ngdawg

While just perusing some bookmarked sites, the spouse decides to check out an online service that lists convicted sexual offenders by zip code. I'd done this in the past and nothing had come up. This time, something did....
One block from our house, directly across the street from where my and 11 other kids catch their school bus, lives a convicted child molester-his crimes were Wreckless Endangerment of a Child and Aggravated Sexual Assault. We can assume he didn't brush up against a 15 year old....
It is up to the county prosecutor's office to notify neighborhoods if a convicted sex offender moves in. We weren't. Neither was the preschool on our street. The Board of Education did not know this, the town's police department didn't either.
I called a neighbor, a mother of twins my kids used to play with. If anyone gets moving, it's Lisa. Before noon, the bus stop was moved to our own street, the police captain was contacting the prosecutor's office and my husband, who happens to be on very friendly terms with the mayor, notified him, who in turn is confering with the town attorney.
Parents, check out your neighborhoods. Megan's Law didn't mean squat to us. This is the link we used that revealed the scum: http://www.familywatchdog.us/

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

sillygirl

So, wow. My area is better than I thought it was, but I'm still shocked at the number. And it sickens me that a lot of them are too close to schools.

__________________

Anyone can be passionate, but it takes real lovers to be silly-Rose Franken
....absence makes me miss him more...

cj2112

Thank you for posting this, I just noticed that the bus my son would ride to school (if he rode the bus) actually stops in front of an apt. building that a convicted child molester lives in. This guy sodomized an 8 y.o. girl and is listed as predatory by the state.

http://sexoffenders.oregon.gov/SorPu...LLETIN&I=19156

shakran

actually, no you can't. You don't know what the situation was, you don't know what the plea bargain involved. You can probably find out, because it's public record, but until you do, you really don't know if the guy's a danger or not.

Let's not forget that if a guy has sex with a 17 year old who claims she's 18, he's legally raped her, and if convicted, has to register as a child molesting sex offender. Even though there was no intent to commit the crime, he still has to have the sex offender stigma attached for the rest of his life.

Those charges could easily come from such a situation. Am I defending sex offenders? No, but I'm saying we shouldn't judge someone simply because they're registered as one. All that means is that they were CONVICTED of a sex offense. We don't know what that offense is. And it's possible they didn't do it at all - people get wrongfully convicted all the time.

Shauk

hrm, i'm a driver for dominos, kinda interesting to see addresses that I've been to....

least I know who it's ok to punch in the face for stiffing me now at least.

Lady Sage

Shit.

Thats all I can say. A number of my clients are sex offenders. Good luck to me being civil.

__________________
If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open.
It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper
Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

bparker805

That is a great tool! I just found an ex's step-dad on there. I wish I could post that thing everywhere!

ngdawg

There's "Endangerment of a child" and then there's "Wreckless endangerment of a Child" coupled with "Aggravated Sexual Assault"...I understand what you're saying, but when you check the backgrounds of felons, there's degrees of severity-I truly doubt anyone would plea bargain to those and if so, then I really would assume the very worst since plea bargaining usually involves the lessening of charges. Registering as an offender is one thing-some 19 year olds have made news because they were charged with a sexual offense for having underage girlfriends.
Under Megan's Law, the immediate neighbors and police department are supposed to be made aware, as are any schools, although paroled felons are not supposed to live close to schools. Our police had no knowledge at all...someone dropped the ball on this and it was up to us to make the notifications.
I'm always told by friends that I'm too trusting...in this case I prefer to not trust at all.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

shakran

Without knowing what state you're in (Megan's law is different in each state) I can't really comment too much on what you're saying.

However, endangerment of a child and reckless endangerment of a child does not necessarily refer to a sex act. If you pull your bike riding kid up hills with your car, you're committing reckless endangerment, even though it's not sexual. That charge may or may not be related to the sex issue.

The aggravated sexual assault charge is a lot more ambiguous. In some states aggravated = sexual assault with a weapon. some say it's aggravated if you injure the person while sexually assaulting them. In still others, it simply means sexual assault with penetration. If your state falls in the latter category, the guy could still be in the situation I described - had sex with a 17 year old who lied and said she was 19.

What I'm saying is that you're going off half cocked here. Of course, keep your kid away from the guy until you research more, but you should do more research to find out what's really going on.

As for Megan's law, it only compels the state to make public the information on registered sex offenders. It doesn't say HOW the states have to make them public. Some states choose to have the cops go door to door warning the neighbors. Others choose to simply create a website. Without knowing what state we're talking about here, you may or may not be correct that Megan's law failed you.

ngdawg

I live in NJ, where Megan's Law originated. The parolee is required to register with the police department(our town's police had no knowledge of him) and the police captain told my neighbor that the county prosecutor was supposed to also contact the police in addition to any schools in the vicinity. According to this, Klaaskids, that is not listed, but it's what we were told, so yes, Megan's Law failed us as no one bothered to find this out.
I'm not a vigilante, but I do believe, in instances such as these, it's better to err on the side of caution. Being lackadasical about something like this could be dangerous.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Deltona Couple

Although I agree that Megan's law could use some updating, I am NOT however happy with the way they courts continue to missuse the sex offender/ sexual predator listing. In Florida, if you pull over on the side of the road to take a leak, you can actually be CHARGED with a sex crime and placed on the states sexual offender's list. If your own kids are in the car, even if they don't see anything, you can be put on the sexual predators list, and have that brand for the rest of your life FOR TAKING A LEAK ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. Personally I think that is taking it too far. I would, and do ALWAYS keep track of our local predators list in our neighborhood, and sourounding areas, but I ALSO check online for the details of the offence. Court recodrs are public acess data, and anyone can check with the courts to get a copy to find out EXACTLY what happened. Some people just see the label and automatically just assume the person is just horrible. A perfect example, and if I can locate the story I will post it here: A 28 year old man was listed on the sexual predators list in Ocala, Florida, and had been since he was 19. When neighbors found out, they posted flyers all over the city, constantly harrased the police about him, wanting him to be kicked out of town. They harrassed his parents, that he lived with, and finally drove the guy to commit suicide. Now on the surface, many people would say good riddance, however dig a little deeper and you will find that he was mentally retarded, and was given the basic mental capacity of a 12 year old, when he was 28 years old. At 19, when he was charged, he was i BELIEVE at some kind of picnic, and was caught masturbating in the bushes by a 9 or 10 year old girl. He was arrested, and taken to court. Even though the state agreed that his mental capacity was near that of the little girl herself, they still were required to put him on the list. Now after that and the rest of his life he was a good citizen, and was never charged with ANY other crimes. BUT when we see that little sign "sexual predator/offender" everyone is quick to jump the gun, and not look at the details FIRST.

Now trust me, if a guy rapes an underage girl, I say give the parents about 20 minutes with him or her in a private room with no windows. So don't think for a second I am defending the sick ones, but always make sure you know the nature of the crime. Ngdawg, if the guy is guilty of the seriousness that it appears to be, I hope that you get the results that you are looking for! Good luck!

__________________
"It is not that I have failed, but that I have found 10,000 ways that it DOESN'T work!" --Thomas Edison

Glory's Sun

hrmm, that site listed to find offenders isn't even current. I checked that database with the states database and there were several missing on the family watchdog site. :shrug:

I agree that people need to find out the background of the crimes before they jump to conclusions. It's no secret how I feel about the sex offender registry or people on it. So I'll just avoid that argument as there are plenty of other threads where it is alive and well.

If you want to be careful and know what's going on, use the states database and use the courts public acccess data.

shakran

Sounds to me like the guy moved and didn't tell anyone. He broke the law. Are they going to charge him?

That is exactly what I'm arguing about here. While it's much easier to simply brand a guy a sicko simply because he's on the list, you need to know WHY he's on the list before you start persecuting him.

ngdawg

Deltona's example of how a neighborhood reacted is why notification needs fine-tuning; however, in my own case, the person's reasons for being listed as a sex offender are quite clear: Aggravated sexual assault and wreckless endangerment of a child. It's those two beginning words that more or less point to the severity of his actions.
As to the point made by Guccilvr that the site is not that recent-spouse checks it periodically and that is the first time anyone has shown up here; he could very well have moved (further checking this morning shows he's had about 6 addresses), but since it shows right now that he lives here, the police have to work with that until they learn otherwise.
I tried to access more information, but it seems that would only be available for the asking price of $34.95....

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

The_Jazz

NG - I think the point here is that you don't know the circumstances of his conviction. You only know the charges that he plead to/was convicted of. I don't think that anyone (shakran, Deltona, myself) would tell you that further investigation is NOT warranted. We'd all agree that it's very possible that the guy is a predator and should be watched very carefully.

If I can speak for the others, I think that we all just want you to realize that it's also very possible he's not a danger and that the circumstances of the actions that led to his conviction are very unlikely to be repeated. What if he got drunk and crawled into the same bed as his child, thinking it was his own? I can imagine that act could lead to those charges, and a vindictive ex-wife might get a prosecutor interested. Couple that with an incompetent or overworked public defender, and you have a conviction and registration as a sex offender.

I'm not saying this is what happened, but it could have. You're not wrong to react to the prosecutor's inaction in failing to notify the proper people, but I think that crucifying the offender is a little premature. He may very well deserve it, but you need to be sure, and the records to do that are public and readily available. I urge you to find out, and if you've already been in contact with the police, they should be able to help you find out quickly and easily.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

ngdawg

As I stated before, pleading to charges that include 'wreckless endangerment' and 'aggravated assault', would essentially mean he did worse, not less. (Of course, saying he pleaded is pure speculation). I don't know about other states, but generally, those words aren't bantered about here, and until known otherwise, suggest a degree of violence, not merely slipping into the wrong bed. Plus, they are not charges, they are what his conviction was.
The circumstances of his conviction are not known, but generally speaking, even with a 50/50 chance of recidivism, as a parent, am I willing to think along those lines? That it's quite possible he's 'reformed'? My answer has to be "no". He didn't steal a bracelet-he hurt a child.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Glory's Sun

Recidivism rates are quite low among sex offenders. However, as a parent I can understand where you are coming from completely. You want to do what you can to protect your child. I just don't want people creating a modern day witch hunt (worse than it already is) based on a label.

Wreckless endagerment could be that he was speeding in his car while a child was inside. As far as finding more information, there should be plenty of state run websites in NJ to find the court documents etc.

The_Jazz

NG, I'm a parent too, and I'm by no means telling you that you'd shouldn't be afraid that this guy is the worst kind of sexual predator. It's entirely possible. However, you're jumping to conclusions and you're admitting as much. You don't know the circumstances and before you continue on your witch hunt, you need to make sure your prey is what you think it is.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

ShaniFaye

In NJ, it depends on the the level of their conviction as to who is notified, you are only notified in person if they are Tier 3, and the schools are not notified until Tier 2

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

shakran

Not necessarilly. If I didn't do something, but the evidence against me makes me think I might get convicted, I might just plead to a lesser charge (aggravated sex assault instead of rape, for instance) so I don't have to spend so much time in jail.


1) Generally does not establish a definite in your case. 2) those words are used as a legal term, not as an embellishment.

Until known otherwise you should quite frankly leave him the hell alone. Go find out what he did. THEN persecute him if it's warranted.

oh and BTW aggravated sex assault in NJ could mean that when he was 17, he slept with his 16 year old 3rd cousin or with his step sister. Hardly something you have to worry about him raping your little kid over.

Suggest a POSSIBLE degree of violence. I've read your state's law. So should you.

So go find out why.


They could be. Go look it up.

Again, it depends on what he did.

If he's really a child molester I wouldn't take that chance either. But I'd find out if he was really a child molester first.

You don't know that. You're assuming that based on limited facts, even though you could very easily go find out the full story.

Why don't you want to do that?

ngdawg

I have been, had you read through....further information is only available if I'm willing to shell out $$$. So far, the court site for New Jersey that I found does not list criminal convictions.
You contradicted your own 'give him a chance' stance with the statement that pleading to something like aggravated sexual assault could be the lesser crime...so rape is not that bad anyway??? Oy...
This isn't a witch hunt-this is insuring that things are ok and my kids and others are safe. As a registered sex offender, he is supposed be known to the local police-being that he's had at least 6 addresses in 2 counties, he's had a lot of notifying to do.
If you want to think this is some kind of 'persecution', that's your right. Let's just hope your kids never have to catch their bus in front of a registered 'aggravated assault instead of rape' resident....
I wouldn't hire a babysitter who even had 'endangerment of a child' hanging over their heads; your implied suggestions that I trust that this guy is nothing more than misunderstood are noted. Ignored, but noted. My kids' welfare is paramount. I have no intentions of knocking on his door with a baseball bat in hand...I'm looking out for my family.

I can't give a link, obviously, to the particulars of this person, but his charges stemmed from two seperate incidents. In 2000, he was convicted of sexual assault on a juvenile female and in 2003, was convicted of exposing himself to two 'stranger women'.
So, still think he's safe? Just what is needed around this boring town-a flasher living across the street from a school bus stop(who also assaults).

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Glory's Sun

After searching around the state Judiciary site for NJ I did find this tidbit of information:

I didn't see anywhere to look up information in Promis Gavel online so if you want to find out the particulars, you need to go to the courthouse.

shakran

So get your neighborhood together and pay for the report.

read again. I also said if I didn't commit a crime but I think they might convict me anyway, I might plead to a lesser charge.

Saying megan's law failed you because he failed to follow it is crazy. Now, if they fail to prosecute him for not notifying them, THEN the law failed.

If he did, I'd find out what the nature of the incident was. Until I knew I'd drive him to school myself, but I'd leave the guy alone. Once I knew, if it was a real issue, I'd then start taking action. Not until. My kid would still be safe - that's MY job, not the government's.

And noted incorrectly. I'm not implying that you should trust him.

I'm saying you should find out what's going on before you start going after him.

I'm also saying that if the only time you don't trust someone around your kid is when the government tells you not to, then you need to wake up. There are plenty of untrustworthy people out there who aren't on any list. Don't trust ANYONE you don't know around your kids. Period. Frankly as far as kids go we should NOT be relying on Megan's law or the government to come tell us when bad people are around. We should be watching our kids regardless of whether the cop tells us there's definitely a bad person in the neighborhood.

Now you finally have the facts, and it's no longer a witch hunt. This is good progress.

I'm going to be blunt here. Exactly where in hell did you get the idea that I ever thought he was safe? Just because I advocated knowing your facts before going off half cocked does not mean I was defending this individual or that I thought he was trustworthy.

mixedmedia

As the mother of two children who were sexually molested (the trial of the perpetrator ended just last May) I can say with some authority that you shouldn't rely on the terms used to legally describe the crime as a basis of determining the severity of the crime. These terms are used to describe a wide variety of activities with children of varying ages. shakran is absolutely right in what he is saying.

Still, I think you've done the right thing by notifying the authorities, ng, and as you've said, action is being taken. That's about all you can do. Apparently this man has served his time and deserves the right to live somewhere as anonymously as possible. You will just have to be more vigilant with your children. Sad fact of life.

I check the sexual offender rolls in my area quite often and there are literally hundreds of offenders living within a 10 mile radius of my home. MOST of these are men who have had consensual relationships with teenage girls - but you wouldn't know it just by reading their charges. Fortunately, the apartment complex where I live screens occupants and will not allow someone convicted of any sexual offense to reside there.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Deltona Couple

While I do the same, and look at our local list on a regular basis, I will say one thing about the above quote.... I don't care one hill of beans if it was consentual, lol, if the guy was say in his late 20's or older, and was doing it with ANY person under the age of 18, I wouldn't want them ANYWHERE near my kids.... Consentual or not, he CHOSE to have sex with a minor...sorry, in my book that is strike one, strike two, strike 3, GET OUT!.....lol

__________________
"It is not that I have failed, but that I have found 10,000 ways that it DOESN'T work!" --Thomas Edison

mixedmedia

I agree absolutely. Only I believe there is a big difference in nature, psychologically speaking, between a man who has consensual sex with a 16-year-old and one molests a pre-pubescent child. One is definitely more of a danger to society than the other. And from my experience, I've become aware that our justice system doesn't exactly consider and reflect that difference, which is why dangerous people are so often let back out onto the street. That is my main concern. I think more attention should be given in our courtrooms to the differences between true pedophiles and what you might otherwise call child molesters. There is a much higher rate of recidivism amongst pedophiles, and worse, a tendency towards increasingly violent crimes against their victims.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

shakran

There is also a large conceptual difference between a man who has sex with a 17 year old who claims she is 18 or 19, and a man who knowingly has sex with a child. The law treats them both the same - you statutorially raped her, you're a sex offender. But the criminal nature of these two situations are night and day different.

Jinn

Interesting thread, and unfortunately I have to agree with those saying it went too much of a witch hunt much too quickly.

And interesting thing to note is that more men think that Megan's Law takes it too far or that the label is overused? Why? Because if a woman were to lie, decieve, or falsify records, we could easily end up a sex offender. And to be frank, the treatment and thoughts that people have in this thread towards people with that label scares me. Remind me to never piss off a woman.

All it would take is a woman to lie convincingly and consistently and I could be put in a jail for a long time, and come out labeled and stigmatized. That SCARES me.

And yet on the other hand, if a man were to do the same thing, it's unlikely that it would ever make it to trial. Even if it did, I have a hard time believing the woman would actually be convicted as a sex offender. She'd probably end up with house arrest like that teacher. Gender imbalance, anyone?

And as a side note, I don't think exposing oneself should be a crime. Sex, penetration, touching, etc.. that's entirely different. There are entire nude colonies, and the European world has an entirely different view than we do on nudity. I think our Protestant fear of nudity has gone a bit far. Someone sees my winky and I'm sexually offending them?

Mostly because sexual assault, rape, etc.. are never accidental. Nakedness can be entirely accidental. If I forget to close my blinds walking from my bathroom to my bedroom and a kid walks by, I hardly think I'm a sex offender.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

mixedmedia

You're right, of course. Here in Florida, where we've had several high-profile child murders recently, there has been increased attention given to sex crimes against children, which is a good thing, long overdue, and I'm grateful for it...but no additional measures have been enacted to make the judicial system more efficient and just and dealing with them. Therefore those accused of "statutory rape" (Florida doesn't even use that term) are often given sentences that one might deem too harsh given all the details and those who pose a true danger to our children are very often sentenced too leniently. Personally, I don't think a pedophile should be given three chances to molest children (to paraphrase DC above). I think we should be more focused on making clinical diagnoses of pedophilia early and dealing with it in a manner totally distinct from the judicial sphere of what is called in psychiatric circles "situational child molesters."

Step one should be the prohibition of ANY plea bargaining for clinically-diagnosed pedophiles. That is the number one factor that gives pedophiles the opportunity to recidivate. If pedophiles were more often sentenced for the crimes they actually committed, there would be far fewer of them on the streets.

Well, that teacher will have to register as a sex offender. That was part of her sentencing. And quite simply, women do not molest children as much as men do.

BUT, that said, on the sex offender rolls here in my neighborhood I was surprised to see how many women were actually on them.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

ngdawg

I would really like to know how you and Shakran think getting information is a witch hunt. Do you have kids? Own a house? No one went after this guy, no one threatened to have him removed, beaten, etc. A bit of irony there that I go within the law and get what is put out there (more than our own police did, apparently), and get ostracized here for wanting to protect my kids and for being pissed that as a parent, I have to do it instead of the authorities, whose job it should have been.
Have you ever been the victim of a crime or been sexually assaulted? I have, my mother was at the age of 3(yes, child molesters were around way back then too) and my sister was an intended but lucky almost-victim back in 1964. There was no registries back then, either.
In this particular instance, someone was registered, on the national register as a two-time offender and, because no one went through the proper channels, a school bus stop was placed in front of his house, not cool at all, plus he managed to move one block from a preschool, which also was not informed and was supposed to be. Having information doesn't make something a witch hunt. Having to find the information by digging and digging because no one in the position to know what's happening, doesn't, is ridiculous. I tell my kids don't go there or don't do this because I want them safe, and every morning I was sending them off to stand in front of a twice-convicted felon's house. And a convicted flasher!! There's something to talk about in study hall.....
The fact of the matter is, women get victimized many many more times than men-rape is primarily a man overpowering woman crime. Women that use it to seek revenge are assholes-that's clear. But, while you can fear possibly getting charged erroneously with a crime of rape, etc., we fear getting raped, and possibly killed. That's the imbalance. (And more than one female teacher has gone to prison for seducing minors-think Mary Laterneau(sp).
Just as there are 'degrees' of sex crime charges, there are degrees of 'lewdness'. Peeing in an alley might get you a desk ticket. Standing on a corner flashing kids as they walk home from school will get you more. Of course, it depends on where you live and the courts, but generally, circumstances rule what the crime is or should be. Nudist colonies and lifestyles are a completely different animal altogether.
You wouldn't be. Cops don't do witch hunts either.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

ShaniFaye

ngdawg (just out of curiosity...Im not coming down on you) Im wondering if you found out what tier he was when you got your information? If you look at the info I posted earlier, the schools (including preschools) are only notified at a specific level.

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

ngdawg

The state police registry didn't have one that I noticed (I was getting ready for work when I found the info). Probably with some more digging I could find out; plus I don't know if NJ considers two seperate convictions seperately or, by lumping them together, raises his level(which would be my guess, but I would need to find out). When I spoke to the preschool director, she made no distinction, saying only that they were 'supposed to be notified' if 'any' registered offender moves close by.
My own curiosity asks me why a preschool director doesn't make periodic checks herself...
Edit: He is listed as a tier2-Moderate. According to the NJSP site: If the risk level is moderate (Tier 2), in addition to law enforcement agencies, schools, licensed day care centers, summer camps, and registered community organizations are notified of sex offenders that they are likely to encounter because of the possibility that pedophiles and sexual predators will be drawn to these places.
It was up to this person to notify our local police of his residence and register with them, who, in turn, notify the above listed. This wasn't done. His failure to register is considered a 4th degree crime and law enforcement is under no compulsion to notify anyone if he or anyone who fails to register gets charged.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Glory's Sun

Wow, this thread has come further than I expected. With that, it's going to be hard for me not to just jump in and state how I feel about the sex offense registries etc.

I'm curious though to the statements about women/girls getting abused more than men. (or that men do more abusing than women). I have a contact with a person who works for the state and rehabilitates sex offenders. She says that while statistically men do more offending than women, the stats are skewed because of a double standard. A boy has sex with his female teacher and it's seen as a badge of honor. It never gets reported and the teacher gets her rocks off to little johnny's tutoring. I have a feeling that if all the instances of this were reported, we'd see quite a difference in the stats and that it would be closer to 50/50.

NC is going to a tiered system for their registries. However it still doesn't differenciate between the 18 yr old kid who slept with a 16 (and legal w/ consent) girl and the 40 year old who plead down to indecent liberties.

The other thing that I'm concered about is how Bush put the law out there that juvenille offenders have to register for 10, 25 and life. If a juvenille offends and isn't found to be mentally disabled, he shouldn't have to worry with such a long registry. Let him try to get his life back together. I think that for every 1 recidivist, there are 1,000's of non-recidivists, but naturally we only hear of the 1, and another witch hunt ensues.

I'm a parent. I understand the fears that parents have; but let's be honest. If someone wants your kid bad enough, no amount of registry or screening or law enforcement will stop them. It's scary, but it's true.

It's early, I'm sure I have plenty of misspellings in there and I apologize but.. as most know this is a subject that I can hash out all day.

mixedmedia

This may be true among the subset of offenders who have sex with adolescents and teenagers, but certainly not true within the larger context of those who sexually offend against minors as a whole. Absolutely not. So I don't think your claim of being closer to 50/50 is qualifiable in any meaningful way.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Glory's Sun

That actually wasn't my statement. That came from a person who's been involved in the DOC and Rehabilitation arena for about 25 years.

mixedmedia

Oopsy...sorry. Only I just don't see how that could be true. If so, there would be alot more evidence of this in our society outside of actual arrests and convictions. Such as the presence of child pornography aimed at women and the like. In this case I don't think attention is too unfairly slanted towards men because men are truly more often (than women) guilty of sex crimes against children, just as they are of sex crimes in general.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Glory's Sun

I have no doubt that men are more likely to commit such crimes. I just agree that if more was reported we'd see the stats change as far as women are concerned. It may not be 50/50, but I would guess it would be 30/70 (women/men), or possibly even higher.

Stats don't really mean much in this arena. For instance, one statistic shows that a sex offender (even the 18 year old lumped in) has had at least 7 victims prior to being caught. I'd venture to say (and so does the expert) that this is often way too high for most offenders. The true pedophiles would be the ones who have this stat while most "petty" offenders have one victim.

She has explained all the fetishes undeneath the paraphelia umbrella and most are quite healthy, it's just the phelias such as pedophelia that are dangerous. Pedophila is ranked as a fetish in the psych world and I do agree with your statement that more people once found of possessing child porn or committing an act, need to actually be evaluated for this fetish. If it is found to be a fetish then they should place them at a higher level of imprisonment etc.

mixedmedia

I won't disagree with that. Sounds fair. And I do understand that there is a bias in regards to men having sex with teen girls that leads to instances of it being reported more often the same crime committed by women with teen boys. For that matter, I can't say for sure, but I have the impression that men having sex with teen boys carries more of a social stigma, as well.

Personally, while I don't think it is right, kids in their mid-to-late teens having sex with adults doesn't cause me that much psychic disturbance. I mean, there is only so much mental and physiological difference between a sixteen year old and an eighteen year old. I agree there should be laws against it, but it doesn't provoke the same outrage in me as it seems to do with many other people.

I agree with you completely, which is why I believe child molestation and pedophilia should be treated at least somewhat distinctly. For example, if the study that came up with the statistic you quoted above was based on data acquired from the cases of offenders across the board, then that 7 victims number, if narrowed down to actual pedophiles might become even higher. It's scary. And our rather puritanical approach of treating all of these cases as if they were committed by the same depraved mindset could conceivably be hurting the cause of really protecting our kids from those who would set out to hurt them rather than helping it.

You're right, pedophilia is categorized as a fetish, but it is a distinctly anti-social fetish and one that I believe should have more significance in our justice system. Glad we can agree on that.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

ngdawg

I agree that juveniles should not be lifelong registrants in almost any circumstance. If their court records can be sealed, why should they then have to register the rest of their lives? As adult crimes are tiered, so should those in juvenile courts.
I think my stance has been really skewed to some here thinking I'm out to get some felon. My only concern is the welfare of my kids; by me being informed, they become informed. I'm not one of those 'because I say so' moms when it comes to something like this. My kids know the world isn't all lollipops and daisies; if I know there's a true hint of danger and where it might be, so will they so that they can act accordingly. I also know, as do they, that some piece of paper or formal act of law-abiding is not what is going to protect them-knowledge will, being aware will. They know why their bus stop was changed and know that sometimes, those that are supposed to act on their behalf, don't, so they need to practice common sense.
The tiered system is a bit better than just some across-the-board legislation, but it would be impossible to go with every case's circumstances and rule accordingly, so there has to be a system of labelling the crime by severity;
sexual assault is not the same as sexual battery, sexual battery is not the same as depraved indifference is not the same as lewdness, etc. "Sexual assault" might have gotten someone a tier2 (depending on the state), but, as in the case I brought up, we have two convictions, which might very well be the reasoning behind the status. I think there is a difference between the 18 year old lying down with a 15 year old girlfriend and a 40 year old doing the same thing; I'd suspect more respectable judges would as well.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

analog

And I believe that's all that needs to be said for the way the issue was handled. Reminds me of the Salem Witchcraft trials. "A witch! A witch!! May we burn her?"

Nothing says, "teach your children about the world" like instilling wonderful qualities such as jumping the gun, and most of all- going nuts and stirring everyone up into a frenzy before you even know what the hell is going on.

"Child molester" with unknown record of offense: 0
Angry mob looking for blood "to protect the kids": 1

And like others, I'd be the first one to lead the ass-kicking of a child molester- but that doesn't mean that I agree with this very poorly executed system of labeling people as sex offenders because their crime fits neatly in a pre-printed list.

The role of the police is to enforce the laws- it is in the judge, however, that we are supposed to expect correct and fair interpretation of the laws. No such thing is done in these cases. As has been pointed out, an 18 year old has sex with his 17 year old girlfriend on the night of his birthday, and he's technically now able to prosecute as a sex offender for "raping" a minor. The day before, it was two minors having a romp before the parents came home, and now it's rape? No no.

It's a massively flawed system to label people who don't pose a danger to others, and irreversibly stigmatizes them as though they did, or do.

We all want to make the world safe and protect the innocent- but this is a gross overstepping of reality and necessity.