• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Meet my neighbor....the convicted sex offender.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<<

<< My boss has an interesting neighbor...a convicted murderer. He served his time and now lives next door to my boss. Apparently, this guy chopped his wife into itty bitty pieces. :Q What I don't get, though, is why my boss's son likes to pick on this guy. >>




If a convicted murderer moves into a neighborhood, does a warning letter go out? Serious question, I don't know. >>


To be perfectly honest, I don't know. I'll have to ask my boss next time I get the chance.
 
No offense taken, you're the lawyer, not me.🙂

Anywho, if the charges were more serious wouldn't he still be in jail? The date of conviction is October of last year, so he'd probably still be incarcerated if the sentence were anything other than a misdemeanor, right? Not to mention the charges listed would be something other than statutory if the victim were under 14...."child endangerment/enticement/etc"?

I'm not especially worried about it, and not going to go ask his folks what really happened...just curious.

Fausto
 
So, I'm browsing through my zip code and.....

CRIME: INCEST WITH A MINOR
CONVICTION DATE: 10/07/1991 CONVICTION STATE: CO
PHOTO: No photo available for this offender.

Sick bastard.
 
Don_Vito: These registries are not the result of congressional (federal) action, its on the state level. Most are modeled after New Jersey's "Megan's Law."

After reviewing the thread, and esp. the initial incident and the first couple of reactions to it, I am not disappointed at all that the federal courts (both at the district and court of appeals levels) have stricken down my state's (CT) version of this public registry.

I would respectfully disagree with those who consider statutory rape to be a crime of such a nature that the such a person should be officially labeled as a "sex offender." To me it dilutes the significance of such a registry.
 


<< No offense taken, you're the lawyer, not me.🙂

Anywho, if the charges were more serious wouldn't he still be in jail? The date of conviction is October of last year, so he'd probably still be incarcerated if the sentence were anything other than a misdemeanor, right? Not to mention the charges listed would be something other than statutory if the victim were under 14...."child endangerment/enticement/etc"? >>



You are probably right, but again, offenders are often permitted to plead guilty to lesser offenses than what the prosecution could prove at trial, in the interest of expedience. Just to be clear, I do not mean to demonize this guy, but I think I would be wary of him if I had a 12-year-old child.

In all candor I may be especially sensitive to these issues at the moment because I am working on a couple of child-molestation cases, one of which is almost unimaginably monstrous.
 
i have 4 level two offenders living within 3 miles of my house. sad thing is there are TONS of kids in my neighborhood and all 4 are convicted of either child molestation or sexual assault. nice huh?

edit: cause i can't spell
 


<< I would respectfully disagree with those who consider statutory rape to be a crime of such a nature that the such a person should be officially labeled as a "sex offender." To me it dilutes the significance of such a registry. >>



To each his own, but I strenuously disagree. Child molesters (and I include many statutory rapists in this broad category) have one of the highest rates of recidivism of any class of offenders, and I regard even consensual statutory rape as a potentially very serious offense. Rhetorically speaking, how would you feel if your 12-year-old were seduced on AOL by a 30-year-old, who took her virginity and repeatedly had sex with her - does that warrant registering as a sex offender? I feel it does, and in my jurisdiction this would be charged as carnal knowledge (aka statutory rape).
 
Tenchim

New Jersey supreme court ruled it unconstitutional to post pictures and addresses of sex offenders living in the state of New Jersey.

Fausto, I agree w/ you, this particular individual probably should not be persecuted.

however, the web site does serve a function, in my opinion a valuable one, to parents looking into moving into new neighborhoods.

sure there are cases like this, where the statuatory rape is purely the decision of the parents. if the parents had been understanding and not pressed charges we wouldn't be looking at pictures of this poor kid now. Based on what little we do know, it was probably a girl of 14 or 15 (who probably looked a lot older) and it was voluntary (hence the statutory rape vs rape). based on those assumptions one would think he was guilty of bad judgement, but i wouldn't label him a CRIMINAL or a RAPIST.

 
i didn't read thru the posts, so i don't know if this has been said. i am aware that some states require "john's" that try to solicit a prositute have to register if they are convicted of solicitation. you wanna get a quick BJ and you have to register for LIFE. thought that was a little out of line.
 
I find it really curious that everyone is assuming the best about this registered sex offender, including completely unsubstantiated suppositions that the girl was 14 or 15 "and probably looked a lot older." I see no legitimate basis for assuming that this convict is being "persecuted," and as a practical matter the length of his confinement only hints at the actual conduct, since he very likely took a plea bargain in his case.

In many instances, a first-time DUI is pled out as reckless driving - that does not imply that the driver was not drunk; by the same token, we know nothing about the facts of this case, yet people are assuming this guy is somehow being railroaded. I don't get it.
 
He had bad judgment that is true, but he did have sex with someone under 16, he is a criminal and a sex offender. Whether he knew or not is beside the point. Someone driving a car when their friend robs it is still as guilty as the person robbing the store. If he knew or didn't it doesn't really matter.
The fact is that he shouldn't of done it and by law he is serving a lesser of the consequences by basically only getting his pic in the news.

The assumption that it was a 14 or 15 year old doesn?t make it better, would you like your 14,15 year old child having sex much less with a 20 year man.

Or how bout if he was 30 would it have been the same?
 


<< I find it really curious that everyone is assuming the best about this registered sex offender, including completely unsubstantiated suppositions that the girl was 14 or 15 "and probably looked a lot older." I see no legitimate basis for assuming that this convict is being "persecuted," and as a practical matter the length of his confinement only hints at the actual conduct, since he very likely took a plea bargain in his case.

In many instances, a first-time DUI is pled out as reckless driving - that does not imply that the driver was not drunk; by the same token, we know nothing about the facts of this case, yet people are assuming this guy is somehow being railroaded. I don't get it. >>



Exactly. I was surprised that everyone seems to be taking the best possible situation and defending him. I would also like to hear all of you say this stuff if it happened to be your daughter/son... I would highly doubt anyone would. He molested or had sex with an underage child... simple as that. If you get caught this will happen to you. So the solution is simple enough, don't do it.. or don't get caught. Not my fault this guy was a dumb@ss and now his life is possibly ruined.
 


<< [To each his own, but I strenuously disagree. Child molesters (and I include many statutory rapists in this broad category) have one of the highest rates of recidivism of any class of offenders, and I regard even consensual statutory rape as a potentially very serious offense. Rhetorically speaking, how would you feel if your 12-year-old were seduced on AOL by a 30-year-old, who took her virginity and repeatedly had sex with her - does that warrant registering as a sex offender? I feel it does, and in my jurisdiction this would be charged as carnal knowledge (aka statutory rape). >>


That's exactly why some states include clauses that alter the law based on the age difference. When I was a senior in HS, I dated a freshman. I was 18, she was 16. We never did have sex, but if I lived in Georgia and we did, even if it was consensual, if her parents found out or whatever, I could face at least a year in prison and be branded as a sex offender?

That's quite ludicrous.
You are correct that no one knows all the facts, and maybe he did plea bargain his way out of child molestation or rape. I guess you're a DA or something similar and of course it's your job to assume the worst in a suspected criminal--your business is to keep them off the streets, but as an avg citizen, I don't have to work that way, so I'm given to assume he's not a nut.
Well no less than any one else 🙂
 
Wouldn't this be considered child molestation? I don't think any would think this is ok. Do we know for sure this guys was 20 when the crime occured? If he was 20 and the girls was 16 and it was consensual, I don't condone it, but it its harsh to label him a sex offender. High school seniors (17-18) have sex with freshman (14-15) happens quite as bit. You would be classifying all of them as sex offenders and arresting half the school.



<< and I regard even consensual statutory rape as a potentially very serious offense. Rhetorically speaking, how would you feel if your 12-year-old were seduced on AOL by a 30-year-old, who took her virginity and repeatedly had sex with her - does that warrant registering as a sex offender? I feel it does, and in my jurisdiction this would be charged as carnal knowledge (aka statutory rape). >>

 
Someone asked about a Michigan Sex Offender Registry. But, be warned, the same issues apply here in Michigan. Many of the registered sex offenders are people who committed nothing more than consentually banging a girl who was a couple months shy of being "of age". I believe that statutory rape is classified as a 3rd or 4th degree criminal sexual conduct.

Remember, we're not always talking about a 45 year-old sleeping with a 14 year-old. There were several 17 and 18 year-olds in my high school dating girls that were 3 years younger and they could very well have been convicted of statutory rape if the girl's parents wanted to go that route. I mean, a high school senior dating a freshman...OMG someone call the feds for crying out loud.
 
I myself know two guys who are guilt of the same crime. They are 19 and their girlfriends are 17 and they have sex all the time. You make it sound like the kid is a child rapist.
 


<< Exactly. I was surprised that everyone seems to be taking the best possible situation and defending him. I would also like to hear all of you say this stuff if it happened to be your daughter/son... I would highly doubt anyone would. He molested or had sex with an underage child... simple as that. >>



Well, not really as simple as that IMO. There is a big difference, in my mind, between two high school students having sex and a middle aged man having sex with a girl under the age of 16. The problem with this law is that it does not reflect the fact that kids are becoming sexually active at ever-earlier ages and that a 15 year-old having intecourse with a 17 year-old is not such a far-fetched scenario. Granted the law does knock the charges down to a misdemeanor level if the age difference is less than 3 years, but it's still a crime and the convicted person's life is still essentially over. Again, none of us will likely ever know exactly what happened in this particular case (unless my busybody neighbors manage to find out and tell us all), but I have to say that I think this law is somewhat flawed as it stands.



<< I find it really curious that everyone is assuming the best about this registered sex offender, including completely unsubstantiated suppositions that the girl was 14 or 15 "and probably looked a lot older." I see no legitimate basis for assuming that this convict is being "persecuted," and as a practical matter the length of his confinement only hints at the actual conduct, since he very likely took a plea bargain in his case. >>



One other question: if we assume a worst-case scenario (as in: this kid assaulted a child under 14) wouldn't the charges still use the term "child" in some capacity rather than just "statutory"? And if the victim were over 14 and the intercourse was non-consensual, wouldn't the charges just be plain old "rape"? This is kinda why I'm hedging toward the "high school sweethearts" theory, BTW.

Fausto
 


<< and I regard even consensual statutory rape as a potentially very serious offense. Rhetorically speaking, how would you feel if your 12-year-old were seduced on AOL by a 30-year-old, who took her virginity and repeatedly had sex with her - does that warrant registering as a sex offender? I feel it does, and in my jurisdiction this would be charged as carnal knowledge (aka statutory rape). >>





<< Wouldn't this be considered child molestation? >>



Not necessarily - every state has its own view of what constitutes child molestation vs. statutory rape. In my jurisdiction they are charged under the same law. The age of consent is 16, and the law provides for substantially greater punishment if the victim is under the age of 12. In my hypothetical (based on an actual case, though the offender was younger than 30, but older than 20), that increment in punishment is not available because the victim was 12 at the time.
 


<< The problem with this law is that it does not reflect the fact that kids are becoming sexually active at ever-earlier ages and that a 15 year-old having intecourse with a 17 year-old is not such a far-fetched scenario. >>

I remember there being a good two dozen girls in my high school who ACTIVELY pursued and courted older guys, it was a status symbol or some matter of prestige for them.

<< I see no legitimate basis for assuming that this convict is being "persecuted," and as a practical matter the length of his confinement only hints at the actual conduct, since he very likely took a plea bargain in his case. >>

Time to learn a little about the law.

Prosecutors NEVER offer plea bargains in crimes that are classified as "strict liability". What strict liability means is essentially that you have no other choice but to prove that you did not engage in the prohibited activity. You have no hope of convincing the jury that your behavior did not rise to the level of the charges.

Statutory rape is a strict liability offense. The law states you are GUILTY of statutory rape if you are of age and the person you have sex with isn't, period. Its a slam dunk guaranteed conviction. The ONLY hope you have of not being convicted of statutory rape is to convince the jury that you did not have sex with the girl, even if you did in fact have sex with her.

Since the minor cannot consent legally, she is not allowed to testify that the sexual relationship was consentual. It is legally irrelevant and immaterial to the case. She will be put on the witness stand and asked if you and her had sexual relations. If she says yes, you're through. The nature of that relationship is not only irrelevant, its not admissable in court and the jury will never hear it.
 


<< << The problem with this law is that it does not reflect the fact that kids are becoming sexually active at ever-earlier ages and that a 15 year-old having intecourse with a 17 year-old is not such a far-fetched scenario. >>

I remember there being a good two dozen girls in my high school who ACTIVELY pursued and courted older guys, it was a status symbol or some matter of prestige for them. >>



You may also recall our infamous Lost Children of Rockdale County debacle....most of the girls were much younger than the guys and they indeed talked about how the sex with older guys was a status thing.

Interesting stuff as always tscenter...thanks.

Fausto
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top