A Sex Registration Horror Story

[goldcatt]

Perhaps one might want to walk in the shoes of law enforcement or adult corrections for a mile or two. If "Joe" goes out and commits a crime against a person (as many many MANY offenders have done even after "paying their debt"), can you imagine the public outcry? Why wasn't Joe kept track of better? Why was Joe allowed to roam the streets? Why didn't anybody know Joe spent one night a week in a garage? And if they did know, why did they allow it? It's against the law!! Joe is a sex offender and he should have been monitored more closely.

All of a sudden, we have another victim, people lose their jobs and once again, it's the fault of EVERYBODY else but Joe. I realize some cases are extreme, but I doubt you'd think so if Joe was staying in YOUR neighbor's garage. We can probably all state a case of where the system overreacted, but I'm betting 98% of sex offenders are labeled that for a good reason.

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

Be afraid...be very afraid....but of who or what?

 

[dilloduck]

Perhaps one might want to walk in the shoes of law enforcement or adult corrections for a mile or two. If "Joe" goes out and commits a crime against a person (as many many MANY offenders have done even after "paying their debt"), can you imagine the public outcry? Why wasn't Joe kept track of better? Why was Joe allowed to roam the streets? Why didn't anybody know Joe spent one night a week in a garage? And if they did know, why did they allow it? It's against the law!! Joe is a sex offender and he should have been monitored more closely.

All of a sudden, we have another victim, people lose their jobs and once again, it's the fault of EVERYBODY else but Joe. I realize some cases are extreme, but I doubt you'd think so if Joe was staying in YOUR neighbor's garage. We can probably all state a case of where the system overreacted, but I'm betting 98% of sex offenders are labeled that for a good reason.

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

Be afraid...be very afraid....but of who or what?

summed it up right there.

 

[strollingbones]

o and this arresting men for urinating is rather odd. but it does become indecent exposure which is a bit much for draining the snake.

Except on the facts given, this busybody dame couldn't even see Mr. Johnson. I don't handle many indecent exposure cases, but I'm pretty sure ya gotta see somethin' before a law is broken. This was either a travisty, or there's more to it than indicated in the original post.

this had to be up north or out west....in the south men are always urinating in the yard...on the side of the road...so on and so forth

 

[Annie]

George, it sounds like you are an attorney. Let me say this about the whole sex registration stuff, I can see a use for it regarding schools, police departments with true predators, i.e., rapists, child sex abusers. That it's being required of anyone that has streaked in HS or college and gotten caught; consensual sex between a minor and someone 3 years their senior; someone taking a piss; someone just going nude in their kitchen? Nope, it's wrong and totally unfair.

This draconian law reminds me very much of zero tolerance nonsense in schools.

 

[Zander]

Joe is screwed.

 

[Father Time]

I will call him "Joe" (not his real name). Joe is 55 years old. When he was in his 30's, Joe was convicted of a sex crime - the type of sex crime that requires him to register with the police department under California's sex registration law (Penal Code, Section 290).

Joe is a transient - a homeless person. He has no address to give the police. In cases such as that, the law requires the person to register every 30 days at the police station nearest to where he most normally is located. Joe faithfully did that.

In November of law year, Joe's driver's license expired. He went to DMV to get a new one. DMV asked him for an address. He said he did not have one. They told him he had to give them one or they would not renew his license. He said, "Well, I do have an address where I get mail." He was told to put that address down, and he did - indicating on the DMV form that it was a "mail only" address.

A month or so ago, a Sheriff's detective whose job it is to monitor sex registrants in the area, ran a routine check on Joe. As part of such a check, the detective contacts DMV to see whether or not any current address have been listed there by the registrant. He found the address which Joe had given DMV as a "mail only" address.

The detective went to the address. He was told by the guy who lived there, that Joe only used the address to receive mail. He also told the detective that sometimes he lets Joe sleep in the garage in return for doing yard work. When asked how often Joe slept in the garage, the homeowner said, "once a week or so."

Armed with this information, the detective sought, and obtained, a felony filing against Joe for violation of PC 290. What might that violation be? The detective located an osbscure California Department of Justice rule which says that if a person stays at one location as little as once a week, they must designate that address as their residence address, and register it at the local police station. Since Joe was registering as a transient, and had not listed the mail only address as his residence, he was in violation of the law according to this detective and the DA that filed the case.

Anyone smell anything here? Joe was doing everything he could to comply with the registration law. He had no knowledge of the "once a week" rule. He thought he was doing everything right. Joe was not trying to hide anything from anybody. Too bad.

Oh, yes - since most sex crimes are strikes in California, Joe is looking at a minimum of 32 months in state prison if he is convicted.

Joe is upset. So am I.

Good. He shouldn't be out in the first place.

Do you even know what he did that made him a sex offender?

It seems you are just talking out of your ass to try to sound "tough on crime", which is pathetic.

What's even more pathetic is 32 years over a filing error.

 

[Father Time]

I wonder what his crime was? I find it interesting that that was left out of the discussion.

Oh . . . I see . . . You find it "interesting," eh? Yesssss . . . . I suspect that others will find it interesting as well . . . verrryyyyy interesting . . .

Why, it almost sounds as if he's trying to HIDE something . . . Yes . . . that's it. He's HIDING something. What could it be? What COULD it be?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know what it was. Probably 288a - sex with a child under 14.

Does that make a difference to you? Do you feel that, the worse the crime, the less we have to abandon legal and moral standards in dealing with the convicted person? I know that a number of people here actually do feel that way. Are you one of them? Apparently so. Let's see - under 14. Would it make any difference to you if we were talking about a fully developed, very provocative and very friendly 14 year old female or a four year old boy? If it was a four year old boy, how would you feel about getting together a lynch mob?

Frankly, - no, I'm not going to stoop to that level . . . let's go on to the next point.

If you did the crime you have to live with the consequences. If you didn't then you should fight like hell to clear your name.

And what consequences would you be willing to stand for? What is happening to Joe here? That seem fair to you? Oh, wait a minute - "fair" doesn't enter the picture once we have a conviction for a sex crime. I forgot. How about a lynch mob? Is that a "consequence" you would be willing to live with?

I simply do not understand people like you.

 

[George Costanza]

.

Regardless, if the man was following the rules as they were explained to him, all I can say is WTF? Don't these detectives have anything better to do?

Don't detectives have anything better to do that keep tabs on sex offenders? I sure as heck hope not!!!

Well, Kyleigh, they sure do have better things to do - like investigating homicides, robberies, major crimes, you know . . . that kind of stuff.

 

[Father Time]

I wonder what his crime was? I find it interesting that that was left out of the discussion.

Oh . . . I see . . . You find it "interesting," eh? Yesssss . . . . I suspect that others will find it interesting as well . . . verrryyyyy interesting . . .

Why, it almost sounds as if he's trying to HIDE something . . . Yes . . . that's it. He's HIDING something. What could it be? What COULD it be?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know what it was. Probably 288a - sex with a child under 14.

Does that make a difference to you? Do you feel that, the worse the crime, the less we have to abandon legal and moral standards in dealing with the convicted person? I know that a number of people here actually do feel that way. Are you one of them? Apparently so. Let's see - under 14. Would it make any difference to you if we were talking about a fully developed, very provocative and very friendly 14 year old female or a four year old boy? If it was a four year old boy, how would you feel about getting together a lynch mob?

Frankly, - no, I'm not going to stoop to that level . . . let's go on to the next point.

If you did the crime you have to live with the consequences. If you didn't then you should fight like hell to clear your name.

And what consequences would you be willing to stand for? What is happening to Joe here? That seem fair to you? Oh, wait a minute - "fair" doesn't enter the picture once we have a conviction for a sex crime. I forgot. How about a lynch mob? Is that a "consequence" you would be willing to live with?

I simply do not understand people like you.

Gee George I don't know. Don't you? I mean if the man was convicted of statutory rape but the girl was romantically involved and they were later married I think that would have a distinct slant to the issue. If the man was convicted of kidnap and rape and was released after serving 6 to 10 years but was classified as a high level risk to offend that would be another matter too...now wouldn't it?

You can get as high and mighty as you want but if the perp is a pedophile he is not going to change his stripe. He will offend whenever he gets the opportunity to do so. I have NO sympathy for pedophiles.

I believe any thinking person would have little sympathy for a serial violent pedophile, or a serial rapist who was let out because there was no legal way to keep him in prison. Don't you?

Sexual predators are the lowest of the low. The fact that some people try to defend these monsters is astonishing to me. How about the victims of these predators? How about the victims to come because these creatures are not kept in prison where they belong?

Are there cases where there are people who have been classified wrongly due to a screwed up legal system? Absolutely! But I can quite easily guarantee you that there are far more victims created because the legal system did not keep these monsters in prison.
Just look at the Phillip Garrido case for a most recent case. One family lost their daughter for 18 years and the now woman J.C. Dugard had two children by the asshole.

This perv had been convicted by a jury and sentenced to 50 years for a violent rape in Reno NV. He was released after 10 years and within months had kidnapped the then 11 year old J.C. How much pain should she and others like her have to suffer so that maybe one criminal is actually rehabilitated?

I say none.

It doesn't say what this guy did so all your crying and bitching and moaning about pedos means jack shit unless you can show us the man is a pedo.

Now this guy is not being convicted of a sex crime he is being prosecuted under a technicality. He followed the rules as were given to him by government employees, so why should he be convicted if the instructions were wrong?

This isn't about his previous crimes this is about him being fucked over by the system, and if you support someone receiving cruel and unusual punishment just because they are a sex offender then you are nuts.

 

[George Costanza]

One of the requirements for most people out on parole is to maintain a residence and a job.

What is your basis for that statement? It is simply not true.

It is true in Oregon where Alli Babba and I live, and where she is part of the enforcement process on children's abuse matters.

I notice it is not a requirement in California, but California does require few things Oregon does not. In Oregon you don't have to have a travel pass in state, like you do in CA. CA does require that if you change jobs you must notify your parole officer in three day.

At the time of release in California, like in Oregon, all the rules of probation/parole are listed in a form you must sign. In both places you must meet with the probation department within 24 hours of sentence, release, and the conditions are spelled out in the form before signing, and IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PAROLEE/PROBATIONER TO MAKE SURE HE IS CLEAR ON EACH CONDITION OF PROBATION/PAROLE.

Very well - I accept that. Frankly, it sounds like a pretty good idea, especially the part about maintaining an address. Jobs are pretty hard to get for parolees, sometimes, but almost anyone can at least give a reference or mailing address.

 

[George Costanza]

I wonder what his crime was? I find it interesting that that was left out of the discussion.

Oh . . . I see . . . You find it "interesting," eh? Yesssss . . . . I suspect that others will find it interesting as well . . . verrryyyyy interesting . . .

Why, it almost sounds as if he's trying to HIDE something . . . Yes . . . that's it. He's HIDING something. What could it be? What COULD it be?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know what it was. Probably 288a - sex with a child under 14.

Does that make a difference to you? Do you feel that, the worse the crime, the less we have to abandon legal and moral standards in dealing with the convicted person? I know that a number of people here actually do feel that way. Are you one of them? Apparently so. Let's see - under 14. Would it make any difference to you if we were talking about a fully developed, very provocative and very friendly 14 year old female or a four year old boy? If it was a four year old boy, how would you feel about getting together a lynch mob?

Frankly, - no, I'm not going to stoop to that level . . . let's go on to the next point.

If you did the crime you have to live with the consequences. If you didn't then you should fight like hell to clear your name.

And what consequences would you be willing to stand for? What is happening to Joe here? That seem fair to you? Oh, wait a minute - "fair" doesn't enter the picture once we have a conviction for a sex crime. I forgot. How about a lynch mob? Is that a "consequence" you would be willing to live with?

I simply do not understand people like you.

Gee George I don't know. Don't you? I mean if the man was convicted of statutory rape but the girl was romantically involved and they were later married I think that would have a distinct slant to the issue. If the man was convicted of kidnap and rape and was released after serving 6 to 10 years but was classified as a high level risk to offend that would be another matter too...now wouldn't it?

You can get as high and mighty as you want but if the perp is a pedophile he is not going to change his stripe. He will offend whenever he gets the opportunity to do so. I have NO sympathy for pedophiles.

I believe any thinking person would have little sympathy for a serial violent pedophile, or a serial rapist who was let out because there was no legal way to keep him in prison. Don't you?

Sexual predators are the lowest of the low. The fact that some people try to defend these monsters is astonishing to me. How about the victims of these predators? How about the victims to come because these creatures are not kept in prison where they belong?

Are there cases where there are people who have been classified wrongly due to a screwed up legal system? Absolutely! But I can quite easily guarantee you that there are far more victims created because the legal system did not keep these monsters in prison.
Just look at the Phillip Garrido case for a most recent case. One family lost their daughter for 18 years and the now woman J.C. Dugard had two children by the asshole.

This perv had been convicted by a jury and sentenced to 50 years for a violent rape in Reno NV. He was released after 10 years and within months had kidnapped the then 11 year old J.C. How much pain should she and others like her have to suffer so that maybe one criminal is actually rehabilitated?

I say none.

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . "what about the victims?" Of COURSE I am concerned about the victims of sex crimes, or the victims of ANY crime, for that matter.

Our system provides for victims in a number of ways. It catches, convicts and punishes the offender. If there is monetary damage, the perp is ordered to pay it. Most of the time, of course, the perp cannot do that. California (and I am sure most states) has a victim's restitution fund that all convicted felons are required to pay into. Victims may draw on that fund to help them with the monetary damages end of the crimes that were committed against them. I don't know, but I assume, that this would include costs of psychiatric counseling in the event of psychological damage caused by a sex crime of some sort.

You, and the rest of you on this thread clamoring for "never let the monsters out," will be ecstatic to learn that, in California, that often happens. Under California's relatively new Sexual Violent Predator law, the really bad ones can be detained indefinitely in "special, psychiatric treatment centers" once they have completed their sentences. I am not an expert on the SVP law, but I do know this can happen.

There - that should make you all feel so much better. (Sorry, we don't allow lynchings here in California. They probably don't allow them in your state either. I know how disappointed that must make all of you.)

 

[Annie]

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . "what about the victims?" Of COURSE I am concerned about the victims of sex crimes, or the victims of ANY crime, for that matter.

Our system provides for victims in a number of ways. It catches, convicts and punishes the offender. If there is monetary damage, the perp is ordered to pay it. Most of the time, of course, the perp cannot do that. California (and I am sure most states) has a victim's restitution fund that all convicted felons are required to pay into. Victims may draw on that fund to help them with the monetary damages end of the crimes that were committed against them. I don't know, but I assume, that this would include costs of psychiatric counseling in the event of psychological damage caused by a sex crime of some sort.

You, and the rest of you on this thread clamoring for "never let the monsters out," will be ecstatic to learn that, in California, that often happens. Under California's relatively new Sexual Violent Predator law, the really bad ones can be detained indefinitely in "special, psychiatric treatment centers" once they have completed their sentences. I am not an expert on the SVP law, but I do know this can happen.

There - that should make you all feel so much better. (Sorry, we don't allow lynchings here in California. They probably don't allow them in your state either. I know how disappointed that must make all of you.)

You haven't responded to my earlier post, nevertheless, here we go. Sexual predators, real ones, are not likely to be rehabilitated. However many 'sex offenders' are not predators, differences should be clear by statute and so should reporting factors.

 

[westwall]

Perhaps one might want to walk in the shoes of law enforcement or adult corrections for a mile or two. If "Joe" goes out and commits a crime against a person (as many many MANY offenders have done even after "paying their debt"), can you imagine the public outcry? Why wasn't Joe kept track of better? Why was Joe allowed to roam the streets? Why didn't anybody know Joe spent one night a week in a garage? And if they did know, why did they allow it? It's against the law!! Joe is a sex offender and he should have been monitored more closely.

All of a sudden, we have another victim, people lose their jobs and once again, it's the fault of EVERYBODY else but Joe. I realize some cases are extreme, but I doubt you'd think so if Joe was staying in YOUR neighbor's garage. We can probably all state a case of where the system overreacted, but I'm betting 98% of sex offenders are labeled that for a good reason.

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

Be afraid...be very afraid....but of who or what?

No, he should follow the terms of his release to the letter. If he chose not to do so then he gets to pay the price for his unwillingness to follow the terms set down by the court.
A very simple way to have prevented any of this would have been to go to the court initially and present his problem and ask for help in rectifying the situation. Also a call to the Public Defenders office would also have negated any of this issue.

Sometimes it really is their fault you know.

 

[westwall]

Oh . . . I see . . . You find it "interesting," eh? Yesssss . . . . I suspect that others will find it interesting as well . . . verrryyyyy interesting . . .

Why, it almost sounds as if he's trying to HIDE something . . . Yes . . . that's it. He's HIDING something. What could it be? What COULD it be?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know what it was. Probably 288a - sex with a child under 14.

Does that make a difference to you? Do you feel that, the worse the crime, the less we have to abandon legal and moral standards in dealing with the convicted person? I know that a number of people here actually do feel that way. Are you one of them? Apparently so. Let's see - under 14. Would it make any difference to you if we were talking about a fully developed, very provocative and very friendly 14 year old female or a four year old boy? If it was a four year old boy, how would you feel about getting together a lynch mob?

Frankly, - no, I'm not going to stoop to that level . . . let's go on to the next point.



And what consequences would you be willing to stand for? What is happening to Joe here? That seem fair to you? Oh, wait a minute - "fair" doesn't enter the picture once we have a conviction for a sex crime. I forgot. How about a lynch mob? Is that a "consequence" you would be willing to live with?

I simply do not understand people like you.

Gee George I don't know. Don't you? I mean if the man was convicted of statutory rape but the girl was romantically involved and they were later married I think that would have a distinct slant to the issue. If the man was convicted of kidnap and rape and was released after serving 6 to 10 years but was classified as a high level risk to offend that would be another matter too...now wouldn't it?

You can get as high and mighty as you want but if the perp is a pedophile he is not going to change his stripe. He will offend whenever he gets the opportunity to do so. I have NO sympathy for pedophiles.

I believe any thinking person would have little sympathy for a serial violent pedophile, or a serial rapist who was let out because there was no legal way to keep him in prison. Don't you?

Sexual predators are the lowest of the low. The fact that some people try to defend these monsters is astonishing to me. How about the victims of these predators? How about the victims to come because these creatures are not kept in prison where they belong?

Are there cases where there are people who have been classified wrongly due to a screwed up legal system? Absolutely! But I can quite easily guarantee you that there are far more victims created because the legal system did not keep these monsters in prison.
Just look at the Phillip Garrido case for a most recent case. One family lost their daughter for 18 years and the now woman J.C. Dugard had two children by the asshole.

This perv had been convicted by a jury and sentenced to 50 years for a violent rape in Reno NV. He was released after 10 years and within months had kidnapped the then 11 year old J.C. How much pain should she and others like her have to suffer so that maybe one criminal is actually rehabilitated?

I say none.

It doesn't say what this guy did so all your crying and bitching and moaning about pedos means jack shit unless you can show us the man is a pedo.

Now this guy is not being convicted of a sex crime he is being prosecuted under a technicality. He followed the rules as were given to him by government employees, so why should he be convicted if the instructions were wrong?

This isn't about his previous crimes this is about him being fucked over by the system, and if you support someone receiving cruel and unusual punishment just because they are a sex offender then you are nuts.

You are correct it didn't say what his crime was. So we have to make decisions based on a lack of information. I choose to err on the side of caution.

 

[goldcatt]

Perhaps one might want to walk in the shoes of law enforcement or adult corrections for a mile or two. If "Joe" goes out and commits a crime against a person (as many many MANY offenders have done even after "paying their debt"), can you imagine the public outcry? Why wasn't Joe kept track of better? Why was Joe allowed to roam the streets? Why didn't anybody know Joe spent one night a week in a garage? And if they did know, why did they allow it? It's against the law!! Joe is a sex offender and he should have been monitored more closely.

All of a sudden, we have another victim, people lose their jobs and once again, it's the fault of EVERYBODY else but Joe. I realize some cases are extreme, but I doubt you'd think so if Joe was staying in YOUR neighbor's garage. We can probably all state a case of where the system overreacted, but I'm betting 98% of sex offenders are labeled that for a good reason.

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

Be afraid...be very afraid....but of who or what?

No, he should follow the terms of his release to the letter. If he chose not to do so then he gets to pay the price for his unwillingness to follow the terms set down by the court.
A very simple way to have prevented any of this would have been to go to the court initially and present his problem and ask for help in rectifying the situation. Also a call to the Public Defenders office would also have negated any of this issue.

Sometimes it really is their fault you know.

Unwillingness? In the fact pattern presented in the OP and as clarified throughout the thread? Hardly.

Nor does the court set the "terms" of sex offender registry, the crime of which he was convicted dictates by statute whether he must or must not register upon release and the rest is a statutory requirement for all to whom it applies. Sex offender registry doesn't get him a conditional early out subject to reincarceration for violating the terms of release, either. Law enforcement monitors them, not the courts. You're still confusing sex offender registration with parole. They are Two. Different. Things.

George is the crim guy, I never did that stuff. But it's not rocket science.

 

[westwall]

Oh . . . I see . . . You find it "interesting," eh? Yesssss . . . . I suspect that others will find it interesting as well . . . verrryyyyy interesting . . .

Why, it almost sounds as if he's trying to HIDE something . . . Yes . . . that's it. He's HIDING something. What could it be? What COULD it be?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know what it was. Probably 288a - sex with a child under 14.

Does that make a difference to you? Do you feel that, the worse the crime, the less we have to abandon legal and moral standards in dealing with the convicted person? I know that a number of people here actually do feel that way. Are you one of them? Apparently so. Let's see - under 14. Would it make any difference to you if we were talking about a fully developed, very provocative and very friendly 14 year old female or a four year old boy? If it was a four year old boy, how would you feel about getting together a lynch mob?

Frankly, - no, I'm not going to stoop to that level . . . let's go on to the next point.



And what consequences would you be willing to stand for? What is happening to Joe here? That seem fair to you? Oh, wait a minute - "fair" doesn't enter the picture once we have a conviction for a sex crime. I forgot. How about a lynch mob? Is that a "consequence" you would be willing to live with?

I simply do not understand people like you.

Gee George I don't know. Don't you? I mean if the man was convicted of statutory rape but the girl was romantically involved and they were later married I think that would have a distinct slant to the issue. If the man was convicted of kidnap and rape and was released after serving 6 to 10 years but was classified as a high level risk to offend that would be another matter too...now wouldn't it?

You can get as high and mighty as you want but if the perp is a pedophile he is not going to change his stripe. He will offend whenever he gets the opportunity to do so. I have NO sympathy for pedophiles.

I believe any thinking person would have little sympathy for a serial violent pedophile, or a serial rapist who was let out because there was no legal way to keep him in prison. Don't you?

Sexual predators are the lowest of the low. The fact that some people try to defend these monsters is astonishing to me. How about the victims of these predators? How about the victims to come because these creatures are not kept in prison where they belong?

Are there cases where there are people who have been classified wrongly due to a screwed up legal system? Absolutely! But I can quite easily guarantee you that there are far more victims created because the legal system did not keep these monsters in prison.
Just look at the Phillip Garrido case for a most recent case. One family lost their daughter for 18 years and the now woman J.C. Dugard had two children by the asshole.

This perv had been convicted by a jury and sentenced to 50 years for a violent rape in Reno NV. He was released after 10 years and within months had kidnapped the then 11 year old J.C. How much pain should she and others like her have to suffer so that maybe one criminal is actually rehabilitated?

I say none.

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . "what about the victims?" Of COURSE I am concerned about the victims of sex crimes, or the victims of ANY crime, for that matter.

Our system provides for victims in a number of ways. It catches, convicts and punishes the offender. If there is monetary damage, the perp is ordered to pay it. Most of the time, of course, the perp cannot do that. California (and I am sure most states) has a victim's restitution fund that all convicted felons are required to pay into. Victims may draw on that fund to help them with the monetary damages end of the crimes that were committed against them. I don't know, but I assume, that this would include costs of psychiatric counseling in the event of psychological damage caused by a sex crime of some sort.

You, and the rest of you on this thread clamoring for "never let the monsters out," will be ecstatic to learn that, in California, that often happens. Under California's relatively new Sexual Violent Predator law, the really bad ones can be detained indefinitely in "special, psychiatric treatment centers" once they have completed their sentences. I am not an expert on the SVP law, but I do know this can happen.

There - that should make you all feel so much better. (Sorry, we don't allow lynchings here in California. They probably don't allow them in your state either. I know how disappointed that must make all of you.)

George,

I am not out to harm people who should not be harmed. My wife is a PhD psychologist and a died in the wool liberal. However, even she says pedophiles should never be allowed out of prison. In her words the recidivism rate is 100% because they actually believe (like you and I believe the sun will rise tomorrow) that they are not harming the children in any way. They 100% believe they are showing how much they truly love the child. They are truly wired differently from non pedophiles.

That's why it is important to know ALL the facts in the case so that we can know whether Joe is getting screwed or not. I'm an expert witness so am an officer of the court as well
and am a big supporter of the Fully Informed Juror movement. So I agree that we have a legal system and not a justice system.

And no I don't agree with lynchings and I don't agree with any other kind of extra legal activity. But, and I think you'll agree with me on this...there are far more instances of sexual predators being released and reoffending than there are instances of citizens caught up in the sex registration morass being screwed over like Joe might be.

And like I said, if Joe was a person who peed on the wall and got convicted as a sex offender that would be a travesty (on all counts), but if Joe is a sexual predator who just happened to get picked up before he was able to offend again, then good! The bastard should never have been let out in the first place!

 

[Kyleigh Maria]

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

No. If he goes to jail, it is because he violated the terms of his release. Its up to a person to know the laws of the land. Shall we let off rapists just because they say they don't know its wrong?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

I don't have any sympathy for sex offenders. None. Sorry. I have a bit of experience in this area and I have NEVER seen anybody labeled a sex offender for peeing on a golf course. I've seen them charged with misdemeanor Urinating in Public. That's it. I'm not saying it does not happen, but it doesn't happen enough to be relevant.

Of course I don't think anyone should be a slave. You are using histrionics to enforce your viewpoint and that won't change anything. I understand that the things being done now - like residency requirements, posting on sex offender registries and electronic monitoring - aren't stopping the offenders. But it sure as heck lets you know who they are. I see that as a good thing.

 

[AllieBaba]

I will call him "Joe" (not his real name). Joe is 55 years old. When he was in his 30's, Joe was convicted of a sex crime - the type of sex crime that requires him to register with the police department under California's sex registration law (Penal Code, Section 290).

Joe is a transient - a homeless person. He has no address to give the police. In cases such as that, the law requires the person to register every 30 days at the police station nearest to where he most normally is located. Joe faithfully did that.

In November of law year, Joe's driver's license expired. He went to DMV to get a new one. DMV asked him for an address. He said he did not have one. They told him he had to give them one or they would not renew his license. He said, "Well, I do have an address where I get mail." He was told to put that address down, and he did - indicating on the DMV form that it was a "mail only" address.

A month or so ago, a Sheriff's detective whose job it is to monitor sex registrants in the area, ran a routine check on Joe. As part of such a check, the detective contacts DMV to see whether or not any current address have been listed there by the registrant. He found the address which Joe had given DMV as a "mail only" address.

The detective went to the address. He was told by the guy who lived there, that Joe only used the address to receive mail. He also told the detective that sometimes he lets Joe sleep in the garage in return for doing yard work. When asked how often Joe slept in the garage, the homeowner said, "once a week or so."

Armed with this information, the detective sought, and obtained, a felony filing against Joe for violation of PC 290. What might that violation be? The detective located an osbscure California Department of Justice rule which says that if a person stays at one location as little as once a week, they must designate that address as their residence address, and register it at the local police station. Since Joe was registering as a transient, and had not listed the mail only address as his residence, he was in violation of the law according to this detective and the DA that filed the case.

Anyone smell anything here? Joe was doing everything he could to comply with the registration law. He had no knowledge of the "once a week" rule. He thought he was doing everything right. Joe was not trying to hide anything from anybody. Too bad.

Oh, yes - since most sex crimes are strikes in California, Joe is looking at a minimum of 32 months in state prison if he is convicted.

Joe is upset. So am I.

Good. He shouldn't be out in the first place.

I see. Life for sex offenders. Death penalty, maybe?

Since recidivism is about 100 percent I'd say yeah, I don't care if they get life.

Don't push my buttons junior, I worked with sex offenders for years.

And they ALWAYS play innocent, they ALWAYS claim to know nothing, and they ALWAYS piss and moan about being persecuted.

And the always want special diets and are obsessed with their own crap, incidentally.

 

[AllieBaba]

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

No. If he goes to jail, it is because he violated the terms of his release. Its up to a person to know the laws of the land. Shall we let off rapists just because they say they don't know its wrong?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

I don't have any sympathy for sex offenders. None. Sorry. I have a bit of experience in this area and I have NEVER seen anybody labeled a sex offender for peeing on a golf course. I've seen them charged with misdemeanor Urinating in Public. That's it. I'm not saying it does not happen, but it doesn't happen enough to be relevant.

Of course I don't think anyone should be a slave. You are using histrionics to enforce your viewpoint and that won't change anything. I understand that the things being done now - like residency requirements, posting on sex offender registries and electronic monitoring - aren't stopping the offenders. But it sure as heck lets you know who they are. I see that as a good thing.

You couldn't pay me to take on a sex offender slave.

Joe was living somewhere he wasn't supposed to be living, and he got busted. Too fucking bad.

 

[goldcatt]

So a man should go to jail for up to 32 months for doing what he was told to do and reporting in at the specified time and place he was told to report to, because the police might be embarrassed in the event he committed a crime?

No. If he goes to jail, it is because he violated the terms of his release. Its up to a person to know the laws of the land. Shall we let off rapists just because they say they don't know its wrong?

And I suppose all sex offenders of any type should be slaves if they ever do get out of jail, made to work without payment in money or kind - even an occasional night spent in a garage instead of on the street. With electronic ankle bracelets monitoring their every move 24/7 I'm sure. Living in designated ghettos and with some kind of identifying mark on their persons or clothing perhaps? Yes, that's the ticket. THAT will stop the real predators. It's the perfect Final Solution to the problem of sex offenders.

I don't have any sympathy for sex offenders. None. Sorry. I have a bit of experience in this area and I have NEVER seen anybody labeled a sex offender for peeing on a golf course. I've seen them charged with misdemeanor Urinating in Public. That's it.

Of course I don't think anyone should be a slave. You are using histrionics to enforce your viewpoint and that won't change anything. I understand that the things being done now - like residency requirements, posting on sex offender registries and electronic monitoring - aren't stopping the offenders. But it sure as heck lets you know who they are. I see that as a good thing.

Another one confusing sex offender registry with parole....and assuming everyone on the list is a bona fide predator.

Tell me this, Kyleigh. Can you separate the issues here? I'll lay it out for you.

First of all, Joe is NOT on parole. He was not given a conditional early release from prison under terms dictated by the court, or the parole board, or any other body. He was convicted of a sex crime that required registry upon release, a crime that could have been anything from being naked in his own house and forgetting to close the blinds (indecent exposure) to serial rape. But the point here is, he served his time under the law and was released. That part is now officially over.

He now must register as a sex offender with the local police. He goes to the police and is told what to do, and he does it. What crime has he committed to be put back in prison for up to 32 months at this point? He slept in somebody's garage "maybe" once a week as payment for services rendered and received mail through that address. He is still homeless, so he continues to report to local police every 30 days which is what he was told to do as a homeless person. That is his crime, the crime for which he would serve another potentially 32 months in jail. He did what he was told to do.

Now you tell me where justice is served by locking Joe up for the crime of accepting payment for his work and doing what the police told him to do.