Are sex offender registries too harsh?

[Phoenix84]

Found an interesting article about a 19 year old being put on the sex offender registry for life because he had sex with a 14 year old who lied about her age online.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/teenager%e2%80%99s-jailing-brings-a-call-to-fix-sex-offender-registries/ar-AAcz5CL

"Until one day in December, Zachery Anderson was a typical 19-year-old in a small Midwestern city.

He studied computer science at the local community college. He lived with his parents and two younger brothers in a sun-filled home on the St. Joseph River, where framed family photos hang from the walls and a pontoon boat is docked outside.

And he dated in the way that so many American teenagers do today: digitally and semi-anonymously, through apps where prospects emerge with the swipe of a finger and meetings are arranged after the exchanges of photos and texts.

In December, Mr. Anderson met a girl through Hot or Not, a dating app, and after some online flirting, he drove to pick her up at her house in Michigan, just miles over the state line. They had sex in a playground in Niles City, the police report said.

That sexual encounter has landed Mr. Anderson in a Michigan jail, and he now faces a lifetime entanglement in the legal system. The girl, who by her own account told Mr. Anderson that she was 17 — a year over the age of consent in Michigan — was actually 14.

The case came to the attention of the police after the girl’s mother contacted them, concerned about her whereabouts. They were at her home when the girl returned, according to The South Bend Tribune. A few weeks later, the paper said, the police visited Mr. Anderson, who cooperated and, in February, turned himself in. He was arrested and charged and, after pleading guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, was sentenced to 90 days in jail and probation.

As an Indiana resident, Mr. Anderson will most likely be listed on a sex offender registry for life, a sanction that requires him to be in regular contact with the authorities, to allow searches of his home every 90 days and to live far from schools, parks and other public places. His probation will also require him to stay off the Internet, though he needs it to study computer science.

Some advocates and legal authorities are holding up Mr. Anderson’s case as the latest example of the overreach of sex offender registries, which gained favor in the 1990s as a tool for monitoring pedophiles and other people who committed sexual crimes. In the decades since, the registries have grown in number and scope; the nearly 800,000 people on registries in the United States go beyond adults who have sexually assaulted other adults or minors. Also listed are people found guilty of lesser offenses that run the gamut from urinating publicly to swapping lewd texts.

As Mr. Anderson’s defenders see it, his story is a parable of the digital age: the collision of the temporary relationships that young people develop on the Internet and the increasing criminalization of sexual activity through the expansion of online sex offender registries."

[Phoenix84]

Do you think the laws governing sex offender registries are too strict in cases like this?

[Deleted]

I think there are definite issues with putting violent rapists, child molesters and this kid, or someone's who pees in public, on the same list.

[milee]

Agree with oped.

The registry itself isn't a bad idea nor is it too strict. The problem is that it's being misused by applying it too broadly. Not every crime that relates in any way, shape or form to genitalia should require registry. The registry should just be for people that not only have committed a serious sex-related crime, but also are likely to reoffend.

Misusing the registry by making it too broad not only is a disserve to the people like those described in the OP, but it also makes the registry less effective because people start to feel it's too big to worry about and that the information is useless. Better to have it smaller and more focused so people can really understand and go through the small but meaningful information on it.

[andi9899]

Agreed. There are some definite changes that need to be made in the definition of sex offender.

[giramomma]

Yes. I think some parts of the law are silly. We've already begun having these discussions with DS.

It's not just having sex with someone under the age of consent (even if the other party gives consent). It's also having pics of nekkid peers on your phone.

I've been blunt with him about his chances for having a life he would like if he makes decisions that lands him on the registry.. All it takes is one pissed off parent, and his life could be ruined.

[Phoenix84]

I agree it's applied too broadly. But as the article points out, lawmakers are reluctant to act on it for fear of public outcry of "being too soft on sex offenders."

I can also see where the lines between what constitutes a "serious" sex offense from a "non serious" sex offense can start to get blurry.

Should we exclude anyone under 21? Should the sex offender registry only apply to accusations of rape and pedophilia?

[Phoenix84]

It's obvious though that if you have boys you need to learn about stuff like this and start teaching it to them early.

I think a lot of guys end up in serious trouble not because they're sex offenders, but for being dumb kids.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2015 9:05:11 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Do you think the laws governing sex offender registries are too strict in cases like this?

I think he had a lousy lawyer. If she misrepresented her age and admitted it in court, why did he plead guilty? He got some bad advice to plead guilty based on those circumstances. Do you think the defender that told him to plead guilty explained all the repercussions of that choice?

I think the sexual predator registry is extremely important. Our registry includes information on whether the police see the person as very likely to re-offend. I want to know where they are, and what they look like, so if a pedophile turns up at the local playground, he is removed.

[Phoenix84]

Jul 5, 2015 9:48:02 GMT -5 @rockit said:

Jul 5, 2015 9:05:11 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Do you think the laws governing sex offender registries are too strict in cases like this?

I think he had a lousy lawyer. If she misrepresented her age and admitted it in court, why did he plead guilty? He got some bad advice to plead guilty based on those circumstances. Do you think the defender that told him to plead guilty explained all the repercussions of that choice?

I think the sexual predator registry is extremely important. Our registry includes information on whether the police see the person as very likely to re-offend. I want to know where they are, and what they look like, so if a pedophile turns up at the local playground, he is removed.

I was wondering this myself. Why did he plead guilty to charges in the first place?

[billisonboard]

In most states, including Michigan, it is not a defense to a charge of statutory rape that the defendant mistakenly believed the child to be of age. This is true even if the child tells the defendant and others that he or she is older and looks and acts older.

(People v. Cash, 351 NW2d 822 (Mich. 1984).)

www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/michigan-statutory-rape-laws.htm

[giramomma]

Jul 5, 2015 9:48:02 GMT -5 @rockit said:

I think he had a lousy lawyer. If she misrepresented her age and admitted it in court, why did he plead guilty? He got some bad advice to plead guilty based on those circumstances. Do you think the defender that told him to plead guilty explained all the repercussions of that choice?

Because didn't he do it? He had sex with her, right? I just don't know how he could be "innocent" of having sex with a minor kid, especially when the law says (per the article) that consenting adults are responsible for finding out the age of the person they are going to bang.

I do feel badly, though, because they are making a moral case out of him. I only skimmed the article, but it seems, really the bigger issue is he used an app to get  no strings attached sex. I find it upsetting that there's no mention of the girl at age 14, being on the dating app. It's not like she was innocent. There's no yelling at her mom for not being aware of what the girl is doing.

[TheHaitian]

Jul 5, 2015 9:50:16 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

Jul 5, 2015 9:48:02 GMT -5 @rockit said:

I think he had a lousy lawyer. If she misrepresented her age and admitted it in court, why did he plead guilty? He got some bad advice to plead guilty based on those circumstances. Do you think the defender that told him to plead guilty explained all the repercussions of that choice?

I think the sexual predator registry is extremely important. Our registry includes information on whether the police see the person as very likely to re-offend. I want to know where they are, and what they look like, so if a pedophile turns up at the local playground, he is removed.

I was wondering this myself. Why did he plead guilty to charges in the first place?

Because he was guilty. Saying "she told me she was of age" is not a defense.

In a way the law sucks because it puts responsibility on the other party and there is no repercussions for the minor that lied about their age.

Same way for selling alcohol to a minor, them giving you a "fake ID" is not a defense, you still sold alcohol to a minor.

Conclusion: it is your job to make sure the person is of age. Birth certificate, drivers license... Whatever you got to do!

[midjd]

Billis is right -- it's not the age/knowledge, it's the act. He was guilty of statutory rape, even if he truly believed she was 18+.

Apparently it's unfortunate that he went to Michigan. If he'd stayed in-state it would have been fine. The only people who are on the sex offender registry for life here are those who are convicted of violent sexual felonies. The rest get 10 years on the registry, so the true dumb teens are no longer on there by their late 20s. I believe the conviction can also be expunged after 5 years in some cases. And if he agreed to "no internet" as part of his probation without any type of work/school exemption, he is crazy. It's more likely he was required to use some kind of monitoring service or net nanny and didn't want to pay for it.

Really though, taking out all the storytelling elements designed to gain sympathy -- a 19-year-old crossed state lines to have sex with a 14-year-old on a playground. I would be heartbroken if one of my loved ones found themselves in trouble for statutory rape, but I'm not going to say the state of Michigan should ease up on its sex offender laws. The proportion of people on a sex offender registry for peeing in public, statutory rape, child porn when they're both 16, etc. is pretty low, and when people can plead guilty to a lesser crime to avoid a harsher sentence, I don't know that we should start letting the "minor crimes" off the hook.

[Deleted]

Sex offender registries are stupid dumb.  If a young person sends a nude selfie to another young person, both can be put on sex offender registries for life.  It is a club used to get people who do minor things like above to plead guilty to lesser charges.


I got accused of defending child molesters in the Duggar thread, I wonder if I will get accused of defending child pornographers  here.

[Deleted]

I've had 19 year olds in high school. And my 14 year old 9th grader wears D cups. And I've been told that even grown men and women act in ways I would consider immature.

Do I think that we should excuse all statuatory rape? Am I sure we are getting all of the story here? No.

Do I think all situations should be treated to mandatory registration? No.

How do people get off the list in 5 years? 10 years? ... And how does that impact his employment for that decade? His participation in his future children's lives?

I hate the gender specific conversations which this type of thing requires me to have with my children.

[midjd]

Jul 5, 2015 10:43:48 GMT -5 @tbird said:

Jul 5, 2015 10:32:04 GMT -5 midjd said:

Billis is right -- it's not the age/knowledge, it's the act. He was guilty of statutory rape, even if he truly believed she was 18+.

Apparently it's unfortunate that he went to Michigan. If he'd stayed in-state it would have been fine. The only people who are on the sex offender registry for life here are those who are convicted of violent sexual felonies. The rest get 10 years on the registry, so the true dumb teens are no longer on there by their late 20s. I believe the conviction can also be expunged after 5 years in some cases. And if he agreed to "no internet" as part of his probation without any type of work/school exemption, he is crazy. It's more likely he was required to use some kind of monitoring service or net nanny and didn't want to pay for it.

Really though, taking out all the storytelling elements designed to gain sympathy -- a 19-year-old crossed state lines to have sex with a 14-year-old on a playground. I would be heartbroken if one of my loved ones found themselves in trouble for statutory rape, but I'm not going to say the state of Michigan should ease up on its sex offender laws. The proportion of people on a sex offender registry for peeing in public, statutory rape, child porn when they're both 16, etc. is pretty low, and when people can plead guilty to a lesser crime to avoid a harsher sentence, I don't know that we should start letting the "minor crimes" off the hook.

oh - so it is not necessarily for life?

then - If he is on for 5 or 10 years, then I absolutely do think this is appropriate. While we may, with what mid calls storytelling, come up with many angles that make him more or less culpable, more or less of a predator, he committed this crime.

He will get a second chance at 29, so - hopefully - he will make the most of that.

And to reiterate - this was a college guy with an 8th grader.

That's if he had been convicted in Indiana... Michigan's laws may be stricter. But here, sexual misconduct with a minor is a low-level felony that can be easily pled down to a misdemeanor. No one is doing hard time or landing on the registry unless they are 18+ and the victim is <13. We are a very red state so I doubt we're substantially easier on sex crimes than other states.

Pleading guilty with knowledge of the terms listed in the OP means that either Michigan has super-harsh sex crime laws, this guy's attorney was asleep, or there is a lot being left out of the story.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2015 11:17:21 GMT -5 midjd said:

Jul 5, 2015 10:43:48 GMT -5 @tbird said:

oh - so it is not necessarily for life?

then - If he is on for 5 or 10 years, then I absolutely do think this is appropriate. While we may, with what mid calls storytelling, come up with many angles that make him more or less culpable, more or less of a predator, he committed this crime.

He will get a second chance at 29, so - hopefully - he will make the most of that.

And to reiterate - this was a college guy with an 8th grader.

That's if he had been convicted in Indiana... Michigan's laws may be much more harsh. But here, sexual misconduct with a minor is a low-level felony that can be easily pled down to a misdemeanor. No one is doing hard time or landing on the registry unless they are 18+ and the victim is <13. We are a very red state so I doubt we're substantially "easier" on sex crimes than other states.

I'm not sure the motivation behind the "sex offender registries are too harsh" news articles, but there are a lot of them. I think the true incidence of Romeo & Juliet/peeing in public on the registry is much lower than you'd guess based on the number of stories about sympathetic defendants.

Because there is little evidence they work, maybe?  And it is being misused. There may not be many people on the registry for doing nothing much wrong, but there are certainly too many.  There are laws with zero tolerance which means zero thinking.  Prosecutors also use the registry as a weapon to get people to plead down.  It can ruin a life, so people who might want to go to court plead out to lesser offenses.  And there is little evidence it works.  Most people abused are abused by a relative or close family friend.  There are plenty of young people prosecuted for child pornography for sending a nude selfie to a boyfriend.  It is wrong.

[Phoenix84]

Jul 5, 2015 10:32:04 GMT -5 midjd said:

Billis is right -- it's not the age/knowledge, it's the act. He was guilty of statutory rape, even if he truly believed she was 18+.

Apparently it's unfortunate that he went to Michigan. If he'd stayed in-state it would have been fine. The only people who are on the sex offender registry for life here are those who are convicted of violent sexual felonies. The rest get 10 years on the registry, so the true dumb teens are no longer on there by their late 20s. I believe the conviction can also be expunged after 5 years in some cases. And if he agreed to "no internet" as part of his probation without any type of work/school exemption, he is crazy. It's more likely he was required to use some kind of monitoring service or net nanny and didn't want to pay for it.

Really though, taking out all the storytelling elements designed to gain sympathy -- a 19-year-old crossed state lines to have sex with a 14-year-old on a playground. I would be heartbroken if one of my loved ones found themselves in trouble for statutory rape, but I'm not going to say the state of Michigan should ease up on its sex offender laws. The proportion of people on a sex offender registry for peeing in public, statutory rape, child porn when they're both 16, etc. is pretty low, and when people can plead guilty to a lesser crime to avoid a harsher sentence, I don't know that we should start letting the "minor crimes" off the hook.

I agree, he committed a crime and should be punished for it.  But I'm not sure a "life sentence" on the sex offender registry is the answer.  90 days in Jail and 5-10 years on the sex offender registry sounds far more reasonable.

[Deleted]

The sex offender registry should not be used as punishment.  Use it if it will do some good, and don't use it where it is pointless. No one needs to know that some guy got arrested for peeing in a park, or some girl was arrested for mooning her friends. 

[zibazinski]

As a landlord, I need to know. I'll rent to some dumb kid who peed in a bad area. Not in front of kids but in a public place and got busted. I'm not renting to a 19 year old who found a girl online and had sex with her. I don't care if she lied and he didn't either.

[TheHaitian]

Jul 5, 2015 15:31:09 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

As a landlord, I need to know. I'll rent to some dumb kid who peed in a bad area. Not in front of kids but in a public place and got busted. I'm not renting to a 19 year old who found a girl online and had sex with her. I don't care if she lied and he didn't either.

Seriously? You didn't do any dumb shits in your late teens /early 20's?

[zibazinski]

I did a lot of dumb things. Nothing naked.

[Tiny]

IDK, seems like something's missing from this news article. How often do you read about some teen who's finally managed to commit some truly heinous crime and get themselves into jail and it comes out that the teen has a paper trail a mile long of less serious offenses - and sometimes serious offenses. Which means a judge (probably more than one) kept giving the kid a "second chance" (or more like a 30th chance) at straightening out their life.

How come THIS 19yo gets fed to the lions on his first 'offense' Why make an "example" of him when there's plenty of other 'kids' who have done much worse, were caught, brought before a judge, had their hand slapped and were released?

What's the rest of the story??

[zibazinski]

I bet there is a lot more to the story. Who has to drive across state lines for sex? No one.

[Deleted]

My daughter told her daughter she wasn't doing something ladylike.  My granddaughter responded by mooning her mom.  If that were someplace else and someone else, instead of it being funny and both people laughing, it could have been a lifelong of punishment being on a sex offender register.

[souldoubt]

No idea about all the details but some judges, DA's, assistant DA's, etc. have no problem making examples out of cases like this.

My biggest problem as others mentioned is that this kid could get lumped in with pedophiles, rapists and so on as a registered sex offender.  Whether there's more to this case or not I've read of multiple instances where some kid who is dating a girl younger than him turns 18, they have sex (not the first time) and he gets charged with a crime.  If a parent doesn't like the kid they can press charges even though it's consentual.  Obviously not every case is black or white but some kid shouldn't end up a registered sex offender for having consentual sex with his girlfriend or some girl that he met assuming it's a reasonable age difference like they were in high school at the same time.  Likewise if some drunk college kid takes a piss in a park he should be charged with a crime but not end up a registered sex offender assuming he isn't whipping it out in front of other people.  I served on a court case where the defendant was a registered sex offender and even the prosecutor made it a point to say it could be for something heinous or something as simple as peeing in a public area but they can't tell you the details and that's not why he was there.  Some people claimed they couldn't be jurors because of that and one woman who said she was okay with it broke down and started crying when she was in the jury box.  Once your on that list it will follow you the rest of your life and it's not something you can downplay because most of us hear "registered sex offender" and think pervert, pedophile or rapist.

[MJ2.0]

Jul 5, 2015 14:15:03 GMT -5 @hickle said:

The sex offender registry should not be used as punishment.  Use it if it will do some good, and don't use it where it is pointless. No one needs to know that some guy got arrested for peeing in a park, or some girl was arrested for mooning her friends. 

I don't know what you know about it, but it is used to inform. It's been a long time since I've interned at the county prosecutors office, but the offenders are separated into 3 tiers - 1 being the lowest (relatively minor offense with little chance of repeating) and 3 being the highest (major offense with high chance of repeating). I believe the tier 3s have to notify the town they live in that they are a registered sex offender.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2015 10:43:48 GMT -5 @tbird said:

And to reiterate - this was a college guy with an 8th grader.

My son is in 8th grade and there are a few girls in his class that seriously do look college age.  They dress and act 10X more mature than any of the boys in the class too.

[milee]

[In response to Hickle's story about a daughter mooning a mother.]

Not really a comparable analogy.    It's as dissimilar to me saying: I had sex with my husband. If he was someone else and he was a minor, it could have been a lifelong of punishment being on a sex offender register.

The receptiveness, ages and relationship of the people involved and the choice of venue are important.   Context matters.