Donor is behind effort to ease sex-offender rules

[Cappuccino]

There is a valid debate to be had about the whole issue of juveniles on the Sex Offenders Register, but this is not a test case for it. This is a rich family trying to help one of their own, and they shouldn't get their own way.

He re-offended when he was 21 - debate over, for him anyway.

There are people who are landed with the label of RSO undeservedly, but IMO he's not one of them, no matter how much money daddy has.

 

[Hejlena]

There is a valid debate to be had about the whole issue of juveniles on the Sex Offenders Register, but this is not a test case for it. This is a rich family trying to help one of their own, and they shouldn't get their own way.

He re-offended when he was 21 - debate over, for him anyway.

There are people who are landed with the label of RSO undeservedly, but IMO he's not one of them, no matter how much money daddy has.

Wait-he re-offended when he was twenty one? How did I miss that? And forgive my ignorance, but doesn't the term "aggravated" mean there was a weapon used or some kind of big-time physical assault?

Eta- nvmnd- I googled aggravated

 

[Reader]

There is a valid debate to be had about the whole issue of juveniles on the Sex Offenders Register, but this is not a test case for it. This is a rich family trying to help one of their own, and they shouldn't get their own way.

He re-offended when he was 21 - debate over, for him anyway.

There are people who are landed with the label of RSO undeservedly, but IMO he's not one of them, no matter how much money daddy has.

Exactly! I see that ohiogirl and al66pine posted records showing he now lives back in MO., so the parents' actions making more sense now. But the very idea that because they are rich they can make contributions to certain politicians to get this one law changed for their one son's benefit is outrageous.....and worse, IT WORKED!

I hope it is vetoed, and if it is not, MO voters really need to look at who was paid off to block the veto. .....IMO....

 

[burbqueen]

OK I stand corrected. Texas doesnt limit where a sex offender lives unlike some other states. However, you bet you butt when I move into a neighborhood I check to see if I have neighbors on there.

I find it terrible that people are using their money and whatever to try to change the laws for their son. How about having your son take responsibility for his actions?? Plus it's not like their son cant get a job or anything or he is poor due to his record. They own businesses. Cry me a river.

 

[not_my_kids]

There are no restrictions on where someone on the sex offender registry can live and as far as having to check in with authorities and update their information, why do we want to create reasons to punish people? If a person has served his/her sentence, well, wasn't that their punishment?

Megan's law. It limits offenders to where they cannot live within a certain number of feet of day care centers, schools, playgrounds, whatever.

And we aren't creating reasons to punish people. They created the reason. And they don't receive the punishment unless they do something that shows they need it. The sentence was for punishment, the notification system is simply to tell everyone else why that punishment was needed. In most cases, all the information is a matter of public record anyway. All the registry does is condense that information into an easy to read directory.

 

[al66pine]

Re: discussion here about whether the those convicted of sex offenses can live within certain proximity to schools, parks, etc.

We know the 50 states here in U.S. have differences in their S/O laws.

Is it possible the living-within-proximity-prohibitions and other terms re those convicted of certain sexual offenses are imposed in different ways -
- in some states, by states' S/O statute itself.
- in other states by court ordered conditions of release from prison?
- a combo of the above.

 

[Reader]

Megan's law. It limits offenders to where they cannot live within a certain number of feet of day care centers, schools, playgrounds, whatever.

And we aren't creating reasons to punish people. They created the reason. And they don't receive the punishment unless they do something that shows they need it. The sentence was for punishment, the notification system is simply to tell everyone else why that punishment was needed. In most cases, all the information is a matter of public record anyway. All the registry does is condense that information into an easy to read directory.

Thanks! In addition, one of the main reasons for the restrictions is to protect the children in communities from being abused, attacked or even kidnapped by the offenders. Pedophilia is not curable and just because an offender has been caught once and served a sentence, does not mean they will stop their obsession with young children. From wiki:

As stated by Abel, Mittleman, and Becker[69] (1985) and Ward et al. (1995), there are generally large distinctions ............
Pedophilic offenders, however, often start offending at an early age; often have a large number of victims who are
frequently extrafamilial; are more inwardly driven to offend; and have values or beliefs that strongly support an
offense lifestyle. Research suggests that incest offenders recidivate at approximately half the rate of extrafamilial
child molesters, and one study estimated that by the time of entry to treatment, nonincestuous pedophiles who molest
boys had committed an average of 282 offenses against 150 victims.[70]

------
Although pedophilia has yet no cure, various treatments are available that are aimed at reducing or preventing the
expression of pedophilic behavior, reducing the prevalence of child sexual abuse.[20][92] Treatment of pedophilia
often requires collaboration between law enforcement and health care professionals.[6][20] A number of proposed treatment
techniques for pedophilia have been developed, though the success rate of these therapies has been very low.[93]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Limitations_of_treatment

 

[Reader]

Re: discussion here about whether the those convicted of sex offenses can live within certain proximity to schools, parks, etc.

We know the 50 states here in U.S. have differences in their S/O laws.

Is it possible the living-within-proximity-prohibitions and other terms re those convicted of certain sexual offenses are imposed in different ways -
- in some states, by states' S/O statute itself.
- in other states by court ordered conditions of release from prison?
- a combo of the above.

It's complicated. Here's a link to the Justice Dept. that explains a little:

Registration is a Local Activity
In the United States, sex offender registration is conducted at the local level and the federal government does not have a system for registering sex offenders. Generally speaking, sex offenders in the United States2
are required to register with law enforcement of any state, locality, territory, or tribe within which they reside, work, and
attend school.

Each State has its own distinct sex offender registration and notification system. The District of Columbia and the five principal U.S. territories each have their own systems, as well, and an increasing number of federally-recognized Indian Tribes have their own sex offender registration and notification systems as well.
3
Every one of these systems has its own nuances and distinct features. Every jurisdiction (meaning each State, Territory, or Tribe) makes its own determinations about who will be required to register,
what information those offenders must provide, which offenders will be posted on the jurisdiction’s public registry website, and so forth.
Even though sex offender registration is not directly administered by the federal government, the federal government is involved in sex offender registration and notification in a number of meaningful ways.

B. Federal Minimum Standards
Over the last two decades Congress has enacted various measures setting
“minimum standards” for jurisdictions to implement in their sex offender registration or notification systems. The first of these was passed in 1994 and is commonly referred to as the “Wetterling Act.” This Act established a set of minimum standards for registration systems for the States.4

Two years later, in 1996, “Megan’s Law” was passed as a set of
minimum standards for community notification.5
The most recent set of standards can be found in the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), which was
passed in 2006.6 SORNA currently governs the federal minimum standards for sex offender registration and notification systems.
If a State, Tribe, or Territory chooses to refrain from substantially implementing SORNA’s standards, [they lose funding]...........

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/caselaw/handbook_july2012.pdf

Klaas Kids has all 50 states' requirements:

http://www.klaaskids.org/meganslaw/

 

[Linda7NJ]

I wish we had his original records. Was there force involved? Was it a mild molest (pls don't take out of context everyone) or was it a full blown rape with penetration? Was it a kiss, a grab, was he lewd & inappropriate, was he luring, etc etc etc?

Not sure about in MO but here in NJ "aggravated sexual assault" is penetration by force or threat

 

[Linda7NJ]

Megan's law. It limits offenders to where they cannot live within a certain number of feet of day care centers, schools, playgrounds, whatever.

And we aren't creating reasons to punish people. They created the reason. And they don't receive the punishment unless they do something that shows they need it. The sentence was for punishment, the notification system is simply to tell everyone else why that punishment was needed. In most cases, all the information is a matter of public record anyway. All the registry does is condense that information into an easy to read directory.

I view it like an attempt to help them protect themselves from temptation.

I'd prefer a bullet, but whatever

 

[Tonya421]

I view it like an attempt to help them protect themselves from temptation.

I'd prefer a bullet, but whatever

:goodpost: