Donor is behind effort to ease sex-offender rules

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by Reader, Sep 10, 2013.

  1. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.centurylink.net/news/rea...-donor_is_behind_effort_to_ease_sexoffend-ap/

    JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — As the politically connected owners of a multi-state tobacco store chain, Jon Rand and Sharie Keil have contributed thousands of dollars to Missouri politicians and even hired their own lobbyists. But the cause they are pushing right now has nothing to do with cigarettes.

    The husband and wife are on a behind-the-scenes mission to pass legislation that would remove hundreds of people convicted of sex crimes as juveniles from the state's online listing of registered sex offenders. Their cause is intensely personal, because their son is among those whose name, photo and address would come down from law enforcement websites........

    Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed the bill earlier this summer, warning it could endanger the public by hiding the whereabouts of violent sex offenders. But the battle is not over. Missouri lawmakers are to convene Wednesday to consider overriding the veto........

    Keil and Rand's son pleaded guilty to aggravated criminal sexual abuse in Illinois for an incident that occurred in June 1998. He was age 17 at the time, and the girl was 12. They say their son, and others like him, deserve a shot at a normal life without the spotlight of a permanent listing on sex-offender websites.

    Much more in 4p. article.....
     
  2. Loading...


  3. animlzrule

    animlzrule New Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Tsk, tsk. Sometimes "family values" are SO very inconvenient. 17 and 12? Pretty sick.
     
  4. not_my_kids

    not_my_kids New Member

    Messages:
    12,690
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    17 and 12 is not jut exploration, unless their son is badly delayed. He should be on the list. I agree about some underage offenders (those that were exploring or just did something like exposing themselves), but not somebody like that.
     
  5. Betty P

    Betty P Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,734
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm surprised the state legislature passed this bill. What were they thinking?

    Anytime a young man of 17 is convicted of aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a 12 year old girl, that's fairly serious. Considering her age, it doesn't sound like youthful indiscretion.

    Illinois statute

    http://www.justdetention.org/pdf/legalresources/Illinois 5-12-16.pdf

    What normal 17 yo guy wants to have sex with a 12 year old girl?
     
  6. Laughing

    Laughing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Um, Missourians, if you're tired of reading new Websleuths threads about new crimes committed by convicted sex offenders, please email that article and your thoughts to your legislators!!!

    http://www.senate.mo.gov/

    type your address into the address box and fire off an email.

    Now!

    Thank you,

    Laughing
     
  7. al66pine

    al66pine New Member

    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If Missouri changes its law re purge certain sex offenders off the state's registry then....

    ... would it be possible for a commerical website to download data from Missouri's sex offender registry website and maintain that data past the time that Missouri purges offenders off its database?
     
  8. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wait...something doesn't make sense. These people (Rand & Keil) have money. Politicians have accepted their donations for years. A politician accepting a sizable donation would question something like tos and not want their self associated with them if something were nefarious. That's what makes me think more about the crime in this case - they want juveniles off of the registry. I question why if the crime is truly heinous then the person is dangerous. So lets look at where this stems from...their son. He was 17. What is his exact level of crime besides just being a sex offense? Was it rape? Is the media misreporting facts to serve an agenda? Why do they keep saying the victim was 12 when clearly all of the records inform victim was 13-16?
     
  9. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
  10. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks, Jersey*Girl....Do you have a link to those records showing the difference in the victim's age? TIA

    Just from cases we've seen on the forum usually when it is 'aggravated sexual abuse', it means rape...IMO

    I just checked another link and it still says she was 12 at the time of the offense. Also says some legislators are rethinking the veto:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/donor-effort-ease-sex-offender-rules-20180702
     
  11. not_my_kids

    not_my_kids New Member

    Messages:
    12,690
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sometimes, if the perp takes a plea, it changes the level and also description of the crime.

    My father was convicted of CSC against a 9 year old boy, but because he pled guilty to a lesser charge than he was originally charged with, all of his paperwork reads "person 12-15".
     
  12. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All of the mugshots online also state victim was 13-16. So was it consensual sex between teenagers and maybe here parents got mad & pressed charges or was it a true out & out rape against an unsuspecting victim?

    If its a true rape in every sense of the word, then I don't get why Rand & Keil are behind the change in registry laws. After all, the unlicensed should be protected from monsters involved in such crimes. However, I can see their point if he participated in something nefarious such as clowning around or such (not to be taken out of context) - then maybe people like him deserve a second chance bc staying on the registry for life will forever hold them back. Should these idiots pay for a mistake their whole life if the crime doesn't fit but they have to serve their sentence based on how all sex offenders are sentenced? Now, if there was a relationship say between a 14 y/o & a 17 y/o and it was consensual but the parents were mad, them I'm against the registry altogether in that situation. So I wonder what the scenario is for his particular crime...
     
  13. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't have the official court records, only the info from the IL registry. If you google his full name, other mugshots come up for the same crime and they all say 13-16. I'm so confused. Why does the media keep printing 12?
     
  14. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh. My. God. They can do that? How is that legal? It's misleading to the public! That's infuriating! Now maybe the articles make more sense.

    How can a 17 y/o have consensual sex with a 12 y/o? Nope. That's rape.
     
  15. Jersey*Girl

    Jersey*Girl New Member

    Messages:
    10,266
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Holy cow not_my_kids, makes so much more sense why the media keep printing 12 y/o now. Thank you. So now if I were a media person, I'd interview the D.A. to find out if AKR plead down and if so why change the age from 12 to 13-16 for his victim. That would be some good reporting if they do find out bc if I questioned the age then surely there are others doing the same.

    Side note... Rand (the father) has contributed over $100,000 in political donations...
     
  16. al66pine

    al66pine New Member

    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Daddy Rand made political contrib's in Missouri and hired a lobbyist in Missouri, to try to change S/O registry laws in Missouri.

    The screen cap linked above (http://www.isp.state.il.us/sor/ ) re son Rand shows his conviction in Sangamon County, Illinois and shows his address as out of state in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

    Was son Rand convicted on two different S/O's,one in MO & one in IL, for which S/O info is originating from MO & IL registries? Or is it something else?

    Why would Daddy Rand lobby only for changes to MO law, if the IL S/O register would still show son Rand as a S/O? Or will Daddy Rand work on IL legislature next?

    Color me confused. :facepalm:
     
  17. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Same here, but I found this about the MO. laws and think it is because of the federal requirement to register which would apply to both states:

    http://www.ask.com/wiki/Sex_offender_registration?o=2801&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com

    But I still don't see why the Rand parents are pushing this veto in MO, when their son's offense and record is in Ill, unless they plan for him to move back and then he would have to register in MO.???

    Help! :waitasec:
     
  18. al66pine

    al66pine New Member

    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BTW, for anyone who did not read the linked article on the first post,
    here is a statement from the man arguing to change MO. S/O registry laws, so his son's info would be deleted:

    "Anybody on the registry is a target for people who like to hurt other people."

    Is a target? No.
    Could be a target? Possibly.

    He seems to be overlooking that any person on the list hurt another person.
    Proven as fact, beyond a reasonable doubt. Not just possibly.
    JMO

    ETA:
    http://www.centurylink.net/news/read/category/Us%20News/article/ap-donor_is_behind_effort_to_ease_sexoffend-ap/
     
  19. Schuby

    Schuby Under the thumb of The Man

    Messages:
    3,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Honestly, I don't really get the point of the sex offender registry to begin with. If someone is convicted of a sex crime there is already a publicly available criminal record of it, why the need for another? Seems a little hysterical to me.
     
  20. not_my_kids

    not_my_kids New Member

    Messages:
    12,690
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Adding someone to the sex offender registry limits where they can live, where they can work, makes them easier to find for law enforcement, and gives them extra restrictions that can be put in place for the course of the offender's life, instead of just while they serve a parole or probation term. Also, if an offender committed an offense while still a juvenile, that record would be sealed, not public record. The sex offender registry make it so that we know about the dangerous 17 year old who otherwise would be able to hide their actions behind useful indiscretion. It also takes the burden for monitoring off of the state and puts it on the offender, so that they can be punished if they don't at least make sure to update their information with local authorities.
     
  21. Schuby

    Schuby Under the thumb of The Man

    Messages:
    3,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    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?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice