolescent psychiatrist late last month was sentenced to 10 to 20 years in prison for sodomizing a 9-year-old boy last year.
Horowitz mentions his education credentials in his petition, including a statement that he is an ordained Orthodox Jewish rabbi.
He claims the only kosher food he has received includes milk and juices in sealed containers and a variety of fruit. Horowitz also included his daily lunch and dinner menu for the month of June: various meals of eggs, tuna and salmon.
Horowitz said his diet does not provide adequate nutrition.
But County Attorney Thomas Hayner said Horowitz`s claim should be dismissed because it is "moot."
Horowitz will soon be transferred to the state prison system to begin serving his sentence.
Also, jail cook George Baker said the facility has made efforts to provide Horowitz with a kosher diet, including using a microwave to cook eggs and potatoes, providing certain kosher foods and wrapping utensils.
Former Psychiatrist Held On Sodomy
Counts
Times Union, The (Albany, NY) - July 20, 1991
A one-time psychiatrist has been returned from Iowa to face charges of sodomizing two city boys.
Meanwhile, publicity about the arrest is causing problems for a local psychologist with a similar name.
Alan Horowitz, 44, was sent back to the Schenectady County Jail Friday following his arraignment in Schenectady City Court on two first- degree sodomy counts, according to Alan Gebell, an assistant Schenectady County district attorney. He is being held in lieu of $75,000 bail.
Horowitz, who was convicted in 1983 of sexually assaulting a boy in his care, is charged with molesting the boys, both under age 11, in his Schenectady home, Gebell said.
The widespread publicity over the case of Alan Horowitz has resulted in some people confusing the suspect with Aaron Hoorwitz, a Schenectady resident and psychologist who specializes in the field of child sexual abuse.
Aaron Hoorwitz is the clinical director of Unified Services for Children and Adolescents, a unit within the Rensselaer County Mental Health Department. He also has a private practice in Schenectady.
"It's hurting me because people think (the suspect) is me," Hoorwitz said Friday.
On Thursday, police returned the suspect, Alan Horowitz, to New York from Iowa, where he had fled in June after learning that he was under investigation. He had been living under the alias "Mike Sonkin" in Woodward, about 30 miles northwest of Des Moines, according to Schenectady police.
Horowitz waived his right to an extradition hearing prior to his return to New York.
Horowitz, a Harvard graduate, was a licensed psychiatrist in Hagerstown, Md., specializing in the treatment of young boys. He lost his license in 1983 after pleading guilty to one count of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old patient.
That plea came in satisfaction of a six-count charge in which he was accused of beating and sodomizing the 12-year-old and his 8-year-old brother.
A Maryland judge gave Horowitz a five-year suspended sentence and five years' probation, and ordered him to undergo psychotherapy at a Jewish religious school in Monsey, Rockland County, according to authorities.
Horowitz twice violated his probation, the second time in November 1985, according to authorities, and went to Israel. It could not be determined when he left this country, but authorities say he returned and settled in Schenectady sometime late last year or early this year.
EX-PSYCHIATRIST CHARGED WITH SODOMIZING
2 BOYS
The Buffalo News - July 20, 1991
A onetime psychiatrist who was convicted in 1983 of sexually assaulting a boy in his care was arraigned Friday on charges of sodomizing two boys.
Alan Horowitz, 44, was sent back to Schenectady County Jail after being arraigned in Schenectady City Court on two counts of first-degree sodomy, according to Alan Gebell, an assistant Schenectady County district attorney. He was being held after not posting $75,000 bail.
He is charged with molesting the boys, both younger than 11, in his Schenectady home, Gebell said.
On Thursday, police returned Horowitz to New York from Iowa, where he had fled in June after learning that he was under investigation.
Man Indicted on 36 Sex Abuse Counts
By Michael Lopez
The Times Union (Albany NY) - August 28, 1991, Page: B4
In what may be the biggest sex crimes indictment handed up in County Court, a former adolescent psychiatrist Tuesday was charged with 36 counts of sodomy and the sexual abuse of four children.
Alan J. Horowitz, convicted in 1983 of sexually assaulting a patient when he practiced psychiatry in Maryland, also was identified by city police as a rabbi when he was charged in July.
He is being investigated by Israeli authorities for sexual abuse allegations in that country, though Assistant District Attorney Alan L. Gebell has said charges in those cases appear unlikely.
The grand jury Tuesday charged Horowitz, formerly of Eastern Parkway, with 34 counts of first-degree sodomy involving two boys less than 11 years old, two counts of second- degree sodomy involving a boy less than 14, third- degree sexual abuse and four counts of endangering the welfare of a child.
Charges allege that Horowitz engaged in deviate sexual intercourse with the youngest boys on numerous occasions between Dec. 1, 1990, and May 25 at two locations: his former Eastern Parkway home and at a Hereford Way home in Niskayuna.
Horowitz was staying with acquaintances at the Niskayuna home when those incidents allegedly occurred, Gebell said.
Horowitz, 44, also is charged with having deviate sexual intercourse with a boy less than 14 between Dec. 15 and Jan. 4 at the Niskayuna home.
He also is charged with sexual abuse of a girl, the oldest of the four children, between Feb. 4 and March 15 at the Eastern Parkway home, as well as endangering the welfare of a child less than 17 between Dec. 1 of last year and May 25 at both homes.
"I don't think we've ever indicted someone (in Schenectady) for so many sex crimes involving so many children," Gebell said.
Held in the county jail in lieu of $75,000 bail, Horowitz is expected to be arraigned in County Court today.
Horowitz in Hagerstown, Md., pleaded guilty to performing an unnatural sexual act on a 12-year-old male patient eight years ago. Forced to give up his license, Horowitz's sentence included extensive religious study.
He lived in the Israeli-occupied West Bank for a couple of years before moving to Schenectady.
Just before his arrest, Horowitz went to Woodward, Iowa, and was turned over to authorities last month to face charges here.
Inmate's Petition For Kosher Diet Ruled
Moot
by Michael Lopez
Times Union (Albany, NY) - August 7, 1992 - August 7, 1992
A petition by convicted child molester Alan J. Horowitz seeking more kosher food from the county jail was found moot Thursday by a state Supreme Court judge.
Though Horowitz Wednesday was transferred to state prison to begin his sentence for sodomizing a 9-year- old boy, his lawyer said she will continue to press the case, saying it encompasses the larger question of freedom of religion.
Of the hearing before Justice Robert E. Lynch, Undersheriff Harry C. Buffardi said, "I do not even know why it got to that point because we were complying with his request."
Horowitz, jailed since his arrest in July 1991, maintained the kosher food he was receiving - basically salmon, tuna and eggs - was insufficient.
"They were making some attempt to provide some kosher food to Mr. Horowitz - the problem is, they were not nutritious meals," said Horowitz`s attorney, Alice K. Berke.
Berke argued the case based on state correction law allowing jail and prison inmates to observe reasonable dietary laws as established by their religions.
Horowitz`s case is not moot because the constitutional right of freedom of religion is of larger public interest, Berke said. And case precedent points to the validity of such petitions if the situation is repeated and escapes judicial review.
"Obviously, every time a prisoner went into the county jail, by the time they were sentenced and moved, they would have no time to obtain kosher food," Berke said.
Horowitz was transferred Wednesday to Fishkill Correctional Facility to begin serving his 10-to- 20-year sentence for sodomizing the 9-year-old boy last year.
A former adolescent psychiatrist, Horowitz in his petition also claimed to be an ordained rabbi.
Buffardi said the jail - which serves 246,375 meals a year - provided Horowitz with kosher food, to the point that, "he (Horowitz) even was satisfied with it."
The jail is accustomed to adjusting meals for various dietary reasons. "There`s no such thing as bread and water anymore," Buffardi said.
A review of commissary purchases showed Horowitz was buying non- kosher candy such as Fireballs and M&Ms, Buffardi said. Though he said Horowitz was seen eating those foods, Berke said her client simply would not eat non-kosher food.
Horowitz`s transfer raises the possibility he was rushed out of the facility because of the petition, Berke said.
But Horowitz was among three prisoners in normal rotation for transfer, "and we made no attempt to whisk him away," the undersheriff said.
Berke plans to enlist Jewish and civil rights organizations to proceed with the case.
Supreme Court Shows Little Mercy for Repeat
Criminals, Sex Offenders
By Stephen Henderson
Tribune Business News - March 6, 2003
Mar. 6--WASHINGTON -- Showing little mercy for repeat criminals and sex offenders, the Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a California law that sentenced a longtime thief to 25 years in prison for stealing golf clubs and endorsed laws in two other states that posted photos and addresses of released rapists and child molesters on the Internet.
The California rulings gave broad latitude to the 26 states that have some form of three-strikes legislation to punish habitual offenders. The Court's embrace of so-called Megan's Laws was more significant because it sanctioned a legal concept that hadn't previously come before the Court.
"The Court's opinions on both issues could be blows to the idea that people can serve his time and get a fresh start," said Alan Horowitz, an appeals specialist at Miller and Chevalier, a Washington law firm. "They show the Court's willingness to allow state laws to attach continuing consequences to prior convictions for which sentences have already been served."
The justices turned away challenges to Alaska and Connecticut statutes that publicize information about released sex offenders. In the Alaska case, the justices held by a 6-3 vote that two sex offenders were not being punished a second time by a law that required them to register with authorities after they left prison. In the Connecticut case, the Court held unanimously that a lower court was wrong to say the state had to grant released sex offenders hearings to determine whether they were still dangerous before putting information about them on a Website. The justices said the law's requirements turned on the "offender's conviction alone."
"The Court gave a wide berth to this kind of punishment, and that's a new wrinkle," said Franklin Zimring, a law professor at Boalt Hall School of Law at University of California, Berkeley.
Robert J. Cottrol, a professor at George Washington University's law school, said a few things appear to be behind the Court's decision.
"There has long been a hair-splitting exercise over what is or is not punishment," Cottrol said. "And increasingly, they seem to be saying that even if something has a devastating effect on someone, it's not necessarily punishment and can be removed from constitutional protection.
"They have also been okay with the idea of what looks like retroactive punishment on the same basis," he said. "If they can say it's not punishment, then it's not a problem."
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority in the Alaska case, said the law in question didn't intend to be punitive and was not punitive in its effects.
He said the list of sex offenders was intended to protect the public from potential crime, not to shame or humiliate those on the list.
"They're saying this is a civil matter, not a criminal one," Zimring said.
Justice John Paul Stevens dissented, saying the law imposed retroactive punishment. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer also dissented, saying the law's intent was ambiguous and its effect was punitive.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion in the Connecticut case. It rejected the sex offenders' claims on procedural grounds and did not address the constitutionality of the Connecticut law.
The Court also rejected two challenges to California's three-strikes law, which mandates life sentences for people convicted of three felonies. With identical 5-4 splits, the justices said the law did not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing for Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in one case, Ewing v. California, said the state had a public-safety interest in deterring repeat offenders, and that justified a steep sentence for a man convicted of stealing three golf clubs because he had such a substantial prior record.
Ewing had argued that the sentence was disproportionate. Two lower courts had already rejected his claims.
"Ewing has been convicted of numerous misdemeanor and felony offenses, served nine separate terms of incarceration, and committed most of his crimes while on probation or parole," O'Connor wrote in the High Court's opinion. She said his sentence "reflects a rational legislative judgment ... that offenders who have committed serious or violent felonies and who continue to commit felonies must be incapacitated."
In strongly worded concurring opinions, justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas questioned the Eighth Amendment's applicability at all in Ewing's case. Scalia recalled language from his opinion in another case in which he said the Amendment only excludes certain "modes of punishment" and does not guarantee against disproportionate sentences. Thomas wrote that the Eighth Amendment says nothing at all about sentence proportionality.
"I'd say that in general this is a Court that is very unsympathetic to constitutional limits on the power to punish," said Zimring of Berkeley. "But I don't think these opinions are particularly surprising. They're in line with the Court's other opinions on matters like this."
A dissenting opinion, written by Justice Stephen G. Breyer and joined by justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and David H. Souter, called Ewing's sentence "grossly disproportionate."
Zimring said the Court has left the door open, but not by much, for some prisoners' claims that their sentences are disproportionate.
"The crack is very small," he said.
Alan J. Horowitz, a New York psychiatrist,
was sentenced to 10 to 20 years in prison
www.cchr.org/educate/icystte2.htm
In 1992, Alan J. Horowitz, a New York psychiatrist, was sentenced to 10 to 20 years in prison for sodomizing three boys ages 7 to 9, and for sexually abusing a 14-year-old girl. Horowitz had a long history of pedophilia, including a prior conviction in Maryland in 1983 for sexually molesting two boys, then aged 8 and 12. He received a five-year suspended sentence at the time. Horowitz defended himself in the 1992 case saying that he was a "normal pedophile." Police investigations found a trail of sexual abuse of patients dating back to the late 1960s when Horowitz worked for a community organization that helped impoverished, inner-city children.
The Prison Experience: Some
Psychosocial Comments
By A. Shneur Horowitz
WARNING: This article was published in NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association). It is quite disturbing, yet offers the public an opportunity to look inside the mind of a convicted sex offender.
After graduating magna cum laude from Harvard College, A. Shneur Horowitz received the M.D. and Ph.D. degrees from Duke University, and is an orthodox rabbi. After twenty years of following these professional interests, Horowitz is now a political prisoner in the United States.
Did you ever have a dream where everything seemed quite logical, and yet even at the time a part of your mind knew that when you awoke, the sense would be completely lost? Not only would you be unable to make a reasonable recounting to anyone else, but even to yourself the dream-events would appear disconnected and the logic bizarre. Talking about prison to those who have not been there, and for whom incarceration is not part of their culture, is very much like that. Both dreaming and imprisonment are alternate realities in which the usual checks and controls have been removed and replaced with other rules for which our normal experiences have left us unprepared.
This severe culture shock applies to all prisoners who have lived their lives in the middle class or mainstream society. We child-lovers, however, suffer a more profound and pervasive psychosocial disintegration because of circumstances relatively specific to us. Personal accounts serve an important purpose, helping those who are not here to appreciate our experiences. However, I would like to use this space to comment on just what it is that makes incarceration different, and worse, for child-lovers than for virtually anyone else. The first section discusses the psychosocial impact of imprisonment with reference to child-lovers. The second deals with special factors which impede our adjustment to incarceration. The third section introduces ideas relating to the possibilities for growth and positive outcome.
It should be noted that much of the material in this article is not relevant to all persons jailed for participating in intergenerational sex. Four exclusionary criteria are evident:
1. short sentence - "Short" is subjective, but many individuals with sentences of five years or less engage in what I call a "count-down" technique. They handle their imprisonment by maintaining and emphasizing a psychological continuity between a remembered Before and an anticipated After. The incarceration can then be endured as an unpleasant interim/interruption/interregnum within an ongoing life.
2. strong outside support - Those who have frequent visits, telephone calls, and exchange of letters with family and continuing friends who encourage and support them may be spared the crises described here. Their psychic reality remains Outside, even over a long period of time, and their personal identity is stabilized and reinforced.
3. prior economic/social poverty - For some, prison represents only slight decrement, or even actual improvement in living conditions and/or social opportunities. For such persons, the culture shock mentioned above is minimal or absent.
4. low intelligence - Some of the processes discussed below entail ability to introspect and conceptualize that may be poorly elaborated in persons of very low intelligence.
Being Imprisoned
How we perceive and react to imprisonment derives from our previous self-image and lifestyle. For almost all of us, being "outted" is a concomitant of our arrest and prosecution. This in itself precipitates a personal crisis of the greatest magnitude. We must face, perhaps for the first time, our identity as pedophiles. It may seem strange to say that a person who has lived many years as an active lover of children can suddenly realize that he is a pedophile, and I don't mean that he has been exactly lying to himself up to now. Nevertheless, there is a strong tendency to wall off or encapsulate the child-lover part of our identity, except when we actually are engaged with children. After all, it sadly cannot quite be integrated into a typical home or professional life in this society. This type of ignoring, or "selective inattention" is a common means of handling perceptions, about ourselves or others, that don't fit into overall conceptions of who and what we are. It is so much easier to think of oneself as "teacher," "carpenter," or "executive," than to label oneself with the most hated characterization in the culture. Parenthetically, I think this may contribute to why we are now being "caught" in such prodigious numbers. Because we have assigned "child-lover" a subsidiary place in our own self-image, compared with "husband," "coach," "doctor," and so on, we assume unconsciously that others view us the same way. Actually, our loving manner and ability to bond with children is as obvious to our enemies, when they choose to attune themselves, as it is to the kids themselves.(1) Being a lover of children is the defining characteristic of our identities, whatever we previously may have thought. It is a beacon which shines from us, for better or for worse, and by which the responses of others to us are illuminated.(2) What has changed in recent years is the motivation of our enemies to tune in to us, and the threshold for their turning suspicion into persecutory behavior.
If the positive part of our internal crisis is confronting and integrating our child-lover identity, then the negative side is facing the realization that we have "lived a lie" for all or most of our adult lives. We built a house of cards right there on Main Street, and then moved in lock, stock, and barrel, papering the inside walls with hypocrisy and the outside with deceptions. We did this so we could live in comfort and ease, so we could "pass," so we could eat our cake and have it too. We did not hold sit-ins or vigils or freedom rides. We did not engage in letter-writing campaigns or in civil disobedience. We attended PTA meetings where our brothers and sisters were vilified, and perhaps even made "appropriate" comments to our neighbors about the danger of "child molesters." We lied to our parents and spouses. We were cowards.
So what goes on internally is a major re-alignment, in today's terms re-formatting, of our whole personality structure. This includes not only re-arrangement of our hierarchy of self-definitions, but also acceptance of some stark and not very favorable truths about our character. This tidal wave of realizations is even more devastating than that during puberty, because the identity crisis of adolescence brings with it the unveiling of seemingly unlimited potentials and possibilities for the future, whereas the identity crisis of outing implies the closing off of possibilities and a confrontation with what we already are.
A third aspect of imprisonment is its interpersonal/social impact. The concurrence of incarceration and outing often triggers abrupt and total disappearance of our support system. Well socialized, middle class individuals build strong social linkages, and depend on them not only for self-validation, but for the communication and clarification of emotions. Nowadays, even males are adapted to "sharing feelings" rather than suppressing or denying them. While there are exceptions, it is not at all unusual for a child-lover to lose all of his significant relationships simultaneously when he is outted and arrested. Of course, for us, our most significant and invigorating relationships are those we have with children, be they overtly intimate or not. These are annihilated, with traumatic and tragic consequences both for us and for our young friends. We confront the knowledge that not only have our tenderest bonds been torn cruelly asunder, but that, using modern psycho-technology, even our partners' memories of us will likely be revised, perverted, and turned into their opposites. This loss not only of the present and future, but of the past as well, defies description. Furthermore, we find that families of orientation and of procreation, colleagues, confidants and lifelong friends either turn on us, or turn from us. We have become non-persons, anathema. Distinct from other middle class prisoners, who often are sustained by their successful social networks, we, in our time of greatest need, find ourselves utterly alone.
A flowing river can appear quite serene, but if all its effluent channels were blocked at once, the weight and force of water turned back from its natural outlets would convert it quickly to a churning maelstrom. Thus it is with our psychological energy when all our relationships are suddenly cut off-- a cataclysmic emotional implosion, flooding back against the damaged bulwarks of our much-weakened selves. The effect is overwhelming, and depression is very severe at this time; the risk of suicide is proportionately great.(3) Depression and identity dissolution combine to make us vulnerable also to the manipulations of prosecutors, unscrupulous "defense" lawyers,(4) and soon-to-be ex-spouses, among others. It is well known that mid-adolescents, whose identities are in flux, are susceptible to the lure of demagoguery and fanaticism. Likewise, after outing and prosecution, many of us leap into the clutches of therapists and re-programmers, who offer a shred of substitute identity, even be it that of "interminably recovering pervert."
Being In Prison
Having passed through the transition to incarceration, there continue to operate factors which make our physical and emotional survival particularly difficult in our new status and environment. The most widely known of these is that we are social pariahs within the prison population. A child-lover is known politely as a "molester," but more frequently and pointedly as a "baby raper," or "tree jumper."(5) In an environment where violence is never far from the surface, this appellation hangs like Damocles' sword over the child-lover's head. Chronic anxiety interferes with concentration and judgment, and probably contributes to physical stress-related disorders over the long run. Because of the danger, most "brothers" whose identity as child-lovers is not generally known, go to great lengths to avoid being "re-outted" within the prison population. While one hardly can blame them for wanting to protect themselves, this results in there never being a mutually supportive network Inside to substitute even partially for the lost relationships Outside. While some states have special facilities, units, or "treatment" programs, most of these are generally for "sex offenders." Ironically, there child-lovers, more often than not the gentlest of souls, find themselves sequestered with brutal rapists and sex-murderers, who may be even more dangerous to them than run-of-the-mill prison inmates.
A second factor, less immediately apparent, is that we are the only prisoners not to utilize two of the three primary mediators of group formation within the prison social system, viz. sexual orientation and type of conviction. (The third is ethnicity, and we frequently will be in a small minority there too, or be excluded on the basis of middle class traits of speech, manners, etc.) Talking about sex, real or imagined, is an immediate common ground for both heterosexuals and homosexuals everywhere. In prison, where many individuals' social development is that of delinquent early adolescents, it forms the stock-in-trade of most conversation. Both ambivalence and fear contribute to child-lovers being unable or unwilling to seek each other out on the basis of our common orientation. Aside from sexuality, there often is affiliation among those with similar reasons for their incarceration, e.g. drug dealers, murderers, or those involved in organized crime. For us, of course, our "crime" and our sexual orientation are one and the same.
Faced with the absence of our own group, many of us choose to lie, i.e. to create an ersatz sexual or criminal history. Not only does this run the risk of violent or even fatal consequences if discovered, but it also feeds into and exacerbates the "living a lie" problem discussed earlier. The other choice readily available is to remain a permanent loner. Loners are not all that uncommon in prison, and generally fall into two categories. There are those with fairly short sentences who are putting up with incarceration while remaining basically aloof and as untarnished by it as possible. We seldom fall into that category, and do so less and less as sentences for child-lovers become increasingly outrageous. Then there are those individuals whose self-imposed isolation causes them to drift ever further into idiosyncratic and impoverished mental states. Appearing far older than their years, they resemble patients with chronic schizophrenia or organic brain syndromes. This is not an attractive prospect.
Aggravating our sense of isolation is the fact that we are the only prisoners denied access to what might be called "non-interpersonal" reinforcers of our identity. Inmates have the opportunity to view television, individually or communally, and most facilities show movies weekly or more often. Heterosexual bonded relationships are displayed frequently, and homosexual ones occasionally. Murder, assault, fraud, drug use and sale, theft, espionage, exploitative sex and rape all are common entertainment fare. Moreover, the perpetrators of these crimes often are portrayed in a sympathetic if not approving manner. There is ample opportunity to watch men or women scantily dressed and in erotic situations. Also, on prison staffs, both male and female adults are present "in the flesh" and have at least superficial real relationships with prisoners, as well as supplying a framework for their fantasies. Over and above this, one may obtain books and magazines dealing with crime and/or with sexual behavior. In many places, one may post even erotically stimulating nude pictures on the walls of one's cell or cubicle. All of that applies to everyone except us. All forms of visual or literary art dealing with adult-child intimacy either are unavailable or are specifically and systematically censored. Even depictions of children which are neither erotic nor intimate could be risky to display or even to possess. Thus, the child-lover, now in a state where he should, and must, develop a newly honest, mature, and profound self-concept, finds himself totally lacking in "props," cues, test-objects, and feedback to use as tools in this monumental task.
A fourth, and perhaps ultimately the most important factor that militates against both our adjustment in prison and our making positive use of our prison time, is that we are unacknowledged political prisoners. Our enemies assert that because physical expressions of love between an adult and a child are defined as illegal, we are criminals. Further, they would rebut that political prisoners are only those incarcerated for speech and writing, not for behavior. Historically, both of these arguments are incorrect. One hundred fifty years ago, an African-American who fled the site of his involuntary servitude was defined by law as a criminal. We, however, view his behavior, correctly I believe, as a political act. Eighteen hundred years earlier, a Judean who circumcised his son was defined by Roman law as having committed an act of bloody child abuse. We, however, term his act religious and political (whether or not we agree with the practice). I aver that a political prisoner is one who is incarcerated for an act which he, in good conscience, believes to be right and good. Moreover, his belief is not idiosyncratic, but is shared by a number of other persons who consider themselves united in part by this belief. This still is short of civil disobedience, as that would require conscious political intent. Most political prisoners, here and elsewhere, are those whose "crime" is no more than living their lives as persons of conscience, according to their best judgment of what is right and good, and without necessarily intending their behavior as a political statement or even considering themselves as politically "involved."(6)
Political prisoners differ fundamentally from other prisoners in being, not only well-socialized, but in fact extraordinarily ethical. At the very least, this is because as members of a persecuted political minority, they have been forced to consider matters of right and wrong more consciously than the average citizen. Such persons tend intrinsically to be rule-followers because, although they think certain rules should be different, they believe in the concept of rules, i.e. that there are aspects of right and wrong, good and bad, which override one's personal desires. Contrariwise, the great majority of prisoners at the penitentiary level, are "antisocial," or "sociopathic." Studies indicate that as many as 80-90% of inmates are intrinsic rule-breakers and lack either an ethic that transcends their own needs and impulses, or the ability to modify their behavior in conformity with such an ethic. The child-lover placed in such a milieu faces a dilemma: to be honest and forthright and persistently exploited, or to compromise his own values in order to make his way in prison.(7)
In some societies, political prisoners have been segregated from criminals, and this ofttimes meant that they received harsher treatment. However, two advantages that almost always accrued are solidarity and support. Even where they were termed criminals, and even where they were confined along with criminals, they were acknowledged as political, both inside and outside of the prison system. Although their handling might be severe, they were accorded a certain respect as being prisoners of conscience. Further, they had automatic alliance with their fellows in the penal system, and received support from unimprisoned members of their group or movement, even when such communication was officially interdicted. Thus, while not minimizing their suffering, their basic identities, both personal and political, were not weakened. In fact there could be a buttressing and encouraging sense of furthering The Cause by one's very presence in prison. Recent examples could be drawn from among incarcerated dissidents in South Africa, the former Soviet Union, and at this very moment in China.
As imprisoned child-lovers, we experience the worst of both worlds. North American and some other governments go to great lengths to define the love of children as a serious felony. In doing so, they have created and financed the development of an entire pseudo-science, "victimology," which has co-opted and corrupted the mental health professions to a degree unimaginable twenty-five years ago.(8) Once arrested, we, like political prisoners everywhere, are subjected to a travesty of the criminal justice system. Usual guarantees are explicitly or implicitly suspended, e.g. the right to confront one's accuser, the inadmissibility of hearsay evidence, and the presumption of innocence. As mentioned elsewhere, the "defense" counsel often supports and surreptitiously cooperates with the State to produce a "show-trial," the outcome of which is indisputably pre-determined.
Once incarcerated, the child-lover is told that he is "just like any other inmate," and that "no one cares why you're here." As far as not receiving special privileges, or any attention to the special needs engendered by total lack of experience with a criminal sub-culture, that is true indeed. However, one may soon find that in order to gain parole, one must complete a "treatment" program, and be certified as being "in recovery," as I have discussed elsewhere.(9) This sounds quite a bit like the "political re-education" programs of other oppressive societies. Then, one finds that access to writings, even scholarly literature, on the subject of intergenerational love, is forbidden; this in an environment saturated with stories of murder and mayhem, and where racist publications advocating hatred and violence are freely available. One may find that requests for inmate-to-inmate correspondence are routinely denied-- only when both parties are child-lovers.
So it seems that while labeled as felons, child-lovers are in fact treated in very significant ways as political prisoners. That in itself is not unique. It is characteristic of regimes dependent upon fanatical elements to criminalize the essential behaviors or rituals of groups whose philosophy and lifestyle are perceived as potentially subversive to the existing order.(10) What is different here is that child-lovers themselves appear to accept and internalize the cultural opprobrium, at least to the extent of deep ambivalence, and frequently to the extent of denial and self-hatred. No unbiased test can demonstrate intergenerational love to be anything worse than politically incorrect, and yet the widespread emotional reaction to it is as though it really were the violent crime it arbitrarily is labeled. In an horrific extension of this phenomenon, child-lovers, who are in the best position to know the reality of adult-child bonded relationships, begin to view themselves through the eyes of the professional "victimologists."(11) This ambivalence also explains the failure of unimprisoned child-lovers to form an effective support network for their incarcerated brethren and "sistren." The analogy comes to mind of a boy, perhaps a generation or two past, whose brother gets caught masturbating. He wants to say, "Leave him alone, there's nothing wrong with it-- even scientists say so!" However, he says nothing, not only because he fears that he will be found out himself, but also because there lurks still at the back of his mind the nagging thought that maybe it really is dirty and nasty and makes you go blind.(12) Surely, "un-outted" members of other movements for social reform also have feared for their own security and safety. However, they always found means to help imprisoned colleagues locate each other; if necessary to smuggle food, literature and encouragement to them; and to re-integrate them upon release, or arrange for them to continue their work in exile.
Being
The abrupt collapse of one's personal psychological identity, all or most of one's interpersonal relationships, and all of one's social and cultural roles, precipitates a state of inner chaos that some will not survive. It is akin to traumatic amputation of all four limbs; the bleeding and shock will be fatal to many. Beyond the acute phase, however, living or dying becomes a process in which we may participate. We are confronted, for the first time in most cases, with having only ourselves for company. What kind of companions do we make for ourselves? To what extent can we take over the complementary functions which others, particularly children, have performed for us? How well do we know ourselves? The substitution will always be poor and incomplete. You can't tickle yourself. You can't be your own sex partner. However, that is not really the point. The question is whether or not we can provide ourselves with the bare minimum requisites for making the decision to live and remain sane.
Possibly the most important task in working through our relationship with our self is resolving the negative aspects of our self-image. First, we must understand and eliminate traces of self-hatred caused by identification with the culture's rejection of us. This already has been discussed. Second is coming to terms with negative events in our own psychosexual history. Many if not most people have sexual fantasies and experiences, especially during adolescence and young adulthood, which they later regret. That is normal. All adolescents are dealing with greatly heightened sexual and aggressive drives, and doing so with the handicaps of neuropsychological immaturity and social inexperience. It is no wonder that they often blunder, injuring their own feelings, and sometimes bodies, and those of their partners. Most people eventually forgive themselves their youthful mistakes, or just forget about them. For child-lovers, however, the part of us that is prone to accept society's labels can seize on these shameful memories to "prove" that we really are despicable. Instead of self-acceptance, we wind up with self-loathing. Now that all outward channels are closed, can we focus the tremendous love and compassion we have poured into others on ourselves? Can we regard our past and present selves with the lavish forbearance and instant forgiveness we once bestowed upon the children we cared for? Can we come to see the essential goodness of our nature, and the essential falsehood of our enemies' calumnies? If so, then we will accept ourselves as less than perfect. We will be able finally to integrate and move beyond the memories of those times when, for whatever reasons, we hurt the ones we loved.
If one gets to this point, one has survived the catastrophic centripetal reversal of energy flow, i.e. one has avoided psychic meltdown. The quadruple amputee who has not died from shock can now begin to figure out how it might be possible to control a computer, or a paintbrush. For us, part of our energy should continue to go into self-exploration and development. Many of us are so "other-oriented," such great givers, that we have not sufficiently come to know ourselves. Working toward knowledge of ourselves and our place in the universe, through religion, meditation, or other means, is a lifelong task. Planning for the future after release also can play a role in the process of renewal. However, we must guard against excessive preoccupation with fantasy, and there is a tragically large number of us who cannot count on release in this lifetime. Substantial progress in personal development may be necessary before one can achieve sufficient equanimity to emerge from the contracted or imploded state mentioned earlier.
Concomitant with increased self-acceptance, there develops a desire to re-establish communication with others. One basic fulfillment of this is through correspondence and visitation. Some individuals may be able to re-contact family members or friends. With the passage of time, and finding the prisoner "sadder but wiser," one or more of these may choose to renew their support. Other prisoners may find new associations through their religious or philosophical alignments. However, there is no doubt that the most important contacts for the incarcerated child-lover are with others of his orientation. Only these can provide opportunities not only for relating with our evolving self, but for corroboration and validation of our most essential identity. This of course requires that there be numbers of child-lovers outside of prison who also are working on development of their own positive identities and resolution of their own ambivalences.
Another mode of communication is through creative expression. For some, it may take considerable effort and re-training to direct the love energy we previously have expressed in our thoughts, words and actions directly with children, into "media." Words that we write, images that we paint or carve, cannot become real children, but they can provide us with an outlet for our caring and passion, as well as our yearning and grief. Creative media include fiction and non-fiction such as this article (I hope).
This leads to a third means of establishing relationship between the revised self and the outside world, viz. working for The Cause. Engagement in such work requires further solidification of a positive personal identity and also firm commitment to the role of political prisoner. Can we resist all systematic attempts to brainwash us and break our spirits? Can we, in the absence of internal network or external support, come to view ourselves as members of a persecuted minority? Well, we can, but as the old song says, "Don'cha know it ain' easy." Our success, and indeed our survival, depends not only upon our own work, but also upon parallel maturational work, both individually and organizationally, of child-lovers on the Outside.
Impediments to survival of outting and incarceration alive and sane are daunting. Subsequently, obstacles to continued personal growth and re-emergence as productive human beings are formidable. As in any popularly sanctioned and governmentally executed genocide, there will be countless direct and indirect casualties. History will not ask us why we died, but it will ask us why we died cowering. It will not question why our enemies did not help us, but it will demand to know why we did not help each other.
Notes:
1. Recently, I showed a friend a photograph of myself and a twelve-year-old boy with whom I was bonded years ago. We are standing side by side with my arm around his shoulder, in what I would consider a typical adult-child pose. My friend took one look at the picture and said, "You were lovers." To my surprise, he pointed out that there was absolutely no space between us. The boy had molded his body so that he was in continuous contact with me from his ankle to where his shoulder fit into my armpit.
2. This is true in the same manner that being Jewish was the defining characteristic of European Jews during the Nazi reign, whether or not they themselves previously had thought about it that way.
3. One can see here clearly the confluence of various models of suicide, including Durkheim's original anomie, the psychodynamic rage turned against the self, and the cognitive psychologists' helplessness/hopelessness paradigm.
4. I have heard so many accounts, besides my own, of defense attorneys cooperating, either actively or passively, with the prosecution, that I must conclude there is some truth to them beyond "sour grapes." The hatred of child-lovers in this culture is so deeply ingrained, and so irrational, that it operates substantially at a subconscious level, and biases the actions even of professionals who have trained themselves ordinarily to separate their personal feelings from their work.
5. I'm not really sure of the origin of this term, but assume it is some obscure reference to hiding in trees or bushes and then jumping out to attack hapless children.
6. I know that I have defined at least some Nazis and other war criminals as "political prisoners." Fortunately, I am not the first to have done so. Although their politics may be abhorrent to me, I believe that if they acted subjectively in good conscience and their values were shared by their group, then the definition must stand.
7. The "sociopathic society" of prison includes both staff and inmates and is beyond the scope of this article. I ask the reader to "take my word for it" that any adjustment to prison life demands at least some degree of lying, stealing, and other behaviors which on the Outside we would reject as unethical.
8. The author is classified as a violent felon, and so housed and treated, because the law defines sexual contact with a child less than eleven as a violent crime. The irony is profound. The child in question once had to go find his brother to help him remove a bothersome loose tooth because the author couldn't bear to cause him even momentary pain.
9. [Horowitz, A.] Shneur. "And If The Twig Be Broken...," in Gayme, Vol. 1 No. 2 (January 1994), pp. 20-28.
10. The question of why pedophilia is perceived as subversive in contemporary "Western" societies is beyond the scope of this article. Let it be said that this culture is both child-hating and erotophobic. Consequently those who love children receive the proverbial double whammy.
11. Psychologically, this is the mechanism of identification with the aggressor described in classic works by Anna Freud and Bruno Bettelheim.
12. The reasons for Americans being especially susceptible to this kind of pernicious double-think are beyond the scope of this article. Briefly, however, I believe they stem significantly from early and persistent conditioning by the mass media to place conventional, externally imposed labels on experiences, overruling individual instincts, perceptions, and judgments.
This article appears in NAMBLA's Criminal Justice?, whose editor estimates there are 25,000 to 30,000 boy-lovers caught up in the American criminal justice system. Criminal Justice? contains other writings by prisoners about their prison experiences, another article by A. Shneur Horowitz about the growing numbers of adolescent boys imprisoned for loving other boys (many housed in a special unit of the New York State prison system), an article from the NAMBLA Bulletin about the Crime Bill of 1994, and a short story by Russell Kinkade.
New York State Department of Correctional Services
Inmate Information - Location/Status/Legal Dates/etc.
http://nysdocslookup.docs.state.ny.us
Date of Information: 02/13/03
DIN (Dept. Identif. Number) 92A6576
Inmate Name: HOROWITZ, ALAN J
Sex: MALE
Date of Birth: 04/04/1947
Race/Ethnicity: WHITE
Custody Status: IN CUSTODY
Housing/Releasing Facility: OTISVILLE
Date Received (Original): 08/05/1992
Date Received (Current): 08/05/1992
Admission Type: NEW COMMITMENT
County of Commitment: SCHENECTADY
Latest Release Date/Type:
(Released Inmates Only)
Crime 1, Description: SODOMY 1ST
Crime 1, Crime Class: B
If all 4 crime fields contain data, there may be additional crimes not shown here. In this case, the crimes shown here are those with the longest sentences.
Aggregate Minimum Sentence: 010 Years, 00 Months, 00 Days
Aggregate Maximum Sentence: 020 Years, 00 Months, 00 Days
Earliest Release Date: 09/28/2003
Under certain circumstances, an inmate may be released prior to serving his or her minimum term and before the earliest release date shown for the inmate.
Earliest Release Type: PAROLE HEARING DATE
Parole Hearing Date: 09/2003
Parole Hearing Type: REAPPEARANCE
Parole Eligibility Date: 11/05/2001
Conditional Release Date: 03/05/2005
Maximum Expiration Date: 11/05/2011
12 Steps to Conquering Your Ivy
Addiction
By Jay Mathews
Tuesday, March 30, 2004; 7:49 AM
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A35338-2004Mar30¬Found=true
My favorite example is the 35th reunion report filed by Alan J.Horowitz, a member of the Harvard class of 1967, who wrote from a state prison in Fishkill, N.Y., to say that his life has been "an uninterrupted saga of frustration, failure and loss."
Current Reported Offender Details
- County of Albany
November 28, 2004
Offender Id: 20897
Last Name: HOROWITZ First Name: ALAN Middle Name:
Race: White Ethnicity: Not Hispanic Height: 5'11"
Weight: 205
DOB: Apr 4, 1947
Hair: Brown
Sex: Male
Eyes: Hazel
Risk Level: 3
Corr. Lens: YES
Reported Address: 15 ASHGROVE PL 1ST FLOOR
