UPDATED: Shame on the VA for firing registrant-owned business because of bad press.

Well this is horrible… a man convicted of a sexual offense in 2007 turned his life around and started a janitorial business. He gets a contract providing janitorial services for the VA. USA today writes a story about it and the VA cancels the contract. Here we have someone who has tried to turn his life around (and seemingly was successful in doing so) gets re-punished for something he did more than a decade ago. He and the many people who work for him are fired and the agency doing the firing is the VA, who is supposed to help veterans (the man served 8 years in the Army)!

The story is offensive because it illustrates: (a) how people on the registry are barred from career opportunities everywhere, including as janitors, (b) how the label undermines rehabilitation by permanently destabilizing people, (c) how the VA can easily discard a sub-class of persons it’s supposed to be helping, and (d) how the label not only stigmatizes the registrant but anyone who chooses to give them a chance and do business with them.

You can read the full story here.

UPDATED: I’VE UPDATED THIS POST WITH A MORE IMPORTANT READ FROM GH-S. PLEASE READ THIS: https://littlereddots.substack.com/p/good-morning-i-am-full-of-rage

If you want to write to the author, you can reach him here: jsalman@gatehousemedia.com

 

36 thoughts on “UPDATED: Shame on the VA for firing registrant-owned business because of bad press.

  • August 11, 2020 at 8:22 am
    Permalink

    That is awful for sure. I’ve never understood how the same federal government that imprisoned me, gave me on the job training in prison for rehabilitation, forced me to work for them at a whopping 35 cents per hour, and won’t hire me for any job on the outside.

    Reply
    • August 11, 2020 at 10:24 am
      Permalink

      Wow you got 35 cents per hour! (Sarcasm implied). The great state of Florida paid me o.oo per hour.
      But the important thing to remember is its not Punative. Its a civil regulatory scheme. Except for the fact that evey time to make the slightest clearlical error you could land in prison for years. But other than that it’s not punishment.. Right? I hate to hear these stories where people are doing the right thing and then loose there job for what amounts to nothing.

      Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 8:31 am
    Permalink

    I fully understand this situation. I worked in the oil industry until recently when I lost my job because my company sold to another. I am fairly certain I only lost the job because of the required employer notification for the registry. Since then I have had 2 job offers for oilfield automation which I’m highly qualified for only to have them rescinded once I notified of being on the registry. The worst part is I can’t blame the VA or the companies that didn’t hire me. The real problem is the media manipulation that has put us in this situation. I’m a veteran and a college graduate but can’t find a job because I’m also on the SOR.

    Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 9:22 am
    Permalink

    While y’all are focusing on the VA, how about dogging USA Today for this hit piece?

    I don’t bother looking for work because of scum like Salman.

    Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 10:44 am
    Permalink

    I thought the Supreme Court ruled being on the registry was not punishment and along with the 66% recidivism rate numerous studies have shown is complete BS, is the reason we still have SORNA.

    This right here is, once again, proof positive the registry is punitive. I hope the gentleman obtains representation and takes the VA to federal court. I believe he would get his contract back or at least some level of compensation for it being taken away without cause.

    Reply
    • August 11, 2020 at 2:48 pm
      Permalink

      I believe the recidivism rate given by Justice Kennedy was 80%, making it even worse.

      Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 12:12 pm
    Permalink

    It just goes to show that bigotry has never left this nation. We will always have to fight tooth and nail for probably better than a century to make any true leeway.

    Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 12:52 pm
    Permalink

    They don’t want any one to succeed but if it was their golf or drinking buddies…. then got framed for it!! This man admitted his mistakes paid the price, now he should been allowed to move on with his life….But NO! if it were a different crime The haters out there would not be making waves about it.
    I don’t understand how the U.S. Supreme Court allows this to Continue because they are appointed for life…And for a Christain Country who makes the Claim “2nd chance for everybody” they sure fall short of showing mercy and forgive but yet Certain key players do the same dirty deeds behide close doors and get tax dollars to pay off the victims

    Reply
  • August 11, 2020 at 2:44 pm
    Permalink

    I have been in contact with Josh Salman, the journalist who wrote this article. Apparently he has come under fire from some of our members.

    Mr. Salman was part of the USA TODAY investigation into some federal government contracts awarded to vendors previously accused of fraud against the government, and part of the investigation led to Lopez at the VA hospital.

    The article did state that a waiver was needed and none of that ever happened. Mr. Salman shared with me that he did not make the rules that the VA goes by, and we know he doesn’t make the rules.

    Mr. Salman shared the following: “I want to clarify another inaccuracy in your group’s post. The VA did not fire the man over bad press — we did not write anything when they fired him and might not have written anything at all had they not — so it was not over bad press. We just asked some questions. That is our job.” He is right.

    I have read through Mr. Salman’s article twice and cannot find fault with anything that he stated as a journalist. He even referenced Jill Levenson and the movement to give “offenders a second chance with meaningful work after their release back to society to help lower crime and prevent recidivism.”

    There have been some journalists in the past who have put out some inaccurate information, but I do not see where Mr. Salman has. He just covered the story — a story that none of us likes, but he is only the messenger.

    Many times I respond to articles or journalist simply to educate them on the research. That does not mean that I feel that journalists are not capable of seeking out the research on their own, but there is no way a journalist can know about every research project out there.

    We want journalists to be our friends, not out foes. Unless they are putting out inaccurate information, say something positive and then share some information that they might at a later time be able to incorporate into one of their articles, thereby helping our cause.

    We do not like what happened to Mr. Lopez, but “beating up” on the journalist is going to do nothing to help our cause.

    Okay, I am ready for the blows that are going to come my way.

    Reply
    • August 11, 2020 at 6:26 pm
      Permalink

      I am not convinced by the excuses if this reporter or any other reporter out there.

      Salman chose to call this man a “child predator” which inflames readers into hating the man. These reporters would not use the N word to describe a black person but the P word is not even considered offensive by these same reporters. These reporters also see us as less than human.

      I have been called foul things over the years by reporters, and I have been used by reporters who then intentionally slant the story out of concerns of being seen as sympathetic to us. Even that director of a certain documentary on the Books said my message was “too harsh” for bringing up Ron Book’s past while we got to see Ron talk about waterboarding us.

      At the end of the day, many reporters are advancing a bad agenda that hurts those of us on the registry, and I do not see Salman any differently. His excuses are poor.

      Reply
      • August 11, 2020 at 6:40 pm
        Permalink

        Member Submission:
        Mr. Salman,

        I am writing in response to your article in today’s USA Today titled, “Sex offender loses COVID-19 contract at VA hospital after USA TODAY asks questions”.

        I find it disgusting to read you gloat about how your investigation got someone, a military veteran nonetheless, terminated because of something they did more than a decade ago. Clearly this individual has worked hard to build a business and live a productive life. I hope you sleep well at night knowing you undermined this man’s decade of rehabilitation efforts and destabilized his family.

        If he’s not worthy of having a janitorial business, what do you propose is an appropriate way for this person to support his family and successfully re-enter society?

        I’m very involved in restorative justice and re-entry programs and your piece completely undermines the principles of both and illustrates precisely why people recidivate when society doesn’t give them a second chance.

        Shame on you!

        Reply
    • August 11, 2020 at 6:28 pm
      Permalink

      Respectfully, STRONGLY disagree with you on this one. Everything from the title of the article to the end completely undermines rehabilitation. His “investigation” reversed all the progress that this individual had made in his life, sweeping the ladder out from under him and whoever he supports.

      I believe that if your personal situation were one where you had to scrape the floor for nickles to support your children, you would have a completely different perspective on this and recognize the harm that he has caused.

      This article could have taken a different direction, showing how an individual can turn his life around and become a productive member of society. Instead they latched on to what sells papers; “sex offender” hysteria, and in the process destroyed a human being’s livelihood and will make businesses across the country think twice before hiring or contracting with someone on the registry.

      Mr. Salman, if he had any journalistic integrity or conscience, should think hard about the absolute f-ing he did to this man’s family and follow up his hack piece with something to redeem the harm he has done.

      Reply
      • August 12, 2020 at 9:31 am
        Permalink

        In the long ago days before the internet, the newspaper mantra was that “if it bleeds, it leads.” That has now morphed into “if it sizzles, it sells.” Journalism is about truth and accuracy. Articles without those should be relegated to the OpEd page.

        Veritas.

        Reply
        • August 13, 2020 at 6:27 am
          Permalink

          Ed C:

          Respectfully disagree. I’ve seen way too many journalists exaggerate some facts and ignore others in order to create the most shock they can, this article included. Very seldom do any make an effort to present both sides of any given issue and if they do, the side opposite the one they privately support is merely glossed over and often belittled.

          Modern journalism is about mouse clicks, subscriptions, and selling advertising space. Nothing more. There are exceptions (as in, a journalist telling all sides of any given story with complete accuracy and equal time), but they are very few and far between. And certainly NONE of them write for USA Today.

          Reply
    • August 11, 2020 at 6:46 pm
      Permalink

      Really appreciate our Media Committee engaging with journalists and getting them to think about how they report these issues, even if this one didn’t quite get the message.

      Reply
    • August 12, 2020 at 6:44 am
      Permalink

      SarahF:

      I believe you give Salman far too much credit for integrity.

      First, his claim that it wasn’t “bad press” that got Lopez fired because the story hadn’t published was misleading. The VA certainly knew from his interview that a story would be released and had a pretty good idea of the slant that story would take.

      Second, your praise for his reference to Jill Levenson is, IMHO, misguided. She has also stressed numerous times the grossly inaccurate public perception of high recidivism in her writings, even if Salman hadn’t spoken to her in person. Either way, I can say with near certainty that Salman was aware of the actual recidivism rates among registrants and found it unfit to print.

      Third, as Derek pointed out, Salman chose to call Lopex a “predator” as opposed to “sex offender” simply to get more attention. He set the tone for the entire story in the first paragraph as a hit piece, and his passive reference to Levenson hardly serves to balance both sides of the argument.

      Fourth, while Salman pats his own back for terminating Lopez’s contract, I wonder if he had considered Lopez’s employees and their families. Or if the health of patients at that hospital is endangered by the lack of janitorial services until the VA finds another vendor. Guessing not.

      I have to agree with Derek and FAC here. For the first time in my recollection since you started posting here, I think you really missed the mark. Nonetheless, I enjoy your posts and appreciate your efforts more than I can convey and hope you are not discouraged by the criticism you have endured in this matter.

      Reply
    • August 12, 2020 at 8:56 am
      Permalink

      Sarah, no blow, just a pat on the back. Our nation today is beset by name calling, mud slinging, ect. This was an article in today’s edition of USA TODAY also.
      Our “fight” isn’t with the author, it’s against the fear based politics that are behind it.

      Reply
      • August 12, 2020 at 10:43 am
        Permalink

        Thank you, Roger. I agree.

        Reply
    • August 12, 2020 at 9:18 am
      Permalink

      SarahF is the only one here to have corresponded with the reporter, elicited a response, and shared that response, amirite?

      The reporter sounds to me as if he is now on the defensive. Perhaps he’ll think twice or do more research before tackling such a subject.

      Thank you again, Media Committee.

      By the way, virtually all the twitter responses to his story so far are negative ones.

      Reply
  • August 12, 2020 at 6:24 am
    Permalink

    If I was the owner of this business, I would launch a CIVIL LAWSUIT against this hack reporter, as well as another against the ‘magazine supermarket tabloid’ that published this non-sense.

    Since, they have bankrupted this business owner, Bankrupt, this useless, spine-less hack reporter…Bankrupt he and his family so, he too, feels it in the wallet…and drag this out for years in the courts, so this the hack reporter, has NOTHING LEFT!…always go for the Jugular!

    Reply
    • August 12, 2020 at 9:08 am
      Permalink

      Our Constitution prevents us from suing a reporter for reporting facts, being malicious, or exercising poor judgment.

      Reply
  • August 12, 2020 at 10:48 am
    Permalink

    Thank you to all the gentlemen who replied to my comments. I do respect all of your opinions.

    When I think how little I knew 15 months ago, I am very sympathetic with journalists. I would have thought nothing of using the terms sex offender or sexual predator because I did not see them as offensive nor anything to be afraid of. I did not understand four years ago when a defense attorney (and former prosecutor) told me that being placed on the registry will destroy a person’s life. The “sex offenders” living in my neighborhood did not concern me as I never saw law enforcement at their homes, so I knew they were law-abiding citizens, and I did not care about some mistake they made years ago. But I did not realize that not everyone else thinks the way I do. I had no idea about the hysteria that fed off myths.

    No journalist can know everything about every subject. Most are not even given the opportunity to write on the subject of “sex offenders”. This particular journalist was given the topic of fraud in government contracts, which we all know is rampant.

    In my communications with him, I was sharing some of the research and facts concerning the registry that I feel very few journalists have had the opportunity to learn. It was all just a start for me as I shared some of the research, how difficult it is for law-abiding registrants, and some of what is happening in Brevard County. Maybe, just maybe, somewhere down the road, this journalist might have had an assignment to report on the unfairness of the registry, and we could have planted a seed that would eventually have sprouted through the use of his keyboard.

    Because this journalist was politely listening to what I had to say, I was saving his contact information to possibly send more data his way at a later time, but some FAC members have pretty much squelched that plan.

    We have seen this with a Brevard county commissioner and now with a journalist; we cannot lash out at people and expect them to really listen to us. Think about it: When someone is verbally tearing you apart, are you really listening to what they are saying or are you thinking about how you are going to lash back at the them? I know what my answer would be – lash back.

    We have lost this journalist but let’s not lose anymore.

    A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city, and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.

    Reply
    • August 12, 2020 at 1:07 pm
      Permalink

      When dealing with journalists, commissioners, etc., PLEASE, resist the temptation to be disrespectful. They don’t HAVE to read or respond to our letters if they don’t want to.

      The only justification for violating this rule would be if we are doing it in a way calculated to persuade the public (example: a public protest by Once Fallen). But if it is the INDIVIDUAL we are trying to persuade, such as the individual journalist or commissioner, then we have to meet them halfway.

      I realize SarahF has just conveyed all this, I’m just being blunter. YOUR MEDIA COMMITTEE WAS ON THE CUSP OF EDUCATING A JOURNALIST BEFORE ONE OF US UNWITTINGLY UNDERMINED THAT EFFORT.

      Keep those letters and e-mails coming. I realize I may take some flak for the above, but please give this some thought. Don’t worry so much about what they “deserve”— worry instead about what would persuade them. Certain cases will be beyond persuasion Sen. Book, Commissioner Tobia)— in those cases they will only be persuaded by public backlash or court order.

      Reply
      • August 12, 2020 at 5:01 pm
        Permalink

        Who do you mean by “one of us”? One of a handful of the people on the F.A.C. board? Or?

        With any luck, the author heard from 10,000 people. People living in America are obviously completely crazy and immoral these days, so who knows.

        I think it is fine that you are trying to persuade and educate people to communicate in a certain way. But this author, and you, need to realize that not everyone is going to listen or act the way that you want them to. That is no excuse for the author to ignore facts. No excuse to remain uneducated and uninformed. No excuse to refuse to engage with F.A.C. or any of the others who communicate in a way that makes the author happy.

        People don’t act how we want them to act. I have to put up with it. I have to put up with idiots who think the Hit Lists are acceptable. This author, and other adults, ought to be smart enough to put up with it also.

        Reply
        • August 12, 2020 at 10:33 pm
          Permalink

          It is easy for people put in a corner to make excuses like a petulent child. This was not a report about fraud. This was a report on why the VA allowedf a Registered Person to work for them. There was no need to publish this man’s past or call him a child predator. There was no need whatsoever to write this article.

          SarahF, there are simply some people who are unwilling to be educated, and this reporter is one of them. This whole “someone hurt my feelings” business is a load of crap. He destroyed a man’s life and he got called out for it. Hell, he should have gotten more than a few striongly worded emails and a feature on the Shiitake Awards blog. But pols and reporters are also public figures and harsh criticism goes with the territory.

          Do you honestly think many pols are also willing to listen to reason? Your state Senator Lauren Book uses her background to justify her personal animus towards us to the point she was willing to file a SLAPP suit to silence us. Do you honestly think she will ever be open to reason when she went to the very homeless campo she created then STILL talks about how we are all ticking time bombs?

          SarahF, don’t be naive here. There are some people who will always make excuses not to listen to us. Pols will claim it is politial suicide but that’s BS. Media will claim fear of cancel culture but the media pyblishes far more controversial stuff that blows over the next day. No, sometimes they need to be called out. If he’s feeling ashamed, GOOD!

          Reply
      • August 12, 2020 at 7:13 pm
        Permalink

        Well stated, Jacob. Thank you.

        Reply
        • August 13, 2020 at 8:36 am
          Permalink

          I’m seeing a variety of views here as to whether the journalist would have been open to reason in this area. But only one of those opinions, as best I can tell, is from anyone who managed to elicit a response from him. And that is the assessment I am going to rely upon most. Other assessments about him are welcome but less informed.

          Here is the prevailing logic that I am seeing:

          This individual did a malicious thing.
          An individual who did such a thing cannot change.
          Therefore, the individual should suffer.

          Sound familiar? If your family has been affected by the registry, you already know how counter-productive such thinking can be. But everyone here is better than that.

          Now, understandably, the rules will change when dealing with the likes of Commissioner Tobia or Senator Book— individuals that have shown a consistent determination to pursue an agenda that is contrary to the facts. Such sociopaths can only be influenced through the courts, as Once Fallen has successfully shown. But I’m not hearing from the Media Committee that that’s the type of person we’re dealing with. And I’m not hearing from anyone else who’s elicited any communication from him at all.

          Again, people don’t HAVE to read our letters and e-mails if they don’t want to. When we contact journalists, is our goal not to influence them?

          If I were the Media Committee chair, having my diligent volunteer work attacked from all sides, I’d consider resigning by now. Fortunately, our Media Committee chair and its members are stronger and more patient than I am. I just want us to be careful not to take our volunteers for granted. They don’t have to do what they do.

          Reply
          • August 13, 2020 at 10:06 am
            Permalink

            Jacob – you are right. Sorry, Sarah.

          • August 13, 2020 at 10:16 am
            Permalink

            Not to worry — I am always listening.

  • August 12, 2020 at 11:00 am
    Permalink

    I have sent an email to Mr. Lopez using an email I found for his business. He’s already shut down his website, undoubtedly due to hate mail because of this USA hit piece. I hope he sues Salman. This was vigilante action via the media, plain and simple. There was NO need to write this article. Salman went beyond just getting Mr. Lopez fired– he wrote this article anyways to ensure that Mr Lopez would not get another job.

    So now either Mr. Lopez rebuilds from nothing, or sits back and collects welfare liuke i’ve done since 2006. See, this is why I get pissed when the conservative wing of this movement dismisses my activist fundraisers by telling me to get a job. Why bother when this is what happens when we do?

    Reply
  • August 12, 2020 at 12:41 pm
    Permalink

    Feedback I shared with Mr. Salman:

    Dear Mr. Salman:

    Like many others, I’m writing in response to the article you wrote.

    You are free to write in any tone you want (this is a free country), but what you may fail to realize is that there are millions of registered persons and their family members that would be deeply offended by the tone of your article. We may not be a protected class like race or sexual orientation, however, we are still people and we still have a voice.

    It is enough that our government has seen fit to provide for just sanctions to punish past behavior. It starts to become unreasonable for that same government to selectively pick certain crimes for additional public shaming, exclusion from community involvement, and even banishment after those sanctions have ended, ensuring those individuals have lifelong hardships securing housing, employment, and being actively engaged members of society. Your actions go much further, however, as if these things weren’t enough, by shining a spotlight on one of these individuals who, in the words of your own piece, has not done anything wrong, but whom you apparently personally feel shouldn’t deserve certain opportunities because of the sex offender label. You make it a point to post their registration information and go to great lengths to dig inordinately deep into odd details of a long ago crime in order to find salacious information to share with your readers – none of which have anything to do with this person’s efforts to provide honest services and earn a living. You want to make sure that the smoldering wick of someone’s life has no chance to flame into something significant and meaningful – perhaps all to satisfy a hunger for malice.

    If I were writing such an article, I would write how this person, despite how disadvantaged they were, given their status, was able to build a business and not only rehabilitate themselves, but went beyond to become a contributing member of the community, providing opportunities for others under his management. To me, that shows uncommon commitment and suggests a much greater depth of character than you give him credit for. I don’t know if you have a journalism degree, but even an unschooled individual could write a more balanced and significant article than what came from your pen.

    Like racists in the Jim Crow south and the Nazis in Germany, you may find yourself ashamedly looking back on your actions one day. Perhaps you may even find posterity writing a story about you and others like you. Hmm, wouldn’t that make for a interesting read?

    Sincerely,
    [Name withheld]

    Reply
    • August 14, 2020 at 3:14 pm
      Permalink

      Brilliant 😂 Thank you Sir.👏 👏 👏

      Reply
  • August 13, 2020 at 7:38 am
    Permalink

    This is a good example of exactly why our family owned house cleaning business is entirely in my wifes name. We have a lot of clients through our church and if something came up it would spread and and my wife would lose a tremendous amount of work not to mention possibly being removed from the church.

    Reply
  • August 17, 2020 at 10:32 am
    Permalink

    I moved out of florida to ga. to better my life and family.
    I lived in florida for 30 years . But when I did 10 years of probation
    on a 20 year probation sentence. I completed all of my terms
    and requested early release and received it. my wife works
    sometimes that just keeps bills payed.
    I look for jobs but when my past as rso comes up no
    job. and it has been over 22 years for the offense.
    I believe that the registry is a punishment for life.
    and if it was not for my wife and family I would have
    ended my life. so I will fight and keep trying knowing
    I will not win. i will not say I am guilty I took a deal with the devil.
    I understand that this world will never give us a chance because it is
    easier to look at us as leopards to society.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *