I hired a pedophile....

[sesfw]

Somewhere along the way I heard that teen couples (under 18) caught 'in the hay' can put the boy on a sex offender list.  Having sex with an under-age girl.

Where does this fit in the equation?

I agree that an adult molesting anyone under 18 needs to be placed 'with his peers'.

[Kolt!]

Jan 5, 2017 16:57:34 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Jan 5, 2017 16:53:42 GMT -5 NomoreDramaQ1015 said:

The problem is that if you make it so they can't live any semblance of a normal life they go underground. Do you want to know where the registered sex offender is or do you want to take the chance he's hanging out in the school parking lot during the day because he has no where else to go?

That is the question a lot of places are wrestling with.   Here the restrictions on where they can live make it so most end up homeless.  Once they have no physical address there is no way to track them via the registry or any other fashion.   That leaves them plenty of time to troll public parks and the school parking lot.

It makes us feel good to make life as difficult as possible for a sex offender but that does not solve the problem.   It creates a new bigger problem.

Jail is a good place to keep track of them 

This. Jail. Or a mental home. If they acted on their attraction to children they belong in jail or a mental home. 

You immediately put anyone that works there's children at risk. 

[Wisconsin Beth]

Jan 5, 2017 17:14:31 GMT -5 sesfw said:

Somewhere along the way I heard that teen couples (under 18) caught 'in the hay' can put the boy on a sex offender list.  Having sex with an under-age girl.

Where does this fit in the equation?

I agree that an adult molesting anyone under 18 needs to be placed 'with his peers'.

some states have what are called Romeo and Julie laws, to address the 19 year old senior dating a 16 year sophomore. I don't know much more than that though.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 5, 2017 17:03:21 GMT -5 finnime said:

Jan 5, 2017 15:13:52 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

So there's a 40% chance that a sex offender will be caught again.... note that I didn't say would commit another sex crime.  I think that's too high of a chance for serious offenses. 

Uhm, this text says that the sexual crime recidivism rate is 13.7 percent, not almost 40% - the larger group were all crimes/criminals. Actually, that's kind of interesting. Sex offenders are less likely than others to do it again, it appears.

or like john wayne gacy, they decide to not get caught again.

[milee]

Jan 5, 2017 16:01:26 GMT -5 Kolt! said:

I honestly think the sex registry list is a good thing but it's brought about in a bad way because it also doesn't always say why they're on the list.

I hate that someone that had a drunken night and peed in the road is placed on their with child molesters. I just think that list should be used for people that actually did an illegal sex act.

Sure, it's stupid to undress in public, streak, pee in public but it's crazy that they're life is placed side by side to someone that molested a child or raped someone. I do believe people that got drunk and peed in public deserve a second chance because maybe they were an alcoholic that got sober or being a stupid kid. I don't think it's fair their life gets destroyed and a lot of times people will see "Sex Offender" and assume rape or that they did something with a child. 

What state do you know of that does not list the crime the offender was convicted of and a classification of their risk for re-offending?  

Between Megan's Law and the law named for Adam Walsh, the registry has been expanded so that certain basic information about the offender - including their risk of re-offending - is a required part.

So yes, you do know in broad terms "why" the person is on the list.  A person who was drunk and peed in public would have been convicted of something like "Public Indecency" while a person who had child pornography would have been convicted of something like "SEX OFFENSE, FEDERAL (POSSESSION OF VISUAL DEPICTIONS INVOLVING THE USE OF MINORS ENGAGED IN SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT)"  This second example is cut and paste from the easily searchable Florida database.  I couldn't find an example of someone who appeared to be convicted of something as minor as peeing in public, so couldn't cut and paste an example like that.  I wonder just how common it is for someone peeing in public to end up on the registry.

Anyway, you definitely can see a general description of the offender's crime and the assessed risk of re-offending.

[Kolt!]

I haven't looked since my freshman year of college five years ago, admittedly. We had to for a class I was in and I just remember it not giving any real information and the description wasn't enough detail. And, sometimes there's more to a story that, that general description doesn't give. I'll have to go look again.

For instance, a nineteen year old with a sixteen year old (a family friends son) he was put on the registry for sex with a minor and not allowed to be near children. These two were together for years and before he was eighteen and it was actually the parents that filed charges on him even though the girlfriend didn't want them to. He was placed on this registry among people of the same category that actually were older, and actually raped someone. Unfortunately, this state did not have a Romeo and Juliet law... which I personally believe states should. 

It can all depend on the state and the laws of the state.  

--
Either way that doesn't change my stance on the fact that I think someone that molested a child should be in jail for life.

--
Ok like all the detail in my state given is "Criminal Sexual Conduct" I mean... that could potentially mean different things.

[zibazinski]

There's a lot of people out there that are mentally ill. Most act out on it. It's hard to control yourself when what you are doing you don't feel is wrong even when others tell you it is.

[beergut]

To expand on what milee said about people being convicted for a lesser crime that what they actually committed:

I give you Phillip Wayne Parsons 

The crime listed is: INDECENCY WITH A CHILD SEXUAL CONTACT

Victim age: 13

Victim sex: Female


JUDGMENT 8Y DISCHARGED FROM INCARCERATION

He spent 8 years in prison under the terms of the plea deal. 

His actual crime: He consistently raped his half-sister from the time she was 6 years old to the time she was 13, and told someone about it. I know about this because I know his victim. She has grown into a phenomenal woman, worked as a victim's advocate before getting married, and now she is busy raising her baby boy. 

She agreed to a plea deal because she didn't want to have to sit in court and tell everyone about the years and years of abuse. There was also tremendous pressure from her family to not press charges. So he gets a charge that sounds like he touched a girl inappropriately, it doesn't list the true horror of what he did for years and years and years. 

I do have a question for milee, though: I notice he is having booking pictures taken every month. Is this because he is in his first year of probation after serving his sentence, or is it because he is living out of his car, so they want to keep track of him? 

[milee]

I don't know why they're taking monthly pictures. I believe that the Adam Walsh law mandates that states post updated pictures at regular intervals, but that the most frequent minimum interval (for Level 3 offenders - classified as most likely to re-offend) is once a year. States are allowed to update pics more frequently, and your guesses as to why they're doing so here sound reasonable.

[Phoenix84]

I guess the question becomes punishment vs. rehabilitation.

Obviously, there's the aspect of punishing the offender. But if you don't kill them or lock them up forever, the issue does arise on how you reintegrate them into society in such a way as to minimize the risk of them reoffending.

Part of reintegration into society means having employment.  And as they say, idle hands are the devil's playthings.  Who do you think is more likely to reoffend, someone without a job with nothing but time on their hands or someone who has a job keeping them busy and occupied?

I get it, it's an uncomfortable and morally difficult thing to wrestle with, reintegrating a sex offender into society.  But if we're going to do it, I'd prefer to do it in such a way as to minimize the risk of re-offense.

[Phoenix84]

If you want to really muddy the waters, how do you handle under age sex offenders and the associated sex offender registry.

[MJ2.0]

Jan 5, 2017 16:53:42 GMT -5 NomoreDramaQ1015 said:

The problem is that if you make it so they can't live any semblance of a normal life they go underground. Do you want to know where the registered sex offender is or do you want to take the chance he's hanging out in the school parking lot during the day because he has no where else to go?

That is the question a lot of places are wrestling with.   Here the restrictions on where they can live make it so most end up homeless.  Once they have no physical address there is no way to track them via the registry or any other fashion.   That leaves them plenty of time to troll public parks and the school parking lot.

It makes us feel good to make life as difficult as possible for a sex offender but that does not solve the problem.   It creates a new bigger problem.

I don't think sex offenders (specifically ones preying on minors) should get to live a normal life. A one-time date rapist should be classified as the lowest tier offender and should not be given any restrictions on where they can live. Someone who has molested a few children should be put into a mental institution. If they MUST be released, chemically castrate them first.

[sesfw]

All of this reminds me of a high school classmate of my DD.

As a young adult he raped a young lady and spent time in prison for it.  She testified against him.

He wrote in his journal the next he rapes someone he will also kill her so she can't testify.

This is what he did and several years ago was executed by the state of AZ.

DD remembered him as being weird in high school