Great...we get a sexual offender at the Soccer Complex and the police won't tell us who he is

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Does that list include anyone who has committed any 'sexual' crime? For example, an 18 year old hooking up with a 17 year old?

Just asking. Most people jump at the words and assume child molestor but that could be way off the mark.

Yes it does, but that is not automatically a crime. Many do not understand the laws on sexual relations with minors...it's more fuzzy logic that a straight law. There are a lot on the sex offenders list that are just like that though, an 18 with a 17 year old...also some that eventually had married the person they were charged with assaulting.

My town calls every resident up when a new sex offender moves into it. The give only the address they moved into and the URL to look it up. From that you can get the name, picture, etc.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Does that list include anyone who has committed any 'sexual' crime? For example, an 18 year old hooking up with a 17 year old?

Just asking. Most people jump at the words and assume child molestor but that could be way off the mark.

Yes it does, but that is not automatically a crime. Many do not understand the laws on sexual relations with minors...it's more fuzzy logic that a straight law. There are a lot on the sex offenders list that are just like that though, an 18 with a 17 year old...also some that eventually had married the person they were charged with assaulting.

My town calls every resident up when a new sex offender moves into it. The give only the address they moved into and the URL to look it up. From that you can get the name, picture, etc.

I edited this post out since it was already discussed but you caught it so I have to respond.

What I hate the most about this is that automatically, regardless of the actual crime, you are branded when you move into a new area and this list is shared with the residents. To most people it probably will not matter what you actually did. What will matter is that you are on "the list". I just do not agree with grouping all crimes together in one lump when it places your picture one click away from a person who molested a dozen children.

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
I hate the sex offender registry. It is such BS.

It is BS for the most part...most of those on it seem to be kids that did something with another kid. What my guess is a jilted party decides to make it a legal issue.

Very few states, if any now; have automatic statutatory rape laws. In many like Florida, as long as one is 24 or under and the other is 16 or older it's fair game. In others as long as X amount of years is not between the minor and the adult it's fair.

However; it's pretty easy for another to claim they were raped. You end up on the sex offender list then.

I had a friend at my Uni who had completely consensual relations with "she who shall not be named" in December of last year. He breaks off his relationship with her in March and in April she claims rape and the whole thing goes into court. Thankfully this lying s1vt had her case against my friend thrown out because she had no proof anything happened, not even circumstantial evidence. (I mean, come on... everyone in the dorm would have heard her if she was screaming rape)... that and she was known to have lied previously, even snuck into a basketball game (in the middle of tenting no less...). Guess if you call wolf too many times no one will believe you, eh?

Just agreeing with the above post that there is a blurry line between consent/non-consent sometimes that may or may not result in conviction(s).

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: TravisT
The man's name should be given up. This is potentially a safety issue for the citizens in that area.

How does giving out his name in any way protect the kids at the park? Knowing his name is not important, his description and that of his vehicle are.

The name is only useful if you want to track him down. If they just gave you his name, how could that help people at the park? Whadduya gonna do? Walk around demanding everyones drivers license to see if it's him? No, the descriptions are the best way to go.

Fern

 

[TravisT]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: TravisT
I actually have viewed the sexual offenders list more than once within the last year for my area. There is no such thing for the things you describe that I know of. I would like to know, but i'm not demanding to know. I don't know exactly what your argument is, but why shouldn't the police give up this guys name and picture? They obviously felt it was important enough to make parents aware of, but yet didn't feel it was important to know if the man walking in the restroom behind your son was the predator or not. It doesn't make sense to me.

This is the same thing as the police officer coming to my house, telling me that I live within a mile of a convicted murder or thief but not telling me who, or where they are.

There are a couple of points. The first is that the list only goes to promote fear by showing ever single person ever convicted of a sex crime living in the area. This includes an 18 year old consentually having sex with a 17 year old in 1990. While these lists may list the crime, these are often misinterpreted. The above could be labbeled "sexual assault of a minor." The actual details of the crime are not released. Again, this only promotes fear. Second, there is a double standard of sorts. People (including those in this thread) are up in arms over not knowing the identity, yet they completely ignore every other sort of crime that goes on around them. The only reason the police reported this is because of politics. If there was a sudden demand from the sheeple of America to know about convicted murderers, the the police would probably notify you about them.

To answer the other part of your question, the legal right of public sex offender databases and registration is already questionable (based on the fact that it punishes a person for a crime after they have served their sentence). Providing more information only provides additional ammo against the laws. It is also a liability issue. If the person were found killed the next day, the local PD would be partially liable.

I think the whole "scare tactic" or "fear" comes up to much. Who would actually be trying to "scare" people? I don't think the police or local authorities put this in the newspaper as a measure to make people manic while at their local youth soccer games. You also said politics, I think it is actually a precaution issue. Lets say someone does get raped or molested at one of these events. The police obviously knew the guy was lurking around in the area, don't you think that would reflect badly on the police department in the area?

Back to the second part, I personally think that sexual registry is PART OF your sentence. I will agree with many here that there should be degree's of punishment in those situations. Someone who raped a child should not be put on the same level as someone who was 18 and slept with a 15 year old. However, it is a crime anyway you look at it. Outside of that, I would like to see states take it to hte extreme with some sexual offenders, probably rapists, molestation of a minor who isn't able to consent, those types of things. Isn't there a state that has or was considering making all sexual registers have pink lincense plates on their vehicles? I think it is a good idea for those that are violent.

I also have a very poor view of rehabilitating a rapist or child molestor. I'm not sure if you have kids, but I would imagine if you did and they were in danger, you would like to be aware of it.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: TravisT

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: TravisT
I actually have viewed the sexual offenders list more than once within the last year for my area. There is no such thing for the things you describe that I know of. I would like to know, but i'm not demanding to know. I don't know exactly what your argument is, but why shouldn't the police give up this guys name and picture? They obviously felt it was important enough to make parents aware of, but yet didn't feel it was important to know if the man walking in the restroom behind your son was the predator or not. It doesn't make sense to me.

This is the same thing as the police officer coming to my house, telling me that I live within a mile of a convicted murder or thief but not telling me who, or where they are.

There are a couple of points. The first is that the list only goes to promote fear by showing ever single person ever convicted of a sex crime living in the area. This includes an 18 year old consentually having sex with a 17 year old in 1990. While these lists may list the crime, these are often misinterpreted. The above could be labbeled "sexual assault of a minor." The actual details of the crime are not released. Again, this only promotes fear. Second, there is a double standard of sorts. People (including those in this thread) are up in arms over not knowing the identity, yet they completely ignore every other sort of crime that goes on around them. The only reason the police reported this is because of politics. If there was a sudden demand from the sheeple of America to know about convicted murderers, the the police would probably notify you about them.

To answer the other part of your question, the legal right of public sex offender databases and registration is already questionable (based on the fact that it punishes a person for a crime after they have served their sentence). Providing more information only provides additional ammo against the laws. It is also a liability issue. If the person were found killed the next day, the local PD would be partially liable.

I think the whole "scare tactic" or "fear" comes up to much. Who would actually be trying to "scare" people? I don't think the police or local authorities put this in the newspaper as a measure to make people manic while at their local youth soccer games. You also said politics, I think it is actually a precaution issue. Lets say someone does get raped or molested at one of these events. The police obviously knew the guy was lurking around in the area, don't you think that would reflect badly on the police department in the area?

Back to the second part, I personally think that sexual registry is PART OF your sentence. I will agree with many here that there should be degree's of punishment in those situations. Someone who raped a child should not be put on the same level as someone who was 18 and slept with a 15 year old. However, it is a crime anyway you look at it. Outside of that, I would like to see states take it to hte extreme with some sexual offenders, probably rapists, molestation of a minor who isn't able to consent, those types of things. Isn't there a state that has or was considering making all sexual registers have pink lincense plates on their vehicles? I think it is a good idea for those that are violent.

I also have a very poor view of rehabilitating a rapist or child molestor. I'm not sure if you have kids, but I would imagine if you did and they were in danger, you would like to be aware of it.

Fear comes from a couple of different areas. First and foremost, the cause of the fear relating to sexual offenders comes from ignorance on the part of the public. Without it, it would not be an issue. Fear is also a tool used in politics. Between special interest groups composed of utter morons and politicians. You might wish to consult the Jetsetta Gage case and its relation to 692A (Iowa).

"I'm not sure if you have kids, but I would imagine if you did and they were in danger, you would like to be aware of it." Unless you live in the country, there is a former violent criminal within a mile of you. You KNOW that your kids are at risk. The only effect the sex offender registry has is to tell you their address. This *might* have an effect if you demand ID from everyone you speak with. Other than that, it does nothing.

 

[opticalmace]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: TravisT
The man's name should be given up. This is potentially a safety issue for the citizens in that area.

How does giving out his name in any way protect the kids at the park? Knowing his name is not important, his description and that of his vehicle are.

The name is only useful if you want to track him down. If they just gave you his name, how could that help people at the park? Whadduya gonna do? Walk around demanding everyones drivers license to see if it's him? No, the descriptions are the best way to go.

Fern

Well said. :thumbsup:

 

[blackangst1]

As it has been stated before, there are many things that put you on a sex registry...here's two examples: a man goes to an adult bookstore and decides to watch some pr0n in a private booth. Mr policeman comes around poking his nose in, and catches him masturbating. BAM. Sex offender. Or if a guy solicits a prostitute...BAM sex offender.

Now tell me this. In both of these cases (which happens FAR more often than a 17 year old doing an 18 year old), how are either of these two people a threat in any way to society?

P.S. No, Im not on a registry somewhere lol

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: ariafrost

I had a friend at my Uni who had completely consensual relations with "she who shall not be named" in December of last year. He breaks off his relationship with her in March and in April she claims rape and the whole thing goes into court. Thankfully this lying s1vt had her case against my friend thrown out because she had no proof anything happened, not even circumstantial evidence. (I mean, come on... everyone in the dorm would have heard her if she was screaming rape)... that and she was known to have lied previously, even snuck into a basketball game (in the middle of tenting no less...). Guess if you call wolf too many times no one will believe you, eh?

Just agreeing with the above post that there is a blurry line between consent/non-consent sometimes that may or may not result in conviction(s).

Just a bit of an FYI, you don't have to scream if you are being raped.

The 'smart' chicks, do the deed then head to the ER and create the story.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: KK
Sh1t, I'm going to have to paint my ranger now.

You can borrow my ice cream truck if you want.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
As it has been stated before, there are many things that put you on a sex registry...here's two examples: a man goes to an adult bookstore and decides to watch some pr0n in a private booth. Mr policeman comes around poking his nose in, and catches him masturbating. BAM. Sex offender. Or if a guy solicits a prostitute...BAM sex offender.

Now tell me this. In both of these cases (which happens FAR more often than a 17 year old doing an 18 year old), how are either of these two people a threat in any way to society?

P.S. No, Im not on a registry somewhere lol

I don't agree that prosititution should be illegal even though I have never had the need for one...however; many will unfortunately tell you about how many ways it brings drugs and murder along with it.

I would vote for openly allowing prostitution providing they are not dressed more risque than an average citizen.

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: blackangst1
As it has been stated before, there are many things that put you on a sex registry...here's two examples: a man goes to an adult bookstore and decides to watch some pr0n in a private booth. Mr policeman comes around poking his nose in, and catches him masturbating. BAM. Sex offender. Or if a guy solicits a prostitute...BAM sex offender.

Now tell me this. In both of these cases (which happens FAR more often than a 17 year old doing an 18 year old), how are either of these two people a threat in any way to society?

P.S. No, Im not on a registry somewhere lol

I don't agree that prosititution should be illegal even though I have never had the need for one...however; many will unfortunately tell you about how many ways it brings drugs and murder along with it.

I would vote for openly allowing prostitution providing they are not dressed more risque than an average citizen.

I love what George Carlin said about Prositution

I don't understand how it can be illegal to sell something you can give away for free.

not an exact quote but so true.

 

[Eos]

< former sex offender. She was barely 17 years, 2 months and I was 19 years and 8 months.

Marrying her cured me of my problem...

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: eos
< former sex offender. She was barely 17 years, 2 months and I was 19 years and 8 months.

Marrying her cured me of my problem...

Not exactly...if you were convicted (dating a 17 y/o when 19 y/o is not a sex offender in most states)..then even with a marriage you'd still be labeled forever.

The bad part of this is the descriptions are very vague others can see and often sound worse than the event.

I had a couple friends that back in the day had incidents that were mostly teenager crap I thought...they are in the sex offender registry. Today (we don't talk much except at reunions which are rare), they both are upper middle class, possibly lower upper class...so are the chicks that accused them. Both these guys were "seeing" these girls.

Fortunately for me my chicks wouldn't run to the cops...just try to get guys to fight me.

To the guy above with the ice cream truck....an Escalade with nintendo works better. :beer:

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: QueBert

I love what George Carlin said about Prositution

I don't understand how it can be illegal to sell something you can give away for free.

not an exact quote but so true.

I agree, but what if I kill for fun? you can see how it gets everyone so loopy.

I think most of it has to do with the guys and girls that either can't get laid bringing cash to the table or that neglect what they have to go out and pay for it.

Realistically though, 9 out of 10 people should be able to find sex now-a-days if they are just going out to look of it without adding in the possibility of a relationship.

Relationships are hard, sex is easy.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: opticalmace

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: TravisT
The man's name should be given up. This is potentially a safety issue for the citizens in that area.

How does giving out his name in any way protect the kids at the park? Knowing his name is not important, his description and that of his vehicle are.

The name is only useful if you want to track him down. If they just gave you his name, how could that help people at the park? Whadduya gonna do? Walk around demanding everyones drivers license to see if it's him? No, the descriptions are the best way to go.

Fern

Well said. :thumbsup:

I was asking for his name because with his name I can look him up in the sex offender registery and get a picture of what he looks like. Which will be much more useful in looking out for this character at the soccer complex than a vague description.

 

[GeekDrew]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: GeekDrew
I'm personally against sexual offender registries for first-time offenders (at least) because a lot of people are classified on that list that shouldn't be (IMHO, not the law's).

For example, a 17 and 18 year old sleep together. It was consentual, and both parties were of age of consent. However, minor's parents press charges against other party, regardless of their child's opinion. Bingo, sexual offender. But why? They've done "nothing wrong" if it was consentual. There are numerous such situations like that, that I completely disagree with.

I agree. There needs to be some qualifications for making the sex offenders list based on the heinousness of the crime. Whether or not its a first conviction should be moot though. It should be based on what exactly the offender did and should only be if a conviction was made, not just an allegation or a trial. Somebody in the situation you described most definitely does NOT belong on a sex offender list with their face plastered all over the internet. There needs to be evidence of a premeditated or violent sexual act done with lewd or vicious intent.

i do wish some of you would read my post.

on the government sex offender list i viewed it details their crime and if force was used.
therefore, if it is an 18 y/o sleeping with a 17 y/o who was charged cause the parents were pissed you can figure that out. (it lists the age(s) of the victim(s))

does that make the guy a "sex offender" in your book? i would think the details could vindicate him. i have a so-called sex offender on my road that is 21 and he did it with a 16 y/o... no force, no drugs involved (it tells you that about the crime). i really don't fear the guy at all, but i won't say he shouldn't be on the list. he knew he was taking that risk.

i did read your post; it isn't relevant to everyone. no sexual offender list in my area details the crime. it says online which section of code he was charged against.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: GeekDrew

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: GeekDrew
I'm personally against sexual offender registries for first-time offenders (at least) because a lot of people are classified on that list that shouldn't be (IMHO, not the law's).

For example, a 17 and 18 year old sleep together. It was consentual, and both parties were of age of consent. However, minor's parents press charges against other party, regardless of their child's opinion. Bingo, sexual offender. But why? They've done "nothing wrong" if it was consentual. There are numerous such situations like that, that I completely disagree with.

I agree. There needs to be some qualifications for making the sex offenders list based on the heinousness of the crime. Whether or not its a first conviction should be moot though. It should be based on what exactly the offender did and should only be if a conviction was made, not just an allegation or a trial. Somebody in the situation you described most definitely does NOT belong on a sex offender list with their face plastered all over the internet. There needs to be evidence of a premeditated or violent sexual act done with lewd or vicious intent.

i do wish some of you would read my post.

on the government sex offender list i viewed it details their crime and if force was used.
therefore, if it is an 18 y/o sleeping with a 17 y/o who was charged cause the parents were pissed you can figure that out. (it lists the age(s) of the victim(s))

does that make the guy a "sex offender" in your book? i would think the details could vindicate him. i have a so-called sex offender on my road that is 21 and he did it with a 16 y/o... no force, no drugs involved (it tells you that about the crime). i really don't fear the guy at all, but i won't say he shouldn't be on the list. he knew he was taking that risk.

i did read your post; it isn't relevant to everyone. no sexual offender list in my area details the crime. it says online which section of code he was charged against.

can you read this link?

http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/cgi/...dler=WebNSORDetailHandler&ID=455285264

that is an example of how much info you get in New York.

Description
PL 130.25 02 E F 3 Rape 3rd: Victim Less Than 17 Years Old, Perpetrator 21 Years Or More

Offense Description:
Actual Sexual Intercourse
Relationship to victim: Non-Stranger
Weapon used:
No weapon used
Force used:
No force used
Computer used: No
Pornography involved: No

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: opticalmace

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: TravisT
The man's name should be given up. This is potentially a safety issue for the citizens in that area.

How does giving out his name in any way protect the kids at the park? Knowing his name is not important, his description and that of his vehicle are.

The name is only useful if you want to track him down. If they just gave you his name, how could that help people at the park? Whadduya gonna do? Walk around demanding everyones drivers license to see if it's him? No, the descriptions are the best way to go.

Fern

Well said. :thumbsup:

I was asking for his name because with his name I can look him up in the sex offender registery and get a picture of what he looks like. Which will be much more useful in looking out for this character at the soccer complex than a vague description.

Fair enough. Might try asking the cops to print out his picture from the database and redact out his name. I suspect the cops are just following what their lawyer said (around here the depts usually have internal counsel to help keep them out of lawsuits.)

To put it another way: You want a better (more detailed) description.


Fern