July 29, 2005
More sex offender laws and restrictions in the works
The on-going social panic over sex offenders finds expression these days in dozens of newspaper articles each day discussing new "get-tough" sex offender legislation and proposals emerging at federal, state and local levels. Among the articles catching my eye this morning:
- from New Jersey, this story reporting that a local township has "extended its restricted zones to prohibit convicted sex offenders from living near roller rinks, movie theaters and amusement parks."
- from Pennsylvania, this story reporting on a state bill that "would increase penalties for convicted sex offenders and require live tracking when they are released from prison."
- from Maryland, this article detailing that a state senator "is calling for tougher sentences, including a possible death penalty, for convicted sex offenders in the aftermath of a highly publicized kidnapping and sex abuse case in Idaho."
Every one of these articles provides still more evidence how the laws and restrictions being developed during the current social panic over sex offenders are driven far more by headline-making anecdotes of horrible individual cases rather than by refined data-driven policy analysis.
July 29, 2005 at 10:37 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More sex offender laws and restrictions in the works:
The lack of data-driven policy analysis infects sentencing legislation for all types of crime, not just sex crimes.
Most sentencing laws these days are a reaction, and usually an over-reaction, to egregious high-profile cases that are abnormal. Jamie Olis, John Rigas, and Bernie Ebbers have all been caught in the maw of the current "lock em up forever" strategy that currently infects white collar crime sentencing.
Indeed, there are reasons to think that the collateral consequences for white collar offenders are more severe than those for sex offenders. The former seldom re-offend, but the latter frequently do.
Posted by: Marc Shepherd | Jul 29, 2005 12:08:46 PM
I am a parent. How can anyone "over-react" to a sex offender? Do you have children? I have four children. Over the weekend, a class 3 sex offender moved into a house across the street. This man spent 22 + years in prison for carnal abuse in the first degree. Am I concerned? YES!! He molested four girls between the ages of 10 and 16. My daughters are 10 and 14. I think if Martha Stewart must wear an ankle bracelet, so should he.
Posted by: Samantha Lee | Aug 10, 2005 12:24:47 AM
I think the new law needs to classify/evaluate each case individually. My grandsons father was stupid but is not dangerous. He at 21 had sex with a 15 almost 16 yr old, sorry to say this happens daily and is always consentual. The girl at 14 was sleeping in the same bed as her boyfriend in her mothers home, her mamma wanted the 21 yr old and was jealous.This man is not a predator. never was and never will be. I was molested as a child and strongly believe there needs to a code for high risk/repeat offenders. The Illinois sex offenders site is to vague, I haven't seen other states. Maybe theirs are more specific.
Posted by: Cinda | Aug 16, 2005 12:48:41 AM
I think society over-reacts to the word "sex offender". Under most laws, if you are caught relieving yourself in the parking lot after a long night at the bar, you get arrested and have to register for the rest of your natural life as a sex offender. In reply to the earlier statement from Ms. Lee, statistics show you are correct about consensual sex occuring and the ages involved. They are alarming to those of us who have children around the age of 10 - 15, however, what these parents are not taking into consideration is time. When I was 15, nearly 30 years ago, times were much different and I am sure you can all agree. But in the days of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, you can't expect children to be as juvenile as we were "back in the day". Kids are much more mature at younger ages. They know what they want and where to get it. To say someone is a horrible criminal and punish them for life for having sex with someone 7 or even 10 years older should really be reexamined. Basically, as an attorney and a parent, I want to remind my peers that as times change, we too must adapt. Realize that our children are exposed to so much more than we ever were and are much more aggressive than we ever were. We can not continue to persecute actions like was done 30 years ago. On the other hand, when there are instances of rape and abuse, then by all means, utilize the punishments, but when our daughter, with her navel ring showing and low rise jeans meets the hot jock from college, we CAN NOT demand that he be considered a sexual predator. We are just as guilty for not instilling the values that we want upheld. Most cases of statutory rape are consensual - NOT BY FORCE. Why put a child through something like this and punish someone for life when it is only us, the parents, who are uneasy?
Posted by: Mark Jenson | Sep 12, 2005 3:28:16 PM
This is directed towards you and anyone else reading this blog: NOT ALL PEOPLE CLASSIFIED AS SEX OFFENDERS ARE PEDOPHILES OR EVEN PREDATORS!! As others have noted above, you can be deemed "sex offender" in most states for peeing behind the shed in your own yard or behind a tree while camping, hunting or fishin - indecent exposure. An 18-year-old who has consensual sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend can be charged with statutory rape and if convicted (or even if adjudication is withheld), he will be forced to register as a sex offender. So, I repeat, NOT ALL PEOPLE CLASSIFIED AS SEX OFFENDERS ARE PEDOPHILES OR EVEN PREDATORS!!
(I am not a student, professor, prosecutor, etc. I am the wife of a registered sex offender.)
Posted by: allyHM | Sep 28, 2005 7:07:45 PM
I live in illinois been convicted os sex
abuse of stepdaughter. It was a custody
battle. Wifes son was sneaking in my daughters
room at night. When we found out proptly gave
him the boot two mnths later found out my son was sneaking to see her. all hell broke lose
again.then recieved paper work from her dad
saying it touched her. I TOUCHED HER.NO SEX
NO nothing not even touching genitals. I have
5 kids myself they never took or even ask about them just her.Now she lives here yes here I can't find a job nobody will even talk to me
The laws are good for those that REALLY harm children would be the first to throw key away
But there are some of us on the list that don't deserve what we are been handed.
Posted by: James | Oct 3, 2005 12:27:20 PM
Sex predator warnings often miss their mark
The Oregon law is hampered by uneven enforcement and a backlog of cases.
BY ALAN GUSTAFSON
February 4, 2001
Every day, chronic rapists, child molesters and sexual abusers prey on society.
Nationally, a woman is sexually assaulted every two minutes, according to the U.S. Justice Department. Statistics for minors are even more alarming. And it is estimated that fewer than 15 percent of such crimes are reported.
Horrified citizens have demanded more protection from sexual predators, calling for everything from lifelong lock-and-key confinement to castration.
Community notification laws have emerged as one of the best known — and most popular — weapons.
Politicians from the White House to the Oregon Capitol have extolled these laws, claiming that neighborhoods become safer places when residents are informed about the presence of sexual predators.
However, the feel-good talk appears to be hollow.
Ten years after the first notification law took effect in Washington state, and almost five years after President Clinton called for every state to enact such a law, experts say there’s no proof that community notifications increase public safety.
“Are we causing community safety? Or are we just causing community hysteria? I don’t know,” said Charity Hobold, a Deschutes County parole and probation officer. She’s president of Oregon’s Sex Offender Supervision Network, a panel that formulates policies on sex offenders.
“I haven’t seen anything that tells me somebody who’s notified on has less recidivism than somebody who hasn’t been notified on,” Hobold said. “And I’d like to see something like that to show notification works or doesn’t work.”
There are several reasons why the well-intentioned law may provide a fragile, even false, sense of security:
•By law, the Oregon State Police are responsible for predatory designations when sex offenders leave post-prison supervision. But the process is bogged down by a hefty backlog of cases.
More than 250 sex offender files are waiting to be processed, even as the agency receives 30 new ones every month. Officials have no timetable for clearing the clogged system.
•Notification procedures vary from county to county because there is no state standard for enforcing the law.
Community corrections officers in Oregon’s 36 counties handle notifications for offenders on post-prison supervision. Some run aggressive programs, not only knocking on doors and circulating fliers when a predator moves into the neighborhood, but also answering questions at public meetings. Others rarely notify neighbors or rely solely on news releases or fliers to spread the word.
Experts see little or no value in notifications done only by paper. In fact, they can backfire by spawning anger, confusion or vigilante-style violence. Instead, they recommend that law enforcement officers hold public meetings in affected neighborhoods.
•Fewer than 10 percent of sex offenders — designated predators — are eligible for community notification.
While experts say it makes sense to target predators because they pose the greatest reoffense threat, critics allege that Oregon uses a questionable “checklist system” to determine who is predatory.
Supporters say it’s a valid tool; skeptics call it unreliable. They contend that relatively low-risk offenders may be deemed predators while dangerous ones may elude the designation that triggers notification.
To be declared a predator, a person must meet three of nine criteria, such as being convicted for forcible rape, having multiple victims, using a weapon or molesting boys.
Molesting girls is not specified on the checklist; critics call it a loophole that allows some dangerous offenders to slip through. Officials defend the system, citing studies indicating that men who molest boys are more likely to do so again.
•Some therapists say priorities are misplaced because creating a false sense of public security takes precedence over treating the cause of the problem.
State officials quietly axed in-prison treatment programs several years ago. That not only made it harder for local parole officers to deal with newly released sex offenders, but also increased the chance they would reoffend, according to professionals who regularly confront the problem.
•Some experts worry that notification laws can reinforce a stereotyped image that portrays sex predators as strangers lurking in the bushes.
In truth, most predators are well-acquainted with their victims, and very few ever get caught or prosecuted. The vast majority of sexual assaults against children — more than 75 percent — are committed inside the home, by a family member or another trusted person, like a baby sitter or boyfriend.
“The stranger-danger myth remains way too prevalent,” said Scott Matson, a research associate with the Center for Sex Offender Management in Maryland, established by the United States Justice Department in 1997 to train law enforcement officials.
“People who are subject to notification usually are under some sort of supervision as well, so they’ve got more controls to keep them in compliance,” Matson said.
“In reality, the person who hasn’t been caught yet — like your uncle or your brother or somebody else you know — poses a much higher risk.”
the last paragragh say's it all
Posted by: James | Oct 3, 2005 1:08:02 PM
I live in Iowa where the law makers are going wild and trying to add even more restrictions on where sex offenders may live. I completed 5 years of extremely effective treatment and have a great new productive life. I have learned that stability and sense of purpose is a leading factor in not re-offending.
I still go to group meeting to help others in their treatment. What I have seen are many people living in motels at $600/mn while working $7/hr jobs. They are there because they had to move out of their homes. Finacial stress is a major issue with many offenders. It is possible that in trying to make the world safe by forcing offenders to move, that, legislators could be actually making the offenders more at risk.
We learn to recognize when we approach an offense cycle and we take steps to move away from it. I can see where many offenders may become so frustrated that they give up doing what they know to be right and safe methods of living. This is called the Abstinence violation effect. It is when a person throws in the towel because they feel that they just cant succeed.
Lets make the community a safer place and follow the direction that the 8th Judicial District in Iowa pursues. They are extremely aggressive with treatment and have no tolerance for infractions. But, I can speak from experience: THEY GET RESULTS.
Don't blindly banish us from your communities. We can be taught. We can be vital and productive members of society. Thank You
Posted by: Daniel | Oct 29, 2005 3:01:48 AM
i'm sorry for the poor grammar and puncuation but i am a 19 year old now being charged for statutory rape i don't understand it at all i've been on the net for hours at a time looking as much as possible.. but i was hoping for a point in the direction of what will happen - the girl said she was 15 but in reality was 13 i couldn't tell the age diffrence and i read mistake is not defense.. but if she lied is that defense? i was 18 at the time.. please respond asap thank you
Posted by: Help me out please | Nov 7, 2005 3:09:48 PM
I live in Iowa too, I am a sex offender, and I was, convicted of touching a 13 year olds private parts and I served 2 years for indecent contact with a child.
I never did touch her and it was her word against mine and I was on the losing side.
In the State Of Iowa, registered sex offenders are two tenths of one percent on the population and the City of Des Moines was the first city to add to the 2000-foot restriction. Registered Sex Offenders cant live with in 2000 feet of a school or a state registered daycare center and now parks, libraries, and trails and the suburbs fallowed suite and now towns like Garrison and Elly who have no schools or daycare centers added swimming pools and bus stops.
So what is a person supposed to do? A sex offender turned himself in the Des Moines Police Department because he could not find a place to live. He is facing 2 years for a restriction violation, (he had one year left on his 10-year registry), and when he out he has to register for another 10 years.
That is l bunch of crap
In the North Central Iowa Town I live in, they have not yet to begin enforcing the 2000-foot law yet. Threes no housing in the areas I can live in. Therefore, I have to move to another town. What is a low-income person to do?
Mr. Kreirman is the co-chair of the judicial committee said on one of the local news broadcasts “
"I’m not sympathetic to if they're living where they don't want to and it's inconvenient to them," and other state lawmaker said,” There is plenty of housing available it may not be convenient but there is” my question is where is this housing? When you have farmers tearing down farmhouses for more ground so they can have more crop production. Cities buying up all the housing in areas that sex offenders can live in. All I am trying to do is find a place to live and stay with in the law.
I wonder if state lawmakers and the State Of Iowa willing to help pay the moving expenses and all deposits of low income sex offenders who have to move. Are there grants available for those who are poor? Landlords can refuse housing if they know that you are a registered sex offenders and HUD low income housing projects, forget them, I didn’t get the apartment because of my criminal record. In the rejection letter in part it said” If you feel that your needs change you may reapply.”(The question is, my needs have changed and if I reapplied I would still be rejected because of my record. is not this discrimination? In addition, discrimination is illegal. It is right.
I thought that lawmakers were supposed to protect Iowa citizens from being victims and against discrimination.
As I see it, you are discriminating against sex offenders and that is illegal?
Is housing declination illegal as well? Even with a criminal record?
Do you realize that you victimizing all registered sex offenders? I know that is not the intention of the law but that is exactly what is happening. In addition, all of the people I talked to said that this law is a feel good law and it is a law enforcement nightmare.
There is no law in the Iowa Code that prohibits registered sex offenders to sit in front of day care centers and schools and parks, Malls, and anywhere children gather. In addition, there are no laws that prevent sex offenders to sit in a park and look at children
There is no law on the books that state registered sex offenders cannot go and swim at a public swimming pool or a public beach at a lake.
Did you know that 90% of the sexual abuse occurs in the home not in schools or stranger accosting a 13-year-old girl?
I am doing my best to obey the law and keep my nose clean, but there are always bad apples in the barrel, like Roger Bentley and his brother. Roger is set to go to trial because he molested Jetseta Gadge a 10-year-old girl for 3 years and his brother killed and raped her because she was going to testify against his brother. Now that is one low life sick SOB and because of them they are making it hard for the rest of us who are trying to stay out of trouble.
Now because of there two so called men a registered sex offender cannot move in with a single parent even if it is a male and if you are splitting expenses and if you are caught then you are looking at child endangerment charges. There is an Ankeny Iowa couple who took in a homeless sex offender and the county Attorney was considering child endangerment charges against the parents but none was filed and the sex offender is in jail on a restriction charge because he did not report a change of address yet, but there is a loophole in this law.
If you marry a single mom and then move in with her there is nothing that they can do.
Well Ill get off my soapbox and this is whats bugging me and I still think it is line of crap.
Posted by: Kevin | Nov 8, 2005 11:17:47 AM
hello all my name is yazzie,im a spiritual leader in my comunity here in iowa.i happend to think that these new laws set us back 200 years.why dont we just make an island for them like they did the lepords.sex offendors are human.i know that some have very bad thoughts and what they did is not justified,but i think the parents have a lot to play in the abuse of their children.we cant even go to the mall with out seeing young girls looking like hookers and there mom and dad walking with them like if their,their pimps as far as keeping them away from schools.HA!this is just another way for the goverment to prove to us that we really are not free people.Makes no sence a convicted sex offendor can go right into a school and if there not on porole any longer can pick up there little brother or sister.they can attend every holiday party and ball game even shaparon activities as long as there not on probation.and not once do they have to tell us that they are sex offendors.just recently i went to a confrance
for the boy scouts and lord and behold one of the speakers there is a convicited sex offendor i noticed this beacuse the man lived in my neighborhood it was good that I knew who he was but now with this new law he had to move so!!where is he at!!well the sheriff department says he lives under a bridge.conclusion:He lives under a bridge no one knows what bridge so now he can leagaly go to boy scouts functions as a speaker or into a school to a holloween party but the scariest thing for me is not knowing who he is beacuse the goverment forced him too move so now none of us truly knows where he is lurking.thank you goverment once again you put every one in danger including sex offendors beacuse you want to make a point for the few that rather see these people on the street then know exacly where there at and who they play with...
Posted by: yazzie ravenhiar | Nov 9, 2005 6:01:23 PM
hello daniel 19 year old im sorry to hear what is happening to you but all i can say is be prepared your going to prison.So plese let it sinck in I say this not to be mean but this country yuou live is great with wich hunting people, first the indian people then the blacks in the 60's and 70's all the way up till now the sex offendors sorry kid that is america..no one cares if you are young every one is painted with the same brush the word sex crime comes into court and your atomaticly guilty,regardless of your ages or consent my mother was 13 when she had me my father was 27 if this happend now my father who is a great man and has provided for us his hole life would be in prison.I hope u beat your case but unlikley no matter if she consented the law says your still guilty of a very normal human feeling.So now are fellings will be judged in court aw our great country.well kid stay strong and when u get to prison remember no one there is your friend..good luck ill prqay for you and all the people that have really done nothing wrong except love someone.NOw for the truly peverted idiots out there all I have to say is Irather now exacly where you at then keep gusing what bridge u live under so i agree with yazzie thank you america for making it a much dangerous place for us...
Posted by: martha | Nov 9, 2005 6:22:01 PM
Please note the way they place the name below the line and it looks like it goes with the following article. Please dont email me thinking i'm the 19 year old. I'm the one above that article. Thanks
Posted by: Daniel | Nov 21, 2005 3:52:38 AM
sir my name is robert seymour i live in massachusetts i am having trouble finding work i use to work at a pizza hut here in mass the town newspaper wrote an article about me and then a couple days later i was fired the reason was that i lied on my application so since then i cannot find a job i write on applications that i am a level 3 sex offender no one wants to give you a chance in society what can i do
Posted by: robert seymour | Dec 15, 2005 11:35:54 AM
I am a registered sex offender in Illinois. I was convicted of criminal sexual assualt of family and served four years in state prison. It is obvious I have a problem with sex and young girls. I have been going to sex offender treatment for six months now. It is up to me to stop my behavior and be a productive citizen of this great nation. I really want to be the best I can be for the sake of children and all people. The more strict laws become, the more frustrated I become. I say to myself, "whats the use, my sincerity is of no avail". Even as I change, people will push me away the rest of my life labeling me and making my life miserable. I know what I did was sick. I know I needed to be punished. But the rest of my life? Is there an end to punishment for doing such acts? I wanted to go to sex offender treatment to ensure I will never commit such acts again. How am I to be a productive citizen if the law inhibits my progress. Another words, how am I going to get back into the mainstream of society if I am not allowed in without severe Persecution for life. I made my life miserable. But, I regret making my family members miserable. I cannot undo what I did, but I can redo my values and morals to live productively, or am I allowed too? What happened to life and liberty to all? Sex offenders cannot be reinstated into the main fabric of society, even if they try. Where is the rest of my bill of rights? I will never look upon them again. They have been erased from existance. If I repent, whome will forgive? Only one will do this, GOD. I am not a repeat sex offender. If I were, than the law would be justifiable. I would have proved my sickness to be verifiable and would deserve greater punishment. What I am trying to say is, I am being punished for what people think I might do in the future rather than what I actually did in reality. If people start punishing for what they might do, than everyone on GODS earth would be punished leaving knowone to Persecute. Everyone has sinned on earth and have had terrible thoughts. The difference is I acted out my thoughts. Is this because I had opportunity and others did not. (as of yet) This would make everyone guilty of what people might do and need punishment and treatment! Everyone has had thoughts of sexual immorality. It is a psychological fact. The more people persecute sex offenders, the more likely they will not Succumb too treatment and care about others. The laws, in my opinion, are unconstitutional of GODS law and federal and state law.
GOD BLESS---DO NOT OFFEND ANYONE FOR ANY REASON!!!!! Grace be unto you!
Posted by: John Schott | Jan 2, 2006 4:29:38 PM
Life and Liberty to all? Did you think about that when you sexually assaulted? You want all the rights that law abiding citizens have- and your request is after you ruined some innocent girls life. There's where part of the problem is-you are not deserving of any peace or happiness -the girl you offended has no peace- she will never be the same- she will never feel total peace so what makes you deserving of any? And yes we need all the laws we can get to protect our children from men like you in the future. You will reoffend- that is a given- no cure!
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 3, 2006 5:15:59 PM
Samantha that sex offender you speak of should have never been let out of prison. That's something that surely needs to be changed. I have the same problem in my neighborhood. If you notice most of the posters on here are sexual offenders or someone that knows a sexual offender. They don't see the horrific damage they have done. They suffered none-except in getting caught. Apparently the thought of getting caught was'nt enough for these men not to offend. We are passing an ordinance in our city that keeps them from living close to where children gather. I don't care if it's a child predator or a family member that offended-the pain is the same to these victims. There is no place in our society for these kinds of animals. Our children should come first. These children hurt forever so why should'nt the offender pay the price forever!
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 4, 2006 1:03:05 PM
Okay, child advocate, I agree with you that the children should ALWAYS come first. But what happens when an INNOCENT MAN is convicted of this and he ends up a registered sex offender for something he really did not do? Are you saying that its IMPOSSIBLE for someone to really be innocent of this? I am talking about FALSE ALLEGATIONS usually against the dad in custody battles with a vengeful ex. Believe me, it happens. Alot.
All we can do on these sites is take each other at our words, as we do not know each other. But I am telling you that I personally know of a man who is a "registered sex offender" and he really is innocent. He was accused in the midst of a custody battle and his life has been ruined ever since. He will never see his small children again, and he is not allowed to live with his new wife and their children either. He recently took and passed a polygraph test and that still isn't good enough. All of their lives were ruined.
All I am saying is that there are some innocent people who are "sex offenders".
I hope you all can see that not everything is always as it seems.
Posted by: Elizabeth | Jan 7, 2006 3:19:47 AM
Elizabeth, I am sure there are people falsely accused and that is very troubling. He apparently did'nt have a good lawyer or the evidence was overwhelming against him. I don't know his story. But we can't put him in another catergory of sex offenders. There is not one for those that are convicted but proclaim their innocense. Most of them say they are innocent even when the evidence is overwhelming. I am sorry if he was convicted falsely but I still - because of his conviction would not want him around my children. They always come before a convicted sex offender.
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 7, 2006 5:03:29 PM
I do understand what you are saying and I have children too and I would not want to be living next door to a sex offender. This is so hard what I am trying to say...UGH!! What happened to the man I speak of was wrong, but you are right, the children come first. And its hard for the innocent men that really were convicted wrongfully. In this man's case, you are right, he had a horrible lawyer. And he ran out of money. You have no idea how much a trial like this could cost. He didn't have the money. So he pleaded it out. It was either that or take a chance that he could end up in prison for life for something he truly did not do.
Look at the Bakersfield, CA cases. Those parents spent YEARS in prison for crimes against their kids that they didn't commit. Recently, a judge reversed the convictions based on the now adult children coming forth and testifying how they were brainwashed over 18 years ago by corrupt social workers, DA's, and police.
I know it is better to be safe, but its also unfair to the innocent.
Posted by: Liz | Jan 7, 2006 5:59:13 PM
I agree with you Liz. Any mother that would falsely accuse a man of sexual abuse is a pretty sorry excuse for a mother. It puts all the ones that truley have been abused in a bad light when they go for help. I hope if your friend is innocent he can find some justice.
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 7, 2006 7:27:15 PM
Thank you for your kind response.
I hope one day he will get justice, too.
I know God sees all things and He knows this man was innocent and one day, in His own timing, justice will be served.
Until then, we have to wait and trust in the Almighty Judge.
Posted by: Liz | Jan 9, 2006 10:14:48 PM
Finally released from the damning sex offeder list after being on it for 10 years just days ago. Convicted of Child porn over 12 years ago. I had sent an email containing only words. It was preceived to be CP under new laws. Yes it was wrong. What was more wrong was how my family was put thru hell because of my mistake. These laws are crap. Live near this or that. If a person is going to do those activities where does it matter where he lives? 500 feet? Guess he or she could walk 501 feet. Or drive. These laws are simply Big Brother in action and are cutting into the basic rights of every citizen whether they believe it or not. Illinois just added arsonist list. I'd sure like to know where the politicians live. THey are the true dangers. These laws DO NOT PROTECT ANYONE!!!!
Simply a flag for jerks to run commercials and pretend they actually did something to get re-elected and others to have a false sese of security. It's also a total violatioon of the US constitution I don't give a damn what some judge wants to preceive and explain it. I was added 2 years aftef my conviction. Life , Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It's basic to the constitution. You can't have it when one is daily, or weekly harrased because his name address and photo is plastered across the world. THank God I'm done with it at least to the pointy that I'm no longer a registered sex offender because I wrote some stupid crap and posted it 13 years ago. And especially my family whom also suffered.
Posted by: John | Jan 18, 2006 6:49:29 PM
John, how can you be released from registering as a sex offender? Megans Law requires an offender to register for life -no exceptions. As far as the residency ordinances-they would keep sex offenders pretty much out of our cities (not just 500 feet away as you said)depending on the size and how many places are there were children gather. In our city there would be 2 houses they could live in. That's just the price they pay for being a sex offender and for us as parents to protect our children a little better. When Jessicas law takes effect through out the country-they will spend a mandatory 25 years in prison on the first offense. Longer prison terms -now that's the answer!
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 22, 2006 8:11:27 PM
Megan's law is for the birds. Go join big brother CA. You are obviously a certified fruit seller. Lock you up is the obvious answer.
Posted by: John | Jan 27, 2006 6:28:58 PM
This is such a double edge sword. Yes I think that there are some very dangerous people out there. But there is also alot of people (mostly men) being accused and convicted for something they didnt do. Due to the accused crime they are presumed guilty untill proven inoccent and not the reverse even if there is no evedince other than one's word agaist another.
My husband went through a very nasty nasty divorse and his ex wife thought that she could gain monatarily and make sure that he had no vistiation rights to his daughter if she made a false allegation that he had sexually molested his daughter.
My husband ended up going through a hours of painstaing investagation, spent ungodly amounts of money on a lawyer for his defence and when he ran out of money had to get a public defender to repersent him in court who completly rolled over for the distrist attorney and let him fry, and all the evedince that my husband had in his was never presented in court and couldnt be used in his appeal. My husband was sent to prison for 3 years and innocent man and now might as well have a scarlet letter branded on him for the rest of his life.
Fortunally he has a good job and has a promotion coming to him if he can move to where they new job is, however we have now spent a year of our lives trying to move from one state to another and because of the Witch hunting that is going on in this country he has been unable to further his career.
I have missed out on a year with my husband as I had to move first to establish resedency in the new state so it would be even possible for him to move. All to find out that after all is said and done and my husband meets all requrements to be able to transfer to the new state we have now been told that he can not only not move here but he cant even come here to visit me or on bussiness which is neccessary for his job.
IM not saying by any means everyone is inoccent and that we shouldnt protect our children cause in fact we do, but we also need to remember that there are alot of inoccent people being caught up in this mess because we so often act before thinking of the consqueses and repocussions.
Thanks for listening.
Posted by: wifeofinoccentdad | Jan 27, 2006 9:59:32 PM
aww John such anger. You put yourself in this situation but you don't want to pay the price. Typical reaction of a child sex offender. You made my case. Thanks John.
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 30, 2006 4:04:58 PM
These residency laws are not about keeping the sex offender from living where ever. It's about giving children a safe place to live free of sexual offenders. I don't think that's asking too much. The child is the innocent one. They deserve to be safe. They shouldn't have to be the ones to move away from their homes because of sexual predators. Why should the victims and the innocent always have to pay the price of the offender? IF WE DON'T STAND UP FOR CHILDREN, THEN WE DON'T STAND FOR ANYTHING.
Posted by: child advocate | Jan 30, 2006 11:29:44 PM
I just read all the posts. What is soooo very sad it the fact that many people aren't thinking about all the consequenses with these sex offender laws.
Now that the door is open to the constitutional fact, most all will soon end up on some kind of registry.
Some states are considering a registry for domestic violence, guns, meth labs, DUI or OUI's , robberies, etc.
Their stance is that if the sex offender stood the muster so will the others.
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Posted by: susan | Feb 1, 2006 1:05:56 PM
I'm not quite sure what is left to debate. If you don't want to end up on a registry don't break the law. We have let criminals get away with so much over the years and now that something is being done about it to inform the offenders react by screaming their rights are being infringed upon. Don't break the law and you won't have to worry about your name being put on a list. That should be the least of your worries.
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 1, 2006 4:04:03 PM
Of course it is easy to say, "Don't break the law", but how many citizens haven't broke the law sometime in their life? Even if was as simple as parking ticket.....
Posted by: Susan | Feb 2, 2006 2:06:44 PM
Now Susan- getting a parking ticket is a far cry from being a child molester and if they want to put me on a list for getting a parking ticket -I could care less. Why people find it so hard to do whatever it takes to protect children is beyond me.
Posted by: shirl | Feb 2, 2006 3:07:42 PM
I 100% believe you and agree with you and I want you to know you are not alone in what happened to you and your husband.
It is a double edged sword, isnt it? I also agree that as a mom I dont want to be living next door to a sex offender, but MY husband went through the same thing yours did in a custody battle with his ex.
He also has to register for the rest of his life for something he never did. I would have never believed something like this could happen, if it didnt happen to us first-hand.
But it is like I said, there is an Almighty Judge that will punish those who falsely accused and ruined our lives, just like He will punish the ones who ruined you and your husband's lives.
And one day justice will be served.
Like I said, you are not alone.
Posted by: Lizzy | Feb 2, 2006 11:27:04 PM
Child Advoacate lets get real. You are a certified nut case.If you are accused od bieng a child molester and are cleared of the charges, people will not forget it. Look how many teachers have quit teaching because pepole have "labeled" a child molester and it wasnt true.
Not all sex offenders are lookin to reoffend but with the new residency laws are pushing sex offenders unnderground. There was a subcommittee meting at the capital in Oct and Nov of 2005. 2005 Interim Committee Briefing
Sexual and Other Criminal Offenses, Criminal Penalties, and Sentencing Practices Study Committee And it was about the 2000 foot law and other guidlines.Mr. Mark Smith, Office of the State Public Defender. Mr. Smith suggested that an exception to the 2,000-foot residency restriction should be created for offenders currently under supervision. He stated that the offender is already being supervised, which adds a level of protection for the community.
Co-chairperson Horbach asked whether a local board should determine if a sex offender can reside within the 2,000-foot residency restriction. If a local board is going to determine whether an offender can reside within 2,000 feet of a school or child care facility, the General Assembly must establish the criteria for the board to make their determination, responded Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith also stated that the General Assembly should prohibit local governments from adopting their own 2,000-foot residency restrictions. He noted that the local ordinances in combination with the state law constitute banishment and will most likely be deemed unconstitutional.
Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault (ICASA). Ms. Liz Hoskins, Executive Director of Waypoint in Cedar Rapids, thanked the General Assembly for listening to the voices of crime victims last session. She commented that the 2,000-foot residency restriction is driving some sex offenders underground and it becomes harder to track their movements. She also expressed concern the residency restriction is destabilizing and disrupting the lives of offenders, which makes them more likely to reoffend. She also expressed concern about the new law punishing a parent who lives with a registered sex offender. She stated the law punishes the parent but does not punish the sex offender. Senator Dvorsky commented children are best protected when the entire community is involved and more resources should be directed to local governments and entities involved in protecting children".
I am believe that Iowa became a Taliban state and if Iowa has its way the only place where sex offenders can live is in tents in corn fields. This law is a "feel good law" and if they care for the childern like they say they do then why dont they go after the drug dealers and the pushers that prey on childern?
It is because they are commies and are on the take from the dope dealers and the pushers?
Thanks for listening.
Posted by: Kevin | Feb 17, 2006 2:40:37 AM
I agree with you 200%.....
As the wife of a wrongfully convicted man, I say you are right about the fact that even if one day the charges against him are cleared, and the truth finally comes out, his life is still ruined, no matter what.
But I do see where child advocate is coming from...most people don't realize that the "system" can and does make mistakes and many innocent lives are ruined based on false allegations that are near impossible to overcome.
Child advocate is just looking at this AS IS and I believe she really has the best intentions.
Posted by: Liz | Feb 17, 2006 6:13:39 PM
Now Kevin what's with the name calling? I think you read where I said I'm sure some people are wrongfully accused. I think that's awful. It's ruins their life forever. I know someone that was wrongfully accused also. Turns out it was his son instead of him. He will never be the same because of it. I don't understand why you can't voice your opinion without acting so childish with the name calling. I'm sure one day they will go after the drug dealers too. will that make you happy? Liz I do know that there are innocent people that have been convicted of this crime. I just don't know what is to be done about it. It's very sad. It really is. But do we let the real sex offender have free reign because of the ones that are falsely accused? How do we separate the two.It's a bad situation all the way around. As far as the residency laws --none have been thrown out of court as of yet. They have only been made to go back and refine them as not to go too far past state laws. I know this for a fact because I have studied and followed this for years. These ordinances are popping up everywhere. They will no be overturned as long as people don't restrict them too much.
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 18, 2006 6:25:54 PM
One other thing-if these ordinances make the sex offender go underground and commit more offenses well then he or she didn't need to be free to begin with. That's just an excuse and a poor one I might add. We don't need to tiptoe around a sex offender in the hopes that he won't reoffend. That's a crock.
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 18, 2006 6:36:31 PM
I've been away from the site awhile. I see CA's point in all this. I guess I felt exactly the same way once. But, the false accusation points are a very real issue. And, although we shouldnt have to tip-toe around offenders, if we are to keep the children safe, then, we cannot do anything that ends up hurting them. Are we to say, "oh well, if our actions made that person lose control then they shouldnt have been free in the first place" What about the victim that we could be helping to create by recklessly pushing the offender over the edge?
Also, yes! I am a sex offender. Yes, I commited my offense. I also am rated as NOT at risk to reoffend. But, I'm no fool to think that I couldnt put myself at risk again because I crossed that line before when I didnt think I could.
Now for my point. Sex offenders can be valuble and safe members of society, if taught the skills we need to possess to be a part of society. CA, I do hope you can see that although there is no magic cure for deviant thoughts, it doesnt mean we are all monsters that need driven away. You would be shocked to know who some of us are. You respect us on the street because you cant see our label.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 22, 2006 6:47:09 PM
Daniel, I honestly don't know how to respond to what you said. I do pray that you never reoffend. I wish we knew how to keep SO's from reoffending. There is no easy answer. And no I'm never surprised at who a sex offender is. We recently had a dentist in our area convicted of child porn. His victims were his little patients. That's why my kids never went in any doctors office alone. Everyone should be considered a threat. It's terrible to have to live that way but that's life. I really don't ever see this issue being solved. It's scary is all I can say.
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 22, 2006 7:29:21 PM
I met so many different types of offenders during my 5 years in treatment. I would guess that 10-20 per cent would never have been given the opportunity to take part in treatment on the street, as opposed to being incacerated, if the treatment staff could have known what some of these people were really like. They were given a chance, but, sometimes people just need to be removed from society. I would guess another 50 per cent were arrested and revoked for violations such as curfew, drugs, alcohol, having sex without being in an approved relationship, ( I spend 30 days in jail for spending the night with my girlfriend ). That might sound bizarre, but, it taught me not to act on impulse, which is how most offenders cross the line.
I do hope that offenders and people, such as yourself, will be able to eventually find a workable solution, but, I don't see it happening. It was just my experience that the majority of offenders refuse to even try to change. I don't mean to sound like a traitor to the rest of you, BUT, WE MUST OWN UP TO THE FACT THAT WE CREATE OUR OWN TROUBLES. It is not a conspiracy of COMMIES, or what ever. No, I don't feel the current trend in legislation is fair, BUT, if we act immature and lash out at "BIG BROTHER", then how can we earn any consideration?
Quite honestly, few offenders ever accept full responsibility for their offenses. It's not about being persecuted by the legal system or being saved by religion and being a new person. It is about EMPATHY and a search for how we were able to offend. Both sides can educate and understand the other. Perhaps if offenders in general would be more sincere in their efforts to never reoffend, then maybe, the other side would offer their help. AND, we must have their help to succeed. We can't be a part of society without them.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 22, 2006 11:43:15 PM
After talking to a few people that council sex offenders I've learned from them that there is no cure. They say sex offenders just have to learn how to avoid situations where they could reoffend. I was wondering if you agreed with that Daniel?
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 23, 2006 12:24:30 AM
Yes, of course I agree. We learn to recognize when we get into our deviant cycle. It can have a very subtle beginning, but, one thing builds on another until the misperceptions( such as being victimized by "BIG BROTHER"),feeling of rejection, and defective thinking all occur and we form a distorted view of reality. It is different for all of us. Non-deviant people get into other sorts of unhealthy behavioral cycles, such as compulsive shopping or gambling, ect. I'm not trying to say they are the same. We get into these mindsets and create secret lives where we are "in charge" and we then de-humanize people so that we can victimize them and not see them as a real person. It is a very cold and unsympathetic process. Our goal is to know when we start to drift into these patterns and run like hell away from them. It isnt always easy because they start with thoughts and feelings and it is so easy to entertain thoughts and justify them by saying they are only thoughts and can't hurt anyone.
The offenders that are pointing fingers at anything other than themselves need to make damn sure they are not already getting into a deviant cycle.
Well, I got to go to work now. I was able to get and keep a very well paying job. It wasnt easy, but, we can succeed if we want to.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 23, 2006 7:17:03 AM
I do commend you Daniel for keeping yourself in check.
Posted by: child advocate | Feb 23, 2006 6:48:52 PM
Well I just spent about 30 minutes reading of these entries...and all I can say is that I am SO glad that people are at least talking about this issue. I don't even know where to start...my life has been flipped up and over so many times that I really can't even make heads or tails out of practically anything anymore. I'm educated...I have a management degree. I'm 29. I was at a party when I was 25 and hooked up with a girl who was there too, drinking and smoking in an adult environment. Neither of us was wasted but I was definitely buzzing a little, and we ended up sleeping together. She was underage. I found that out the next day when I told the hosts of the party (my friends) and found out it was one of the host's (little sister). I felt like the absolute scum of the earth. It was totally consentual, I didn't coerce this girl or anything...she was all about it and it went down. Still when I found out that she was...14...it was like the worst guilt that I person could ever feel. The girl who was having the party (my age) really liked me...and told their dad who was...a cop. It took a year to go through the courts. through the courts. I hired an attorney, was indicted, and took the plea. (A side note...I was also originally charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, but about 6 months into it, that charge was placed onto the host of the party (the girl's older sister) since it was their party. Her boyfriend also received the same charge. Both charges were dismissed when I pled) Anyway, this is where it gets interesting. I was sentenced as a "first offender." I received 10 years probation, was ordered to attend counseling
("treament") and the most important part of the plea was that I would NOT have to register. Georgia code at the time specifically stated that "people sentenced under the first offender act will not have to register." I got on with my life. I bought a house. I had a great job. Then, they just decided to change the law and make all the people under first offender register. A month later someone spotted me on the registry and I was fired. Cops come to my house to "check up" on me now. I put so much time into this house...painting, finishing the basement, everything. I settled in to this community and made lots of friends. When I told people what was up, I actually received letters of support from people. Now they are changing the law again and things are about to get worse...again. OK I know that's not a short story to read, but that's still the pretty condensed version. The thing that is most maddening...and I mean like going crazy maddening...about all of this is when I read things like "they should be locked up forever...they do it again and again...these monsters...we must protect the children." I couldn't hurt a child. I don't have a problem with children and I sure as hell don't want to sleep with them. Yet...I'm up on that website now and when some lady like "child advocate" sees my picture up there all she thinks is "get out of my city you monster child raper!" Add that to the fact that my house is going into loss mitigation, my once 700+ credit score is now almost in the 400's, nobody will hire me, then you can add on what I just went through today. My probation got transferred to another office. The new guy wants to subject me to a curfew, charge me money to report, and although all of my roommates (who are also my friends, who moved in with me when I lost my job to help me pay for the house) are over 21, since I own the house, there is not to be one drop of alcohol on the premises, and yes, he will be coming, frequently. Keep in mind that the original intent of the sentence I received was not to have to go through any of this. It wasn't a slap on the wrist either. I reported to probation, never missed a day of counseling, paid for all of it. So why am I posting this? I am going to just go ahead and say something that will probably enrage a lot of you: I AM looking for sympathy. Yes it was a really, really stupid thing to have done, and perhaps I altered that girl's life forever. I'll never know because I was barred by law from having any contact with her. All I can do is hope that what happened between us didn't totally wreck her forever, say, in the way having a 40-something year old man grab an 8 year old and sodomize her over a period of days. You may say "it's not the same thing though" but the problem is that when people like "child advocate" look on the sex offender website, they see the same thing, because the registry is not only extremely punitive in its own right, but discriminatory within itself. Add to that the fact that the government and media don't just allow, but actually encourage outright discrimination against anyone on the list and hopefully you can see that there really is a problem here. Unfortunately, it's not really a problem that anyone wants to hear about, because at the end of the day, who really gives a *hit about a "sex offender". And around and around we go...
for more information please check out my website
Posted by: JohnTheGuitaristDotCom | Feb 25, 2006 7:34:06 AM
John, First of, I do sympathize with you. As far as child advocate having had a preconcieved opinion about offenders, this is why we need to communicate back and forth. It will help them to see us as we are and not as what many of them imagine. I felt the same way about sex offenders. I had the "hang'em all" attitude. Then, I became one. It was the lowest and most shameful thing I have ever felt. I havent explained my single offense that I committed when I was 36. I think people think I was minimizing my offense if I did. And so, I just have to let their imaginations dream up what ever they do.
It is definitely frustrating to find yourself placed in a category with people that make your stomach turn. And, it is unreal the way our lives can be destroyed because we are all treated as if we are the same. I'm sorry I can't say that its all a bad dream and it will all be O.K., but, I went through 5 years of serious supervision. The no alcohol rule is very important though. Although I have never been much of a drinker, we just don't need more issues that can cause trouble in treatment or supervision. In fact, when a person makes a stink about not being able to do some of the things that free people get to do and say there's no law against it, it makes the treatment staff wonder why it's an issue with you if you say you don't have problems in that area.
Drop me a line at my email if you want by clicking on my name at the end of my post. Everyone is welcome to write. I would like to see if we can get everyone talking and understanding eachother. The ONLY RULE IS THIS. You can complain and share feelings and opnions, BUT, ALWAYS BE HONEST. As offenders we must be honest and not misrepresent ourselves in any way. If we are not 100% honest, we can never gain any understanding.
Thanks for posting here, I really wish more offenders would.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 26, 2006 2:14:15 AM
I'm not saying that it's just me that can't drink. The people that are renting rooms from me are all over 21, and they are not allowed to have alcohol in the house. These people helping out with the bills is the only way I am keeping my house right now. It's bad enough for them to have to know that the cops could show up at any minute and mess with them, but now by living here, they can't even keep beer in the fridge.
Posted by: JohnTheGuitaristDotCom | Feb 26, 2006 10:06:37 AM
It is easy to only see how our offense impacts our life. But, along with how we impact our victim's life forever, we also affect our families, co-workers, the people in the legal system that have to put up with us, the tax payers, the citizen's that get more afraid to walk the streets everytime they hear about us. I could go on , but, the point is that it isnt about us. We get the chance to be in treatment, but, although it is to help us, it is actually to help society be safe with us in their midst.
Many people get hung up on the hoops we HAVE to jump through. Hey, if I were a free citizen, I would demand proof that an offender is safe to be walking the streets. Since there is no proof, then, we must conform to very strict rules and be severely punished when we break them.
Question: Will the curfew and no alcoholor bar rules lessen your chance of staying out all night and going home with someone you just met? If so, you start to learn not to de-value sex or to use another person for sex. Even if they are adults and consent. Sometimes habits that arent illegal just arent healthy and the attitudes contribute to what we eventually do. We need to strive to live by higher standards than those that judge us, because, we are at risk for deviant behavior and we need to have more checks in place. We just have to be more careful about what we do.
It isnt about the unfairness to you or your roommates that are just trying to help you out. It is about society and large and not having anymore victims.
Also, I think if you really look deep enough, you will see that you did know or suspect the girl was underage. We cant play niave when we are adults.
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 26, 2006 12:07:25 PM
You might also consider that you were at a house party with alcohol and you had a victim. Then, you want to be able to have alcohol in your house? I don't think so.
I, myself, am attracted to girls that age. It would be an extreme risk for me to be in the situation you were in. A person has to know their risk areas and never fool themselves about them. Simply put, if you had sex with a minor, then you wanted to and you are attracted to them. You cant justify it or pretend it was a fluke, because, flukes just dont happen. Just give it some thought, you will feel more guilt when you admit that you knew what you were doing, but, it is the first step. And, alcohol is no excuse for one's actions. Sorry to sound harsh. I really don't mean to. Just, it is about so much more than just us. Thanks
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 26, 2006 12:15:34 PM
this law is crazy. Im not for one side or the other, but i am for the notion that if you get punished by a court in america then once you finish that punishment you should be free. The registries to me seem like probation for people that have served their sentences. I think most people on the registries are consensual relationships and one time offenders. If a guy in his late teens or early 20s has a relationship with a minor it is probably out of immaturity. I dont think if the guy gets in trouble for that then he will be willing to risk jail again just for that. I would estimate that maybe as much as 65 to 70 percent of the people on the registries are on there for this type of offense. i think it confuses the community with an overload of people they have to look out for when it isnt necessary.
Posted by: mike | Feb 27, 2006 7:28:14 PM
John and Daniel:
I do agree with some of the things you have been saying and John I do sympathize with you on some things but I do have to remind you, and I am not trying to be harsh, believe me I'm not, but honey you DID break the law. I know you didn't have the intention to have sex with a minor but you did. AND alcohol was more than likely a contributing factor. So you probably should NOT be drinking, as it clouded your judgement in the past and led to your life being turned upsidedown. And if your friends are truly your friends, they will abide by the "no alcohol" restriction on your household.
I do believe you that you are not attracted to children in the sense of prebubecent children but the fact remains that you did something stupid and yes, you are going to have to comply with all the restrictions that is put on you.
John, I am not trying to be mean but you have to at least admit that when it all boils down, you broke the law.
And child advocate has also posted, if you have read her posts that she also is open-minded to the fact that some men are 100% innocent and falsely accused. I am married to such a man and he did NOT IN ANY WAY molest any children. He was falsely accused in a custody battle with his ex-wife and her mother. That happens alot believe it or not. But, see the difference between you and my husband is that you DID have sex with a minor, even though I believe you didn't set out to do it, and I also believe you are not a danger to small children but at least you cant say you were falsely accused like my husband was.
I just wanted to make that point and to let you know that not all people think that sex offenders are "monsters" as you thought you were labled.
And to tell you to hang in there, things will get better for you eventually.
I'll pray for you cuz I know you are hurting and angry and frusterated.
Posted by: Liz | Feb 28, 2006 3:59:14 AM
Thank you Liz. I know there a lot of people that get falsely accused. It happens a lot. And, I know that the charges filed and the expense of legal fees pretty much force a person into pleading to something they didnt do. Then, after they plead, only then do they find out what they're in for and what a mess the false accusation will make of their lives. I wish there were some way to punish those that do the false accusing, but, if there is, it must not be very harsh. As convicted sex offenders, we live in daily fear that we will be falsely accused of a second offense. we know that we have no credibility and they courts will assume we are guilty a second time.
It is good to know that not all people see us all the same. It is hard to try to plead our case since many of us have lost our voting rights. I am still trying to get mine back.
As to what Mike said. I would guess those percentages are close, but, most of the people I knew that had sex with teenagers were 30-45 when they did. Although there are many 18-20 that do this, innocently, the older ones are preying on youth and innocence. They use their dating experience to fool the teenager who doesnt know the difference between genuine words and B.S..
Posted by: Daniel | Feb 28, 2006 10:01:01 AM
Thanks for your comments. I didn't respond immediately because I really wanted to think about what has been said for a little while. I appreciate your compassion, thoughts and prayers though. I really do. At least I know that I am a little justified in feeling this way. That is the only semblance of a glimmer of hope that I have right now. I think the 2 previous posters do make some good points, and I can see where they are coming from. I guess there really isn't any solution to this except to just hold on and hope for the best. I do know, however, that it is one of our (as Americans) basic rights that you're not supposed to get raked over the coals by the legal system multiple times for the same instance of breaking the law, which yes, I know, I did. That's the part that I have a hard time with and it will probably irk me till the day I die. Arriving at that juncture (which I hope nobody here who has never broken the law ever has to do) where your fate is being decided by the judicial system is probably the most stressful and daunting thing that a pesron can go though. For that whole year between arrest and court date, my senior year in college nonetheless, I was terrified 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I didn't know what was going to happen. When it all came down, I thought that I had done the honorable thing, and trusted my attorney and the court when they told me that "if I do this...then I will get this in return." I did everything they asked, and they screwed me anyway. Even though I did break the law, there is a reason people are protected, as part of their constitutional rights, from getting nailed over and over for the same thing. It's cruel. First I was forced to register, then I lost my job, then the cops starting coming to my house, now I'm expected to live under this new set of more stringent rules. I did it right...I was on the right path. I proved to myself, really for the first time since my mom died, that I could flourish and succeed. My dad was proud. I'm an only child so that meant a lot to me. I don't want to have to start selling all my stuff on ebay. I don't want to have to sell my house. After having so much happen in the last few months, I guess I'm just scared to death of what might happen next, or where I am going to find the stamina to deal with it. I know I will make it through this, though. I guess that's just the kind of person that I am. I do hope that I was able to offer some perspective on the general perception of "sex offenders" though.
Posted by: JohnTheGuitaristDotCom | Feb 28, 2006 1:41:24 PM
Your right john. Its ridiculous. To think that you take a plea bargain and get lied to by the courts. What gets me is that the supreme court says the registry is not punishment. This to me is about as close to probation as you can get. And when they give you probation it is a punishment right. If they were honest they would have said...yes it is punishment and fall under ex post facto..but that would be unpopular with the public right?
Posted by: mike | Feb 28, 2006 2:40:45 PM
Please don't try and play the victim. It's not very becoming!
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 1, 2006 12:40:33 AM
I must say i am pretty impressed with the dialog in this blog. Anyway i did want to add some of my own concerns about statutory rape. I guess the biggest problem i have with statutory rape is that it seems almost too easy to accuse someone of statutory rape. From what i can tell just reading comments from others and all it seems to be that if you even associate with someone below the age of consent and if someone wants to accuse you of staturoy rape all they have to do is mention it and boom the cops will be at your door and you will possibly have a trial on your hands. I just think we need to have some more strict rules on the evidence needed to accuse someone of statutory rape. I really think it should be limited to just a few ways someone can have a cop knocking on thier door. I mean i guess the ways i could justify a cop knocking on someones door would be if someone has maybe actually witnessed someone having sex with someone below the age of consent. Of course if there is physical evidence such as tapes an STD or a pregnacy those are also sutiable evidence of sexual contact. Of course one of the strongest forms of evidence for me would be for the victim to actually come out and say that someone had sex with them. Its kind of hard for me to believe that cases could be brought to court even if the victim said nothing sexual occurred even if there were circumstances where sex could have occured such as the victim and the suspect were alone together. From what i can tell though all it sometimes takes is someone to tell a lie and just say that the suspect was just hanging out with someone under the age of consent and allege they had sex and boom the cops will investigate and if there is enough circumstatial evidence such as being alone together heck maybe even having spent the night together then the suspect will at least get a knock at the door and possibly a trial. As i see it i personally feel it is the victims who should be the ones seeking prosecution not the victim's friends or family. I mean there is pretty much no statute of limitations on rape or at least there are laws coming into effect removing the statute of lmitations from what i have heard. So if the victim at any point in the future feels they were really victimized by someone older than them then they can seek our prosecution at anytime. I can relate a situation that i was in where i could easily have been accused of statutory rape even though no sexual contact ever occured. When i was 20 years old (which was almost 10 years ago for me) i ended up dating someone who was 5 years younger than me. In the state where i lived 18 was the AOC so for a very long time it was a statutory rape situation. We dated for 2 years and i never ever had sex with her. We kissed we held hands but that was about it. Of course her family knew my age and all and they totally were ok with it so at no point did anything bad happen to me but to even think that someone could have just accused me of sexual contact with her is just insane to me. I mean we were alone alot and i mean alot i even spent the night with her sometimes when we would housesit for a friend of ours but at no point did we ever even see each other naked i was very careful about things plus i was a virgin at the time so i was nervous about everything sexual. Also at no point not even to this day would she ever say she was a victim for us dating or hanging out. I dont even think she would have felt victimized had we had sex since we were very much inlove and all and we were in a long term relationship. I mean had we had sex and she had felt she was victimized then i fully support her right to come forward and say she was victimized and i would say that i deserve whatever punishment the law allows. I just say we really need to let the victims be the ones to come forward and seek protection unless there is very specific and strong evidence of wrong doing. If however someone just suspects sexual contact is going on and the victim says there is no sexual contact then the cops shouldnt come to the suspects door and the case should be closed. There shouldnt be alot of manipulating of the victim or the police trying to create a victim. Anyway thats all i have to say about it. Sorry for the tirad there i just have a friend going through a rough time with all this and needed to vent a little.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 1, 2006 2:08:49 AM
Kevin, The statute of limitations in most states on stat rape is 5 years after the victim turns 18. The reason they dont have to be the one to report it is because they are not considered mature enough to give consent until a certain age, which does very from state to state. I don't feel that a 15 y/o knows enough to give consent even if they want to have sex. That is why there are laws in place to protect them when they don't realize they need protected.
As far as the parents being O.K. with it. The laws still protect the child when perhaps the parents don't understand the vulnerability of the child, nor, the damage it can cause a teenager.
When I was 22, I dated a 17 y/o. Thats the youngest I ever dated. Why did you want to date a 15 y/o in the first place? I would have thought the immaturity would have driven you crazy.
Although I agree the laws concerning proof is a little thin, some victims are too afraid to come forward within a time frame where evidence would still exist. If we need hard proof of sexual contact in order to investigate, then, we just open the door wide for offenders because it decreases the chances they will get caught. Most states due provide for high school dating by not pursueing charges if they are within a certain age of eachother.
I agree with CA, some of you guys need to stop and identify the real victims here. Call me a traitor if you want, but, if you don't understand that one basic idea of who got victimized by whom, then, you are still a danger to others and society has the right to be afraid.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 1, 2006 8:44:42 AM
OK I dont quite think i was expecting that. So basically you are saying that every 15 year old that dates a 20 year old is a victim automatically even without having sex with them even when no Statutory Rape occurred. The argument i was trying to make is by allowing alot of circumstancial evidence to bring things to trial without a victim saying sex occurred or without some sort of proof sex occured such as STD pregnacy or video tape or heck even audio tape we are openning the door for this law to be abused. Now yes i guess you can say we all choose who we date and all that but rarely is love such a choosen thing. And just for the record i will state again THERE WAS NO SEX INVOLVED IN THIS RELATIONSHIP. I just think the laws are just a little too aggressive maybe i think there needs to be a more clearer picture of a victim here and i think a 15 year old dating a 20 year old where no sex is involved that the 15 year old is not a victim. Now had her parents wanted to stop us from seeing each other and all that they could have gotten a restrainting order or something like that but of course as i said her parents were complete ok with me and the relationship was a rather normal happy and healthy one and after we broke up she went on to have other happy and healthy relationships. I guess i just feel that a 15 year old and a 20 year old left alone does not automatically mean they are having sex and society shouldnt be allowed to just accuse them of having sex without some sort of proof. To me that is just insane and leaves the doors open for the law to be abused.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 1, 2006 10:33:44 AM
well i think what daniel is trying to say is that if your under 18 you have absolutely no idea of what your doing. Arguments can go both ways..but i do think that some know the difference between right and wrong. Where do you draw the line? Is it right to say a 17 year old who is 30 days away from his/her 18th birthday doesnt not have a clue about life? Lets face it..you cant judge everyone by age alone.
Posted by: mike | Mar 1, 2006 10:44:54 AM
I'm not saying that they are automatically a victim even if no sex happenned. What I'm saying is that a 15 y/o can't give consent to things beyond their maturity level. To say that "love" knows no age restrictions isn't right either, because, the 15 y/o has no concept of the true meaning of that sort of love. I don't think a 20 y/o does either though. As far as the parents consent go. We can't just assume the parents really understand what is right either.
I don't mean to come off as overly zealous or anything. But, do you really think a 15 y/o really understands the dynamics of a sexual relationship? And, I'm not saying that you had sex with her. I'm talking about 15 y/o's in general. May I ask if you two engaged in petting. A person doesnt have to have intercourse for sexual contact to occur.
I guy could date a girl from the time she is 15 till 18, then break up with her, and, have charges filed against him when she is 22. So, all I'm saying is a guy needs to know the laws and be ready and able to face the music if it happens. I'm not saying that is it always fair, but, neither is life. I think a safe approach is that after you graduate high school, go on with an adult life and leave the little kids alone to explore the world with people of their own age group.
I do know it doesnt take much in the way of proof to push a case through the court system, so, it is like the buyer beware idea. If you date a KID, you are setting yourself up for trouble. And, it doesnt matter how sweet and innocent you are. It just isnt a smart move to put yourself in that situation.
I enjoyed being a kid without adults trying to be a part of my intimate life. Let's let the kids today have the same freedom from adult problems and concerns. It's what makes childhood memories special. Let's not ruin or pollute that.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 1, 2006 11:01:55 AM
What in the world is a 20 year old guy doing with a 15 year old girl? If that were my 15 year old daughter you wouldn't have to wait for the police to take care of you -her dad and I would! That's exactly why there are age of consent laws.You just need to learn to obey them. You-Kevin-really concern me. I can still remember being 20 and I could not even imagine hanging out with a 15 year old kid.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 2, 2006 12:13:10 AM
I know I most likely tick some of you guys off, but, I really agree with CA on this one. When you think about a 20 y/o and a 15 y/o, it just doesnt even begin to look right. They are on completely different wavelenghts. If not, then the 20 y/o needs to grow up and quit trying to be a kid. And, there are definetlypeople out there that won't grow up and become adults. I know you said it was all innocent and all, but, it sounds more like being afraid to step into the adult world to me. By that age I was a sgt in the army and was to far from childishness to return and date a little kid.
We can't use excuses ,such as,"they were mature for their age". That is just a way to justify something that we know to be wrong. Remember, if you need to explain it or justify it, then, it is most likely wrong.
We are not kids. And, kids are not adults. Sorry folks, but, there just isnt any gray area here.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 2, 2006 7:09:38 AM
OK CA I do agree with you that if you don't want your 15 yo daughter dating a 20 yo guy then you are completely in your rights to put a stop to it. However I don't agree with you saying the guy had sex with your daughter and charging him with Statutory Rape if no sex ever occurred. There are such things as restraining orders and the such that would likely do the same trick without all the legal mess and putting someone innocent in prison. I just think that saying someone committed statutory rape without proof and for it to go to trial is just insane. As far as me being 20 and dating a 15 yo that happened in the past and while I am not trying to justify it or make it right I am just trying to say that no harm was caused I did not have sex with her did not do any heavy petting with her and never saw her naked. We were both fairly aware of the laws at the time and even if she wasn't capable of adult love as you guys all say she was very capable of caring about me and she cared enough to never put us in a situation where I would get into trouble. I will say at 20 you guys are right I was very immature at the time she was my first girlfriend and the first person I ever kissed (note that we kissed and get your minds out of the gutter it wasn't like this huge make out session like you guys are thinking). Anyway I am not trying to justify 15 yo's having sex with older men or even dating older men as I see it parents have the right until their child is 18 to have absolute control over who their child is dating (no matter what the age of the boyfriend or girlfriend is). I'm just saying the whole statutory rape thing really shouldn't be used without proof that it has occurred there are other options that just aren't so messy. In other words lets not go to extremes unless extremes are actually happening. The feeling i am getting from you guys though is you would instantly say statutory rape and have me arrested charged and convicted without any proof. To me that is just crazy.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 2, 2006 10:38:45 AM
Kevin,You say the 15 year old was careful not to put you in a situation where you would get into trouble? That's the problem Kevin! It's not up to an under aged child to keep you from screwing up. Don't you see that? You were not so innocent. Just from the things you have said-you knew you shouldn't be hanging out with a 15 year old girl because you knew there could be problems but you continued anyway. I have a question? Did the girl say you had sex with her? There had to be some reason you were charged with this.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 2, 2006 12:13:46 PM
OK OK OK i guess i didnt make myself clear at all. I have never and will never be charged with statutory rape. Sorry if i confused anyone on that matter. I was just basically discussing how these laws can be abused since the burden of proof is extremely low. I was simply discussing burden of proof thats all and giving a background on my experience. As i see it for someone to be charged and put to trial for statutory rape there should be proof that sex took place either by witness, STD or pregnancy, or the victim coming forward. The parents shouldnt be able to just assume sex occured and start charging someone with statutory rape when their child says nothing sexual occured. Something like that shouldnt go to trial or anything and the parents should use other means such as restaining orders and the like and the legal system should promote that and not haul off someone to jail just because someone says the person had sex with a minor. Anyway sorry if i ever mislead anyone into believing i was charged with Statutory Rape i just have a friend going through a situation dealing with that now so i am just expressing my views and getting the views from others.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 2, 2006 12:36:41 PM
Sorry Kevin. I misunderstood.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 2, 2006 8:34:49 PM
This might be really long, but I have been posting on another forum. Here's the transcript which will answer a lot of questions. Comments are addressed to me and I have responded:
You were 25, you can see what a child looks like, especially after she speaks. Although you deny it (as offenders are always dishonest) you knew she was a child. You need to be more honest. You really have no excuse as 25 is far to old to be having contact with children in the social sense. You really do not do yourself or offenders in general any favors by describing your situation. You choose to sexually abuse a child and then you want sympathy about how your life is now. You need to take your punishment like an adult.
I guess you hit the nail on the head with that one and that I, like all the other "baby rapers" out there, am just lying. It's not that I don't want to hash this out with you. I really do, but the level of ignorance that you just displayed is so severe that it's just not worth it to me. I've got bigger obstacles to face, such as my state's house majority leader (and Governer) coming out with this nugget:
"We want to make it so tough, that they (sex offenders) are not going to live in Georgia once they are released," Keen said. When asked where sex offenders then would go, he responded: "I'm a state legislator from Georgia. What Alabama, Tennessee and other states do is up to them."
If I could offer one piece of advice though: Don't be so quick to judge. You never know when it might be your turn.
John, that other person was a little harsh (and probably not too bright) with their post, but the basic premise still stands.
I am in my 30's now, and I completely remember being in my 20's in college, going to bars & parties, and trying to get laid. Yes, I admit I had a few one night stands. So I can partially understand where you're coming from.
HOWEVER, I just can't believe that at the age of 25, you couldn't tell a FOURTEEN YEAR OLD GIRL when you saw one. I have a niece that's 14, and she seems like a BABY. And she would seem like a baby if I were 25, and frankly, she would seem like a baby if I were 18!
I do think that you had some idea that this girl was a little young, but you ignored it and went ahead and slept with her anyway. Your story is a little suspect. And I say that based on experience of going to many parties, and hitting on many women. It's just not plausible that you had no idea who this girl was before you slept with her.
I think you need to own up to your responsibility in this situation.
I am not 100% innocent here, that is why I agreed to the plea offer. However, I did not know...for a fact...that she was underage. I could have carded her, but I didn't. The fact that she was partaking in activities (drinking, smoking) that require a person to be of a certain age did impact my judgement. The hosts of the party were not held accountable for that at all. Yes, I was 25, and as much as I am forced to ignore this fact, the recent events in my own life did contribute to the overall state of mind that I was in at the time. It was promiscuous on my part and I'm not a promiscuous person and never was. I won't go into it here, but you can read about it on my site. So...am I just trying to dodge this bullet and minimize the act, or could I actually be driven by a legitimate force of justification? Maybe I don't know and maybe that is why I am putting myself out there like this...posting on messageboards to strangers and whatnot. There are 2 distinct issues at hand here, though. One is my own personal dealing with having broken the law. Yes, I did it and yes it was bad and yes I even owned up to it from the start. The second issue, the one that is really driving my pursuit here, is the fact that I was offered a deal by the law. My case never went to trial because I accepted their deal. The most important part of that deal was that if I did what they said, they would not make me register. That was what the deal was and there was a reason that the "not registering" part was such an important part of that deal. I did everything that was asked of me, and I do not understand how they could come back 2 years later and change their minds. Their reasoning is that it is not considered to be "punishment" to be on the registry. That is what the Supreme Court has said, and that is how it is. This punishment is way too harsh, though. The fact that the most severe part of the punishment, which was specifically promised to me not to happen , was imposed after I had already made major life decisions that would not be sustainable with the burden of registration, is cruel. That is not something that you just "suck up and move on" from...especially when there is no place left to move. Then there's the whole thing about how everyone on the list is considered by most people (thanks to the media and politicians) to be the most vile and dangerous threat to children. The laws that are being created now affect everyone on that list the same way. Before this last round of changes, if you violated any of the numerous, trivial registration requirements (like registering within 10 days, which was also just changed to 72 hours), you could receive up to a year in prison. Now, it's an automatic 10 years to serve. They just included bus stops as places you cannot be or live within 1000 feet of. I know the requirements are different in every state, but the point is that they continue to change, and I am just very uncomfortable with the direction that this seems to be going in.
What part innocent are you, you sexually abused a child.
You said "The fact that she was partaking in activities (drinking, smoking) that require a person to be of a certain age did impact my judgement". Kids drink and smoke all the time. I drank and smoked when I was underage,and even drove a car, does that mean a pedophile can say "Oh he was drinking , smoking, so it through me off"
A kid is recognizable as a kid, especially when like you did, you talk to the kid. Own you knew it was a kid.
You said "It was promiscuous on my part". That is wrong as promiscuity is having sex with many persons. An adult having sexual contact with a child is called abuse.
OK, now that that other guy has all those responses out of his system (jeez, what a rant!), I have some serious questions for you.
Actually, I have to say that your "thanks for the feedback" post has made me think more seriously on this question than any of the other posts on this thread. Most of them are just so kneejerk that I can't identify with them in the least.
Anyway, back to your situation. I do actually see how it is disengenuous for the state to change your deal after you plead out. I'm trying to understand what is wrong with the proposed legislation that would cause them to do that. Are you a level 3 sex offender? Was this your only sexual offence, or are there others? Please answer these questions, because I would really like to understand the situation.
Many of offenders had already made plea deals factoring in that they would not be registerable, but what happened in many offenders crimes were grandfathered into registerable offences.Offences that were previously not registerable were made registerable. Although everyone on the registery deserves to be on the registery, this is the one and only situation where I can see how a "deals a deal" and identify with an offender
Of course I am in treatment..."counseling" as it is were. What have I learned? How about sitting through hour after hour of videos of adults, fighting back tears, recalling stories of incidents that happened in their childhoods. Being kidnapped and sodomized at 7...Being repeatedly molested by a babysitter from age 4-8. Me sitting there going whoa...words cannot describe what it is like to see someone tell a story like that...as an adult all these years later, tears running down their face as if it had just happened yesterday. At first I was pretty enraged...I honestly felt like we "Had to go after these people"...but then I had a shocking realization: They already are...and they're coming for ME! You see, through your eyes, and every other severely misinformed person who has fallen victim to the moral panic that America is faced with, I am the guy who did those kinds of things. I am not even going to try and convince you that I never did anything like that, nor in a million years would I be capable of it, because you have already made your position clear about me being a child abuser or whatever. Other than that we just talk about how the law is changing and believe it or not, the person who leads the group, who is very educated and experienced in the field, has even basically told us that this state of affairs does not make any sense whatsoever...is illogical and fueled by a misinformed public, and has severely undermined whatever attempts at "treatment" she has tried to give us. I get polygraphed twice a year. Yes, hooked up to a lie detector machine and asked questions ranging from "have you been in any contact whatsoever with any underage people" to "have you done or thought about doing anything your friends or family would not approve of?" She is very stressful to the point that we must not break the law though, especially nowadays, no probation violations whatsoever, as the penalties are so strict that it would be the end of the offender if he did. The strongest message is "No more victims." There is actually a lot that has gone on...two and a half years at this point, but in all honesty, the "I did it. I am extremely sorry and I will never ever do anything like that again so help me God" thing is really not that big of a part of it, unless of course you refuse to even admit that much, which yes, there are a few people who cannot get past that hurdle. I know it will be very hard for you to ever accept another perspective on this, as you are definitely the type of person who once you have made up your mind, "your" right from then on. I am telling you, though, there is a reason that I am trying so hard to stand up on this, and maybe this time around you caught it. It's not that I don't think baby rapers need to be burned at the stake. I do. It's the fact that you're trying to call me one and treat me like one. It's the fact that the state and court promised me they would not call me a "baby raper"...because they decided that I'm not a "baby raper" based on the evidence of my case. Then, 2 and a half years later, they went to all the newspapers, tv stations, and people's computers and said "John is a baby raper!" To which I am still in the process of saying, "Oh hell no..."
I'm trying to understand what is wrong with the proposed legislation that would cause them to do that.
Very good, very complicated question. It's sinister and has to do with getting votes. It might have to do with creating registries for every crime. It has to do with federal funding to states. As one democratic congresswoman here put it (and "Anonymous Poster" has proven: "It is a hateful piece of legislation"
Are you a level 3 sex offender?
No. Georgia does not have a tiered system.
Was this your only sexual offence, or are there others?
When I was in 9th grade, I looked in a girl's window. I got the idea from the movie, "Back to the Future" That behavior was very short-lived. I decided that it was not the right thing to be doing and stopped. I have not ever offended sexually in any other way than that.
Posted by: JohnTheGuitaristDotCom | Mar 3, 2006 12:22:55 AM
John, I do agree that it was wrong for them to break the deal with you. A lot has to do with politics, which, we don't seem to have much impact on. All I can say is to look past those things and just keep focused on the progress you are trying to make to not reoffend. I am in a similar boat with this blanket treatment. And, I do wish people could see that many of us are not like these other offenders that we see in the news. Unfortunately, we can only present ourselves as we are and hope that people just us on our individual merits.
Kevin, I never misunderstood you and didn't think you were being accused of this. I was just saying that contact between people of those ages is not a good thing, even if nothing sexual happenned. And no, it isnt grounds for charges to be filed. Because it can be easy for people to make false accusations, we must not put ourselves in a position to be accused.
CA, I really like your feedback and I'm glad you don't just throw us all in one category.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 3, 2006 11:52:36 AM
john. Easy way to get past this is to just move to another country. Lets say italy.Beautiful country. That way you can get past all these self righteous attitudes of the politicians and media and not get punished for what they think you MAY do. p.s. My last post folks...its been real. Dan John, CA, take care this has been informative. Glad i stumbled upon this blog
Posted by: mike | Mar 3, 2006 12:19:23 PM
One of our news stations has been doing a lot of programming lately about sex offenders. It's been really in formative. They had an interview the other night with a female sex offender. She molested an 8 yr. old boy. People don't look at female offenders the way they do male offenders for some reason. I'm not one of those people. I do believe the same harm is done. Any feedback on this subject?
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 3, 2006 1:24:35 PM
I meant to say INFORMATIVE.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 3, 2006 1:26:34 PM
The most common reaction I hear about female sex offenders is when guys joke around that they would like to go out with one. I guess they think that means they are a nympho or something. People definitely don't see them the same way. When you hear of a female teacher having sex with a male student, guys tend to say "lucky kid" and things like that. I do know one female offender and she was bi-polar and had a lot of serious problems that were caused by the abuse she suffered as a child. She was trapped in a world of alcoholism, drug abuse, and sexual addiction caused by her past abuse.
I would guess that perhaps when women are the offenders there might be a serious history of abuse in their past. That makes treatment much harder because there is a stronger base of attitudes and reactions that are very deeply ingrained. I think that male offenders tend to act out sexually, even without any history of abuse. I'm not sure that any offender can be treated in the same way as another completely. Whether man or woman, they each have different weaknesses and issues that need to be addressed differently. Perhaps I'm wrong to say that women shouldnt be treated the same as men, but, I think that often their is post traumatic stress and bi-polar disorder that needs to take precedence in treatment. Treating anyone with these issues will makes treatment very long and difficult. But, the person has to be brought back to a certain level of functionality before they can really begin sex offender treatment fully.
I say these things because the person I know of has issues that will most likely keep her from ever being able to progress in sex offender treatment. As a side note, this woman received the highest entrance test scores to a nursing program in the history of the college she applied to. So, although this person is not stupid by any means, her past abuse has screwed up her life so much that she can't ever have the life she should have been able to have had.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 4, 2006 2:52:54 AM
The female sex offemder that was interviewed on our news station said that there was no diffrence between male abousers and female abusers. Only thing is she didn't elaborate. I just wonder if they were abused as children why in the world do they take it out on children? Seems to me they would be apt to protect children instead of abusing them.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 4, 2006 12:44:58 PM
I would guess that about half the offenders I knew had been abused. Although many of them don't plan to continue the cycle of abuse, sometimes they don't have the social skills needed to function properly. I know there were social developmental things I missed while I was growing up. I tended to be shy and a loner and didnt give myself the oppurtunity to learn the social skills most people learn that can help us find our place in society.
It is similar to people that propagate the cycle of poverty or vow never to divorce because they had come from a broken home. So many people that have first hand knowledge of the impact of such things just never had the chance to learn how not to repeat these cycles themselves.
I have known some people that tried so hard to break the cycles and were so frustrated because they just didnt know how to do it.
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 5, 2006 2:01:40 AM
Daniel isn't it strange though that -as you said-half of the SO were abused and the other half weren't? It kinda of leaves us with no answers as to what makes a SO offend. If that could be figured out a lot of children could be saved. I wonder if that will ever be answered? If all we have is punishment alone then it will never be any diffrent.
Posted by: child advocate | Mar 5, 2006 1:30:06 PM
I havent been on for a while but I just wanted you to know that I don't look at you as a "baby raper" or, like I said before a danger to prebubecent children..meaning small kids.
I think you made a mistake, yes, and I think that alcohol may have clouded your judgement but I don't think you are a sexual predator, as I bet they have you labled, don't they.
I said I would pray for you and I have and I still will, hoping that God sees you through the frusteration and guilt you feel.
I know how hard it is to explain your whole situation to strangers and I know how frusterating it is when you get discouraging feedback. You feel like you have to keep defending yourself and it just makes you more frusterated. I know. My husband and I have been going through this now for over 3 years, and we will never see his kids again, and he never touched them or did any of the things he was accused of. What's worse, is my husband's ex wife actually came into my work 2 years ago and ADMITTED TO ME, ON VIDEO TAPE AND IN FRONT OF WITNESSES that her mother was brainwashing the kids (ages 3 and 4 at the time) on a daily basis, because she wanted to keep the foster care money she was getting for them.
When I took the video and the witnessed to our lawyer I remember I was so happy thinking...Now they have to dismiss this. I mean, I had a full confession with witnesses. You know what happened? The tape and confession was supressed because it was considered HEARSAY.
Can you believe that? What a joke. That was when we decided to take the plea. We were out of money, the State had supressed so much evidence that proved his innocence, and I just couldn't take a chance with his life. He is innocent, and if we would have come up with the money to try this case, there would have been so much that the jury would have never heard, he could have been convicted and given LIFE in prison. LIFE. FOR SOMETHING HE NEVER DID. The state realized towards the end when the evidence started to unfold in our favor that he was indeed innocent but they refused to dismiss it as we could have sued them. They instead offered us the deal of PROBATION, with a lifetime registry.
Now remember, the original punishment the State wanted was 30-90 years, a natural life sentence. But they came down to probation if he pled out.
That showed that the state was worried about not having a strong enough case.
But like I said, I know he didn't molest his kids, my family(most of whom are police officers in another county, mind you) know he didn't do it and all of our friends know it too.
And that's all that matters. It doesnt matter what people here or even the strangers that look at you on the internet think. It's the ones who love you and know you and know what kind of person you really are that matter.
Some strangers that don't know us will say "If I was truly innocent, I would never plead guilty to a crime like that, no way...."
But I bet that they would wish that they pled out to the crime if they got convicted and sent to prison and met bubba their cell mate.....(LOL)
Not everything is as it seems, and nobody knows that better than me and my husband.
So I just wanted you to know that.
Posted by: Liz | Mar 7, 2006 12:22:19 AM
Liz, You got me confused with John. Anyway, it is good that you don't look out us all the same way.
CA, I think that a lot of people that weren't abused as children just don't learn the social skills needed or don't learn to care enough about others. I think that was my case.
The ones that had been abused would most likely want to stop the cycle of abuse, but, many of them don't learn how. It's like people from broken homes that vow to never get divorced. Yet, they do, because they didnt have proper models to learn from
Posted by: Daniel | Mar 7, 2006 7:17:46 PM
CA-- Do you think child molestors should be put to death or have their private parts removed?
Posted by: Johnny | Apr 7, 2006 6:41:09 PM
Neither one. I think they should have longer prison terms and I'm not talking about the girlfriend -boyfriend situation. That's a whole diffrent story.
Posted by: child advocate | Apr 10, 2006 8:52:49 PM
CA--Sex offenders already get 3 years to life depending on the severity of their crime. Don't you trust the criminal justice system? Wouldn't it be an overkill to give them more than life. (or 30 years for a victim of 12-16 year old) Don't get me wrong, where there is criminal activity, there is responsibility, but more punishment means that society is now more revengeful than justice oriented. Most people can be rehabilitated, and fewer committed. I am in no way making an excuse for criminal behavior, however, I believe people can be made whole again through therapy and shown how empathy changes hearts. Again, if they are dangerous and show signs of criminal thoughts and behavior, than commit these people. I believe God knows people's hearts. God has love and forgivnes too all who seek HIM. Why should society be unforgiving and throw away a person that shows signs of empathy and true rehabilitation? Faith, Trust, and Love are the top three of any human feelings. The apostle "PAUL" was a murderer, rapist, thief, ect. He was rehabilitated and lived a Godly life after he found Christ. Can other criminals have at least one chance to prove themselves? If a person commits another crime, than they obviousy need this extra prison time because they are absolutely evil and stupid now. But what do you think about the first time offenders? Should they receive the benefit (one chance) and get only the required sentence or should the be put away for longer periods of time? Maybe the offender actually thought about what they had done and felt ashamed, empathy for their victim, and vowed a moral and happy future, and to be the person they should have been in the first place? Who are these people who want to put people away for along time for first offences? He who is without sin cast the first stone. All sin is the same unto God. Severe punishment is Gods doing if that person refuses to repent. We are to help people see there error and help them. We are not to Judge people before they get a chance to repent. Maybe you are not spiritual, or maybe you are. But, at least, give people a chance unless the prove they are pure evil and wish to remain evil. It's not about, "the offender should have thought about the circumstances before he/she got 30 years in prison for a deviant sexual crime." I believe in punishment and responsibility but not complete abandonment. This, according to God, is evil in itself, criminal to Gods Law. This is just my opinion. I'm sure you will see it different according to what you have wrote in this blog. I say give people a chance first, than, put them away. Do you think I am thinking wrong because of a good heart, or am I right?
Posted by: Johnny | Apr 14, 2006 8:20:14 PM
First time offenders should get more than 3 years. It's not like the old saying goes"THE FIRST DOG BITE IS FREE" absolutely not. Sex offenders of children should have controlled that urge before they acted on it. I can only think of one other crime that would be worse and that would be to kill the child after they were offended.Yes we have all sinned but I think my driving too fast or cursing someone out does not in no way even come close to molesting a child. So yes I do cast stones when it comes to sex offenders of children. Big stones! I am all for JESSICA'S LAW in every state -mandatory 25 years for the first time. NO DEALS! Don't molest then no one will have to worry about going to prison for 25 years. That's much less TIME than the child gets. They get life! I'm sorry I don't believe a child molester can be rehabilitated. Separate them from children then it stops!I guarantee you all sin is not the same under God. The love God has for children is spoken of often in the bible so I think he would not stand for a child to be hurt in this way. God is the only one that will forgive but I believe he would put a child over a molester anyday.
Posted by: child advocate | Apr 14, 2006 10:01:05 PM
One thing I forgot to say -The second time they are caught-PRISON FOR LIFE!
Posted by: child advocate | Apr 14, 2006 10:06:29 PM
I agree. You have a good heart CA! God Bless
Posted by: Johnny | Apr 15, 2006 9:12:36 AM
Well, I'm a one time offender. And, if you new the particulars of my case, you wouldn't think I should have got a life term, let alone, what I did accept because I ran out of money to fight. Anyway, can we be rehabilitated? "Definitely" But, there are some that are just evil and need locked up. Those are the ones you hear about. The legal system would be embarrased to tell you about the most of us though. I think the public would be pissed that sex offenders are really becoming a money and political business. I'm not minimizing either. It just isnt what most people think.
I am still instrumental in helping others in group although I'm off paper. One offender that was on paper for having sex with a 15 y/o when he was 19 y/o just violated his probation. He had sex with a 19 y/o, and he is 24 now. But, it is casual sex and he is married , so, he broke the rules of his probation. He WILL be going to prison on his 10 year sentence and will serve over 5 years minimum. Oh well, I guess thats what you people seem to want. I 'm a little pissed that he could screw up on his probation because the stakes are so high. I can't imagine going to prison for adult consensual sex, but, he new the rules. Then again, I don't have much simpathy for a person that cheats on their spouse. Especially when they stand at your side and accept you for what you are.
So, what do you all think about the guy that murdered to sex offenders recently and the one that killed two last year. They both found random victim through the online registry. Is that O.K. with you folks?
Also, when you increase punishments, since most offenses are within the family, you will get less reported . The statistics will show a decrease in offenses, but, you will have more offenders out there because they dont get turned in. Each case needs to be judged on its on merits.
Posted by: Daniel | Apr 18, 2006 10:51:27 AM
CA- What is your career? It sounds like you work in office or have been some type of political figure.
I do agree on putting child molesters in prison, but I definetly disagree on your prison term of 25 YR mandatory for first time offenders of less than class X. Forgive me for saying so, your philosphy concerning "what to do with sex offenders" seems to be extreme. I can agree with you too certain levels of punishment, but 25 Years for the first offense! Wow, most people would be in prison, including political figures, police, lawyers, school teachers, ect.
Posted by: Johnny | Apr 28, 2006 11:08:59 PM
CA- I am a police officer and sad to say but my fiancee was just sentenced for statutory rape that occurred 4 years ago. He is a not a danger to society or a pedophile as his probation report read. He's guilty of being a guy. The girl told him that she was 18 and nowadays girls are looking older and older. Its almost as if you have card these girls before sleeping with them.
As an officer I have submitted many reports to the DA for sex related offenses. I have seen true sexual predators sit before me. My fiancee was convicted of two felonies, has to serve 6 months in county jail, 5 years probation and register as a sex offender. i can honestly say that the punishment is way to harsh for the crime, especially since the girl didn't want the case to continue.
As you can imagine this puts a damper on our whole situation. With him being a convicted felon and me being an officer, it makes for a pretty tough road ahead. What hurts me the most is that because he has to register he will never be able to volunteer with our children's schools or outside activities. He will be constantly looking over his shoulder. his punishment that is set up for him is a sure fire way for him to fail. Probation for 5 years!!! I know violent offenders with long records who dont get that much.
I guess I'm just frustrated at the legal system and what makes it worse is that I'm a part of it. We are appealing the case, but for now, my very preppy, loving, fiancee sits in a tiny cell with a cellmate, thinking about what has become of his life.
Posted by: Amy | May 9, 2006 6:17:56 AM
Um hi ok I am a 15 year old girl in Ok. I will be 16 in 4 months (Sept.) Isn't the age of consent in Ok. 16 y/o? I'm asking because I have a 20 year old boyfriend whom I have been with for only a few months but known for 7 years...so i'm pretty sure it is gunna turn into a long term relationship. But I don't want to get him in trouble. I love him so that would kill me. I just want to know once I turn 16 will I be legal for him to be with? Thnx- Mya
Posted by: Mya Shiane | May 25, 2006 5:24:31 PM
To the sixteen year old. Well if your 20 year old boyfriend really loved you, he'd wait til you were 18 and marry you, of which you can almost guarantee that once he has sex with you, he'll get bored, leave and you'll still feel like killing yourself.
To the sex offenders whining and complaining about the treatment that they recieved from the courts and society, then the laws must be working.
I would hate to meet a serial killer, armed robber or con artist who said his experience with the justice system was very supportive of their actions and the whole experience was a positive one that they would not hesitate to go through again!!
Posted by: Victoria | Jun 8, 2006 9:48:21 PM
It is high time for all sex offenders to unite as one. We are 500k strong and we can make a difference if we come from out of the dark. We are letting the media and brainless polititians dictate who were are and where we can live. We must stop this madness! but it can only happen if we join together as one. please pass on my email firstname.lastname@example.org to any SO or SO supporter so that we can plan to act NOW.
Posted by: macshug | Jun 18, 2006 5:31:23 PM
as a sex offender I agree. it is time that socity casts off fear and quit treating us as "modern day" lepers. I live in Iowa and the state has gone to far and restricting registered sex offenders from living 2000' from a state registered day care center or a school. When the State Of Iowa passed this law and started enfocing it, it pushed alot of sex offrnders underground. so now they camt monitor them and they cant find them. Thankfuly I 4 years 10 months to go and then I can tell the state to leave me alone.
Posted by: Kevin | Jun 23, 2006 3:20:44 PM
I'm a prosecutor in the Midwest who last week convicted a 68 year old convicted sex offender of molesting a wheelchair-bound 14 year old cerebral palsy victim that he was babysitting at the time. He will rightly die in prison, likely serving a triple digit sentence. The fact that her mother accepted $15k from him to keep quiet after the fact didn't help the case, and her trial is in a few months.
Next week, I begin a jury trial for a troubled but worldly and feisty 14 year old who met a 23 year old online who said he was 17, snuck out of her house at midnight and had sex with him in his BMW in an industrial park. The defendant won't plead because of the lifetime registration. The victim text messaged him some very raw and graphic discussions of what they'd done, and yet initially alleged force. Then she did an overhear tape where she's a very convincing liar in attempting to get the defendant to incriminate himself, which he partially does. However, I'm very concerned with jurors who don't have daughters or are younger and sophisticated themselves feeling sorry for the clean-cut defendant. And the very evidence of the offense shows that this is a 14 year old who's way too knowledgeable for her age on sexual techniques, etc.
As a prosecutor, I'm frustrated by the lack of flexibility that I have in adjusting the sentence to fit the crime. The difference between these two crimes in terms of depravity and damage is substantial, yet the law in my state doesn't have much discretion in imposing less than lifetime registration or in-custody treatment alternatives for offenders whose sex offender evaluation comes back as a minimal risk to reoffend (which is often the case in statutory rape cases where the difference in age is less than 10 years).
And what really amazes me is that everyone who says we should throw the book at sex offenders, the minute they're picked as jurors on a statutory rape case, they get back in the jury room and say that the girl knew exactly what she was doing and they don't want to ruin the defendant's life for "what's probably going on everywhere anyway". And then the next victim gets no opportunity to see his face on the sex offender website.
We need more levels of sex offense and more distinctions between statutory rape versus force so that we're throwing resources at the right people. I have yet to have had a sex offender that I offered probation re-offend (although granted its not a large group), but still the conventional wisdom is that its political suicide not to send every sex offender to prison, no matter what the circumstances of the offense were. And our sex offender probation officers have a case load of about 50 sex offenders each; parole officers typically oversee about 400 parolees.
The US has some recent child-murders where the defendants had previously been tried and acquitted for sexually-based offenses. Sometimes, when your evidence is weak, you need to get the guy registered and in treatment rather than try for prison, but politics often won't let you do that, and children can die as a result. But if you discuss that as a politician, you're "soft on sex crimes". Whereas if you take a weak case to jury trial and lose, you just pass the blame on to those twelve people off the street when your defendant feels invincible after beating the system and instead of being forced to get treatment, selects his next victim.
And of course what noone points out when someone's placed on probation, is that if they screw up in any way, you don't have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt to send them to prison, its preponderance of the evidence, and you get to send them to prison for the same amount of time they could have gotten originally. But probation is "soft" for some reason. I'm just saying that re-tooling the law to deal with the daily reality rather than the occasional nightmare will probably tend to help with the nightmares as well.
Posted by: Perseqtor | Aug 6, 2006 6:52:00 PM
these laws are redicules. only real intent is 1, diverting sociotys attention away from the politicly ambicious who are failing to uphold the issues that really matter, jobs ect. 2,again diverting attention from there own dirty laundry. 3, it gets votes. our locle shariff is running for congress right now and is credited as being a worrior agenst sex offenders by upgrading the registry. thay added a mapping system and thats pretty much it. was'nt cheap to do it eather. fact! convicted sex offenders have just about the lowest rate of recidavism. every body with any common sence knows that it's not the guys that have already been down thay need to worry about. it's the close family friends and relatives thay'd better beware of. uncle chester is closer then you think. the registry does NOT work. if it is then why are the statistics showing a steady rise in sexual abuse cases? thay cant answer that one. society wants someone to hate, what easyer target then some guy that's on the registry. your not suppossed to use these sites to harras these guys right? but when thay are, the law does'nt do anything about it. the first time it happend to me, i defended myself and guess who got locked up? well it was'nt the person who started the fight with me and you can beleave that! i spent 20 months locked up for there black eye and thay got nothing for my concution except for everything that i owned, stolden after i got locked up. the next time i was harrased, outed and threatoned to be shot at my place of employment. i asked for help from the shariffs dept, nothing! so it's officially open season on registerd sex offender year round. okay thats fine. y'all keep an eye on me and guys that are in the same boat as me. but whail your busy getting into my bissness, uncle chester gonna be getting ALL up in your kids bissness becouse you, mom an dad, are'nt looking out for them. which is great! for the polaticians. thay love that. gives them something to talk about for the next election. dont like what i said do you? well thats to bad. the system failed me when the jury/society convicted me without any evidance muchless a date of insidence. so i guess it's all on them/society.
Posted by: c.a.b. | Oct 28, 2006 8:46:38 PM
Well I found this page very interesting to read. I am from Wisconsin and moved to Iowa because of family issues that are neither here nor there. I will say without being ashamed that when I was 19 and at a bar I met someone and we went home together. 1 and 1/2 years later I was charged with 2nd degree sexual assault and found out the man was only 15. I now have 4 children ages 15, 14, 10 and 7. I am a registerred sex offender in the state of Wisconsin. I don't have to register in Iowa as my 10 years is up. I did not have the money to fight against being charged and my public defender told me to plead no contest and take the 5 year probation plea agreement. The state of Iowa made me move because i was within 1995 feet of a school, mind you for my children. They wanted me to move where the other sex offenders live. The ones that had committed child molestation. Why would i put my children at risk? And if I was so abusive why not remove my children from my home? Now I have DHHS inspecting a case of child abuse on me because I took in my 5 year old nephew as his mother (my sister) had no place to live and needed someone to take him until she could get back on her feet. They say that they are not questioning my parenting skills and can tell that I am a great parent but knowing that I am a sex offender that I put my nephew at risk. I agree that there should be laws out there for sex offenders but that they should not clump us all into one catergory. My brother whom is 19 is now a sex offender and has to register because he was stupid enough to moon someone out of his car in front of a police officer. A sex offender? Makes no sense to me. So as a parent of 4 children (single parent) and a sex offender for committing what was once called statutory rape....this new law has made my life hell along with my childrens. I have not nor would I ever molest a child. Also...who is to say that if a pervert truly wanted to hurt a child he/she could not just get in their car and drive to the schools, parks, etc. ?
Posted by: suzyqtie | Dec 19, 2006 6:43:16 PM
also forgot to add why not have this registry in effect for murders? And to mya above...well i can say that I learned to never sleep with anyone i met at a bar or anyplace without asking for ID first and did tell my probation officer thank you because the situation made me grow up and realize that it is not okay to sleep around with whomever my urges want me too.
Posted by: suzyqtie | Dec 19, 2006 6:49:19 PM
THERE ARE ALOT OF SEX OFFENDERS THAT YOU SHOULD WORRY ABOUT WITH YOUR CHILDREN BUT NOT ALL OF THEM ARE AS BAD. AS A MATTER OF FACT I HAVE A FRIEND THAT I HAVE KNOWN FOR YEARS AND HE IS BI, WELL MY OTHER FRIEND AND HIM DATED EVEN THOUGH ONE WAS UNDER AGE, HE WAS ONLY SEVENTEEN. WELL THE MOTHER DID NOT AGREE THAT HER SON WI BI AND PRESSED CHARGES. NOW MY FRIEND IS A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER AND PEOPLE LOOK AT HIM DIFFERENTLY. I THINK THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH IS MUTUAL BETWEEN THE TWO SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. WELL THAT'S JUST MY POINT OF VIEW. AND I LOVE HIM DEARLY.
Posted by: JAMIE | Dec 29, 2006 9:50:00 PM
THERE ARE ALOT OF SEX OFFENDERS THAT YOU SHOULD WORRY ABOUT WITH YOUR CHILDREN BUT NOT ALL OF THEM ARE AS BAD. AS A MATTER OF FACT I HAVE A FRIEND THAT I HAVE KNOWN FOR YEARS AND HE IS BI, WELL MY OTHER FRIEND AND HIM DATED EVEN THOUGH ONE WAS UNDER AGE, HE WAS ONLY SEVENTEEN. WELL THE MOTHER DID NOT AGREE THAT HER SON WI BI AND PRESSED CHARGES. NOW MY FRIEND IS A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER AND PEOPLE LOOK AT HIM DIFFERENTLY. I THINK THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH IS MUTUAL BETWEEN THE TWO SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. WELL THAT'S JUST MY POINT OF VIEW. AND I LOVE HIM DEARLY.
Posted by: JAMIE | Dec 29, 2006 9:50:01 PM
I too am a sex offender, living in the great state of Indiana. I have no complaint about being on the sex offender registry because I will never re-offend. I am self employed and own my home- me and the bank. While my case had NOTHING to do with a minor I am lumped into the category with those that injure children. I feel if my registering forces everyone else to comply and it saves one child from injury it is worth the inconvenience. My one wish would be to categorize offenders on a tiered basis. Multiple and repeat offenders Should be the highest priority. Crimes like urinating in public, voyerism, vicarious gratification, Should be seperated from actual crimes that physically injure victims. Also pedophiles should be distinguished from those that assault adults. They claim that there are statistics that lead to crossover from sex crime to sex crime I do not buy into that. The bureau of prisons vital statistics and the National crime report to not support it either. It is kinda strange. Years ago when they looked at me and said "sign here and you will be out in fourteen years" there was no mention of restricting my liberty prohibiting me from living within specified distances of schools or parks. There was no mention of a registry which when a person fails to meet regulates him/her to a mandatory 2 year prison term. I am currently selling my home because I live 16 feet too close to a school. I am not a pedophile, I have no history of hurting children. My case is not special. Lots of guys commit the act I did. I came home from work and caught my partner in bed with another guy and reacted emotionally without rational thought. Is it an excuse? No simply the bare fact. I do not forsee ever being in that circumstance again, I had no prior I have one criminal case... But now I am regulated a "predator" and need to register for life? I will not complain Just so when the politicians pass the laws regulating everyone that has had a DUI must have bright red tires on their cars, cannot live or work near a bar brewery, restaurant,gas station, or grocery store that serves or sells liquor, nor can they attend any event where alcohol may be served... It is simply assinine. More people are killed each year by drunk drivers than than ever were killed by sex offenders. No murderer registry, no burglar registry, no arson registry, No drug dealer registry... Me I want to know all the criminals in my neighborhood. Ex- Post facto laws are prohibited by our constitution laws passed and imposed after the fact are expost facto. Today the crime of shoplifting a $20.00 item is probably a short jail term and a fine or probation. If arrested today and tommorrow the courts say all shoplifters must have their right hand removed, the law would not apply to anyone prior to the time the law was passed. My biggest complaint is the continual changing of the rules. When released in 2002 I had to register for 3 years. Six months after my release it changed to 5 years and now a couple of months ago it changed to LIFETIME. The government keeps adding restrictions in re to Jobs I can hold, places I can live, and those I cannot. I support the registry bu it needs to be regulated by one agency nationally and be consistent state to state. The registry must seperate the offenders into classifications of the group(s) the given offender has targeted in the past. Finally the government needs a uniform CRIME REGISTRY because sex offenders are not the only candy coated creepies out there. We will never see that though because 50% of everyone in congress has had some kind of run in with the law. Hell Bill Clinton would be a sex offender in Indiana recall Monica Lewinsky and the famed cigar? That is a crime in hoosier land. Doen't matter, I am the least political man on the planet. I do not think our current adminstration is fulfilling its vested delegated responsibility to the public. I am tired of the stranglehold of fear the American Public has been duped into buying. While terrorism is awful and God knows we all need a little peace, if you want your family to be safe, the way you do that is to KNOW where your children and spouses are. KNOW your neighbors. Lets face everybody no one wants a sex offender next door but once the debt delved by the courts is paid they have a right to get back to life. I have been inside. I served 12 and 1/2 years I have seen some very dangerous souls. They are the exception and not the rule. Most often drugs and alcohol play a role in crimes. I am sober over 18 years I am far from dangerous and have droves of friends in every walk of life to prove it. You have the right to be safe and the ability to make it so. Choose to be safe, Get involved. If your community has no program for sex offenders call and ask your local politician why. Granted it is a bother and an expense. But what price can we put on safety? Good luck I welcome e mail @ email@example.com
Posted by: Jeffrey | Jan 5, 2007 2:13:43 AM
American citizen. Civil Rights for all or none at all. Restrictions/conditions on free americans proves registration is punishment and un-constitutional. Read my report MOLINA 927 south Bruce--5 Anaheim, Ca. 92804
Posted by: MOLINA | Feb 22, 2007 1:37:37 PM
Government forced restrictions/conditions on free americans will now prove registration is punishment = un-constitutional. It's in my article report. Also innocent people will be further obstructed to justice. When the prosecution gives serious fraudulent evidence for the jury to consider/instruct then anyone can be convicted. The public needs to be warned and protected that serious fraud can be used against anyone. read how in my article report. send $ 255.-- MOLINA 927 south Bruce-5 Anaheim, Ca. 92804
Posted by: MOLINA | Feb 28, 2007 6:54:07 AM
I typed this once and lost it and don't have time to rehash the whole thing again. So long story short I am a mother of a 22 year male who has been dating a female 17 (will be 18 in June) for the past two years. I helped her get emancipated. Recently a lot of drama took place and now suddenly she is threatening to press statutory rape charges on him. Does the emancipation change the age restriction? I know living together, etc. makes no difference or the fact that I witnessed that it was consenual by accidentally walking in on them and overhearing on other occasions.
She is with another guy who is older also and this may be his idea or perhaps she is just threatening because she is mad at me. My son is worried sick.
Please help anyone...
Posted by: Ms. G | Mar 22, 2007 10:04:23 PM