Secrets of the City

the deets missed the mark on their posting about sex offender getting a hard time. sympathy is good, but no sympathy for home invading sister rapists.

I’d have to say I agree with BCA, while they should continue to be able to live their lives after serving their time, I have little sympathy for 2nd and 3rd degree sex offenders.

I think our sex offender laws are outrageous. We let murdering gang members out and they don’t have to register, but sex offenders do. Once someone has served there time, it should be done. If the general public doesn’t think the time is long enough, then the law should be changed, but once time has been served it should be over with.

Plus, unlike any other crime, many sex offenders are immediately committed to Regional Treatment Centers after they serve their time. Only those that the governmnet thinks are likely to not reoffended are released to the general public. They don’t do this with arsonists/murderers/robbers etc.

I think it is totally immoral to do this.

I don’t know, kc, what are the stats on sex offender recidivism? What are the chances that a sex offender participated in rehab (if you believe they can be rehabilitated)? Would I want a murderer to register on a national website? Sure, but aren’t they paroled and monitored by parole officers, whereas dangerous sexual offenders (I’m talking 3rd degree-ers here) are set free after maybe 10 years without supervision.

It’s a shitty thing, but really, I don’t think the majority of the population has a problem with it.

KC,
you think that a repeat sex offender should be locked up for life instead of re-introduced into society? It makes sense to give them a chance to integrate and try to become a lawful citizen, but while keeping a close eye on them.

They should serve their time, but also be monitored, especially if they are deemed more likely to re-offend. They aren’t just guessing, offenders are analyzed by pyshchiatrists, cops, etc, to determine if they are likely to reoffend.

Keep in mind that sex offense are unique in that they are not based on greed, and instead on power. Many sex offenders like to have power over their victims. Not a safe type of person to have walking around unsupervised.

The laws, for the most part, make sense.

Who cares what the recidivism rates are? If the punishment is not long enough, the law should be changed. They should not be punished after they have served their time.

And sex offenders have to follow the same rules that other felons have to follow regarding parole officers, loss of voting rights, etc.

And just because the majority of the population is okay with it, doesn’t make it right. The majority of the population was also okay with prohibition, but that didn’t make it the right thing to do.

Sure, but aren’t they paroled and monitored by parole officers, whereas dangerous sexual offenders (I’m talking 3rd degree-ers here) are set free after maybe 10 years without supervision.

Depends on whether they serve their full sentence. If they get some kind of early release, they’ll probably be on parole. Otherwise, they’re unsupervised.

Not really feeling a lot of sympathy for someone who preys on kids.
Saw a documentary about chemically castrating level 3 sex offenders. The guys they interviewed and featured in the documentary were pretty clear about the fact that they’d reoffend if they were freed. Many of them were repeat offenders.

It changed my mind on how I viewed them. Not that I think our system in handling it perfect, but I’ll stand next to imperfect laws that try to protect kids.

If the punishment is not long enough, the law should be changed.

So instead of being released but monitored for 10 years, they should be locked up for 10 more and not released at all? It’s like a special kind of probation, for people that committed a different type of crime.

you think that a repeat sex offender should be locked up for life instead of re-introduced into society?

No, I didn’t say that. I think society should come up with an appropirate length punishment and then allow the person to try and readjust to society. They cannot do this with all the laws around notification and where they can live (it is much worse other places.)

Keep in mind that sex offense are unique in that they are not based on greed, and instead on power. Many sex offenders like to have power over their victims.

The same is true with people who beat up their wives/girlfriends/kids/etc. Yet, we do not have a registry for them. Same is true with people who hurt animals, and some murderers, and some white collar crimes, yet, after they serve their sentances they are free to live a normal life.

Who cares what the recidivism rates are?

I care. As do millions of parents with young children. Registration allows people to know if there’s a dangerous person near them. It also prohibits sexual offenders from living near schools and working with children, because more likely than not, they will reoffend if they are in the presence of their preferred victim. Also, many sex crimes go unreported or detected. The average molester has abused 10 people before he or she is caught.

I think society should come up with an appropirate length punishment and then allow the person to try and readjust to society.
That’s what we are doing, but while keeping an eye on them. Do you even know the sex offender laws in MN? Only level three offenders warrant the notifcation of the area to which they are released. The other levels are monitored by law enforcement, but their information (address, name, etc) are not public information.

and some murderers, and some white collar crimes, yet, after they serve their sentances they are free to live a normal life.

Doubtful, since a felony record follows a person around for the rest of their life, prohibiting employment and where they can live. Even if they served their full sentence.

Furthermore, when someone is convicted of first degree criminal sexual conduct, they can be sentenced to no more than 30 years, but how much you wanna bet they even serve half that? What good is increasing the sentencing when they’ll be paroled after serving only a fraction of their time?

No, registration allows them to know if there is a dangerous sex offender living near them. Not if there is a dangerous person near them.

And it does not keep sex offenders from working with children, background checks do that. It isn’t that their records would be wiped clean.

Imagine the scenario of an 18 year old kid having sex with his passed out 15 year old girlfriend. Parents press charges and he goes to jail for 5 years THEN has to let everyone know what he did for the rest of his life, every time he moves. How will he readjust to society? What chance does he have?

And two other points, not all sex offenders like kids and not all are rapists.

Parents press charges and he goes to jail for 5 years THEN has to let everyone know what he did for the rest of his life, every time he moves.

He would most likely be deemd a level one sex offender, and have to register for 10 years, not life. Understand the laws before you try to protest them.

That’s what we are doing, but while keeping an eye on them.
No, that’s not what they are doing. Keeping an eye on them is making them keep their address on file. Invading their privacy is making them tell everyone what they did and restricting where they can live.

No, registration allows them to know if there is a dangerous sex offender living near them. Not if there is a dangerous person near them.

That’s what I meant.

Imagine the scenario of an 18 year old kid having sex with his passed out 15 year old girlfriend. Parents press charges and he goes to jail for 5 years THEN has to let everyone know what he did for the rest of his life, every time he moves. How will he readjust to society? What chance does he have?

Statutory rape (as far as I know) would not require registration. Level 2 and level 3 offenders (those determined by the corrections department) are only required to register on the national databank.

Furthermore, I have never heard of a statutory rape case in which the age difference was 3 years, and the perp ended up doing any time at all. Especially for a first offence. Most likely he’d get a sexual misconduct charge and serve probation or a suspended sentence.

When I was in high school a guy who raped an old woman and someone else moved in next door to me. I’m glad we were notified. It turned out that he violated his parole and went back to jail. I’m not sure what he did but I was just happy he wasn’t living next to me anymore.

My point is, our judicial system is based on the idea that if you do something wrong, you complete a punishment, then you are free to try and live your life. Except for sex offenders.

Sure, sex offenders commit bad crimes, but so do murderers and child abusers, yet we treat them differently. Why? And is it fair? I don’t think so.

Now I have to go and pick cjc up from the doctor. He had some procedures under sedation and can’t drive home. Sorry I can’t continue with my clearly minority arguement.

(And I think you all have valid points. I just don’t see how it is fair. I don’t like sex offenders either. I worked with them a bit and they creep me out.)

Furthermore, I have never heard of a statutory rape case in which the age difference was 3 years, and the perp ended up doing any time at all. Especially for a first offence. Most likely he’d get a sexual misconduct charge and serve probation or a suspended sentence.

Marcus Dixon.

I want a skeezy weasel mustache registry. I want to be notified if a man or woman with a mustache of that type is living in my neighborhood. I think that people with this type of mustache lack judgement and are therefore more prone to commit crimes.

Sure, sex offenders commit bad crimes, but so do murderers and child abusers, yet we treat them differently. Why? And is it fair? I don’t think so.

OK, here’s my purely personal argument, not rooted in fact or anything, just an opinion.

Is it fair to a 9 year old child that she’s had her innocence stolen, yet her uncle (or whoever) serves 10 years and then just gets to go back to normal? Is it fair to an 18 year old college student brutally raped on her way back from a night class? No, it’s not fair, but it’s certainly justice to many people.

Agreed with KC 100%.

If we are notified of sex offenders, we should be notified of murders, etc…

After all, I would argue murdering someone is worse than sexually offending them. This just goes to show the twisted mentality of our society regarding sex.

Another good example is the book Lolita by Nabokov. Everyone spazzes out about it since it talks about old dude banging young teen. Ban it from libraries, movie can’t be shown in theaters, bla bla bla. How is pedophilia any worse than murder??

Last time I checked there were 100s of movies, books, tv shows about murderers and their subjects.

Vlad, I hope you’re kidding. This isn’t about sex, you know.

As murky and imperfect as the laws may be, they were created to protect children as many level 3 offenders prey on children. The sex offender laws are harsh because of the predatory nature of the person and the belief that it’s intrinsic to who they are and not learned or conditioned.

You could argue anything with “but not all…”

The example of the 18 year-old is rare, but I understand your angst as he got caught in the crossfire. Unfortunately, there are not enough of “him” and more of “them.”

mnblrmkr, yeah, well, there’s no accounting for Georgia…

Oh, and people should realize that the level of a sex offender has little to do with their sentence or who they attacked, but more to do with the probability of them reoffending.

No, I am not kidding.

Why are there levels of sex offenders and not murderers?

Are murderers 100% guaranteed to not re-murder?

How about other people convicted of violent crimes?

Have you guys (Vlado, KC) ever heard of parol? Parolees are monitored, checked up on, and have to provide the law enforcement agency notification when they move or travel. Law enforcement does not have to provide the address of these offender, but the majority of sex offenders are not required to have the public notified either. If a guy who enters homes without permission and has sex with sleeping 10 year old girls moves in to my neighborhood, I DAMN sure want to know about it. And thanks to Megan’s law, I can.

On Friday July 29, 1994, 7-year old Megan Nicole Kanka disappeared. With the promise of a puppy, her neighbor, Jesse Timmendequas, lured her into his home where he raped, strangled and suffocated her. Her body was stuffed into a plastic toy chest and dumped in a nearby park. Megan had been killed by a two-time registered sex offender who lived across the street from the Kanka home and was sharing his house with two other convicted sex offenders, he met in prison.

Have you guys (Vlado, KC) ever heard of parol? Parolees are monitored, checked up on, and have to provide the law enforcement agency notification when they move or travel. Law enforcement does not have to provide the address of these offender, but the majority of sex offenders are not required to have the public notified either.

No, but I’ve heard of parole. I’m torn on this issue. I think that making all sex offenders regardless of the level notify their neighbors is ridiculous. I think that someone who gets labeled a sex offender for statutory rape should not have to notify their neighbors. I think that someone who is a serial rapist or a child molester should. A date rapist, for example, is where I’m ambivalent about notification.

And yes, there are often people who commit statutory rape who have to notify neighbors. I’m wondering where and why the majority of sex offenders are not required to notify the public. Could you please link to a statue or something? I’m not arguing that you’re wrong, I’d just like to see it.

After all, I would argue murdering someone is worse than sexually offending them. This just goes to show the twisted mentality of our society regarding sex.

The bolded section is where you lost me, vlad. Since when is the rape of a child, forcible sex with a weapon, or molestation of a child the product of the average american’s twisted mentality regarding sex?

Why are there levels of sex offenders and not murderers?

Um, because there are?

aliecat, have you had sex with a weapon?

Sex offender laws are easy. No politician in their re-electable mind would ever vote against a law that made them seem like they voted against harsher sentences for Sex offenders of any stripe.

The real problem is that we up lock these people, that for the most part have mental health issue, with absolutely no treatment and then expect them no t to re-offend when they do eventually get the chance.

Bixby, here’s a link for NC’s statute, which I found from MN’s site.

Okay, so after look at that (poorly formatted) site, I’m not clear on who doesn’t have to register?

I was watching Dateline or 48 Hours and there was a kid who was 18 who had sex with his girlfriend who was 15. Her Dad found out about it and turned him in and he was convicted and has to register as a sex offender. The father now regrets his actions.

I think it depends on the state, Bix. I’m pretty sure in MN, you don’t have to register (or at least you don’t for the rest of your life) if you’re a level 1, which usually applies to non-violent offences or first-timers.

Technically, a 16 year old boy who has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend is guilty of statutory rape…so’s the girl, depending on the state’s age of consent laws after taking into consideration the age difference.

I think if one really wanted to revamp the laws, legislators should take a look at removing mandatory minimum sentencing.

The bolded section is where you lost me, vlad. Since when is the rape of a child, forcible sex with a weapon, or molestation of a child the product of the average american’s twisted mentality regarding sex?

What I meant is that it seems our society dismisses murder and other bad crimes as no big deal, but then spazzes out about sex crimes.

Example: movie about pedohilia won’t be shown anywhere. Movie about serial killers are typical affairs in any theater.

Also, remember that in Minnesota you could become a sexual offender after skinny-dipping in a lake. If you go to Europe there are naked people tanning everywhere. Puritanic sex values are alive and well!

The public nudity – sex offender charge has prevented me from doing the naked bike ride years in a row. This happens with no problems around the world every year:

(NSFW)
http://www.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.html

This is what I know:
Federal law mandates that every state create a sex offender registration law, but each state differs on what that looks like.

Doesn’t Wetterling have something to do with this? I think the original “register” law is called the Jacob Wetterling Act or something like that.

Then Meghan’s law added the notification to it – once again, each state varies.

What I meant is that it seems our society dismisses murder and other bad crimes as no big deal, but then spazzes out about sex crimes.

In the words of The Rat: Nonsense.

In the words of The Rat: Nonsense.

I find it curious no one has addressed my Lolita example. Anyway, whatev…

The problem is that a bunch of garbage did not get sentenced long enough when they first committed the crimes. Now they are being let out and society is trying to come up with a means control them. I do not think you should constitutionally punish someone after they have completed their sentence but we should never ever let a sexofender out of prison. Better yet kill them and throw them out like garbage. You should notify people in neighborhoods that a sex offender is coming or lives in the area, their is no constitutional protection against that. Just an fyi, I went to a meeting in my old neighborhood and asked if you can deny a sex-offender housing based on that and they said yes, but if you allow one, you have to allow anyone else who is a sex offender into the housing unit.

Technically, a 16 year old boy who has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend is guilty of statutory rape…so’s the girl, depending on the state’s age of consent laws after taking into consideration the age difference.

The age of consent laws vary wildly by state. In Minnesota the age of consent is 16 unless the 18+ person is a person of authority such as a police officer, clergy, teacher or family member. If both are under 18 then the minimum age for either is 14. Anyone under 14 is considered a vulnerable minor and cannot make decisions for themselves on much more than what they would like for lunch.

Age of consent is as low at 14 in some states, I think Hawaii and New Mexico.

Because it’s a dumb example, vlad.

What I meant is that it seems our society dismisses murder and other bad crimes as no big deal, but then spazzes out about sex crimes.

Here’s the $64,000 question: In a free society, should a man be sentenced to prison for looking at pictures? In a free society, Should looking at something be illegal? Really?

“I think the guideline is well beyond what is needed,” he said, for a man who merely looked at prohibited pictures but did nothing to produce them. He sentenced him to 48 months in prison followed by supervised release for life.

If I was this fellow I’d fight it all the way to the supreme court.

I think a wide range of convictions haunt people for a long time after they’ve done their time or the equivalent. In general I think that’s not a good thing.

My friend has a felony on his record for a very petty theft, but the dollar amount made it a felony and now he has a hard time getting jobs in his line of work. He was stupid to do it, but should he really suffer for a relatively harmless mistake for the rest of his life?

Our justice system is so broken. And there’s almost never talk about how we stop producing criminals, only what to do with them after the fact. At least in MN we don’t execute people.

As for sex offender notifications, rather than just arguing for or against it, I’m not hearing alternatives that might work. Is there another option besides saying they did their time, leave them alone and labelling them for life? In some states the rules of where they can live are so strict there’s almost no place they can move. That really doesn’t help them get back to a normal life.

Maz, hmmm, I’m not sure where I stand on that. Child porn exploits children and is against the law. I’ve heard studies that those who look at and collect it have more sinister predilictions than just a fetish they’ll never act upon…so, I guess I would compare it to a possession of an illeagal substance issue.

As for sex offender notifications, rather than just arguing for or against it, I’m not hearing alternatives that might work. Is there another option besides saying they did their time, leave them alone and labelling them for life?

Shoot them.

I’ve heard studies that those who look at and collect it have more sinister predilictions than just a fetish they’ll never act upon

Yeah, but should people be imprisoned for something studies show they might do?

to those of you who are not familiar with MN sex offender law

If an offender is assigned to Risk-Level I (low risk of reoffense), the law-enforcement agency may maintain information regarding the offender within the agency itself and may disclose such information to other law-enforcement agencies. Additionally the law-enforcement agency may disclose the information to any victims of or witnesses to the offense committed by the offender. The agency must disclose the information to victims of the offense committed by the offender who have requested disclosure and to adult members of the offenders immediate household.
(Minn. Stat. § 244.052, Subdiv. 4(b)(1))

If an offender is assigned to Risk-Level II (moderate risk of reoffense), the law-enforcement agency may disclose information to agencies and groups that the offender is likely to encounter for the purpose of securing those institutions and protecting persons in their care while they are on or near the premises of the institution. These agencies and groups include the staff members of public and private educational institutions, daycare establishments, and establishments and organizations that primarily serve persons likely to be victimized by the offender. The law-enforcement agency may also disclose information to persons the agency believes are likely to be victimized by the offender. The law-enforcement agencys belief must be based on the offenders pattern of offending or victim preference as documented in information supplied by the Minnesota Department of Corrections and/or the Minnesota Department of Human Services.
(Minn. Stat. § 244.052, Subdiv. 4(b)(2))

If an offender is assigned to Risk-Level III (high risk of reoffense), the law-enforcement agency must disclose information to the persons and entities described for Risk Levels I and II above, and to other members of the community whom the offender is likely to encounter, unless the law-enforcement agency determines that public safety would be compromised by the disclosure or that a more limited disclosure is necessary to protect the identity of the victim.
(Minn. Stat. § 244.052, Subdiv. 4(b)(3))
The law-enforcement agency cannot make the disclosure permitted for Risk Levels II and III if the offender is placed or resides in a residential facility.
(Minn. Stat. § 244.052, Subdiv. 4(b

“I find it curious no one has addressed my Lolita example. Anyway, whatev…”

I’ll address it. It’s a fine book, but I like Pale Fire better. Happy?

Paulie, I think a good option would be to lift mandatory minimums and sentencing requirements…that would probably help in the cases of 18 year olds having sex with their girlfriends.

That really doesn’t help them get back to a normal life.
Why should sex offenders be allowed to get back a normal life? For starters the crimes they’ve commited are far from normal.

Additionally, people that are victims of sex crimes will never have their normal life back.

I agree the justice system is broken, but this is one area that the punishment should be greater.

Yeah, but should people be imprisoned for something studies show they might do?

In the case of owning and looking at something like child porn (many of the children are also victims of human trafficking), I guess I would have to say yes, in that limited sense.

I’m curious what people think about stories like this one.

Yeah, but should people be imprisoned for something studies show they might do

Maz,
These aren’t photoshopped images.

That’s an interesting story, kurtis…reminds me of the “To Catch a Predetor” hubub.

@Baker:

I guess what I want are some concrete examples of level 1 and 2 cases. That language is so vague and there seem to be so many stupid cases of people being labeled sex offenders – level 3. I’m wondering whether, in reality, level 1 and 2 exist.

I think that’s outrageous.

Watch The Castration Cure.

I see how the hyperlink thing could be used as probable cause for a search warrant, but there’s something really icky about it.

I think sending people to prison for simply looking at something is not far removed from the taliban’s law.

Maz, one thing, is the law written as the possession of child porn illegal, or merely the viewing of? I think that’s the difference. But I’m not a lawyer, so I’m merely guessing.

for a man who merely looked at prohibited pictures but did nothing to produce them. He sentenced him to 48 months in prison followed by supervised release for life.

Does possession include storage in temporary internet files?

You may look at something but have no intention of actually saving and possession the matter but it is still on your computer.

You might not even be aware of what you clicked on to load!

Child porn Rickroll?

I guess I don’t understand how this guy could be viewing pictures that he didn’t physically possess. My understanding is that you can be charged with a crime for owning child porn.

for a man who merely looked at prohibited pictures but did nothing to produce them. He sentenced him to 48 months in prison followed by supervised release for life.

Maz…not that I agree with this reasoning but what I have heard as an argument is that by simply viewing prohibited materials you are creating a demand for those materials.

“Does possession include storage in temporary internet files?”

I have read more than one story where it did, including one of the people busted by the above sting. I also know a defense lawyer who had a client convicted for a few cached images among thousands of legal porn images. It’s kind of scary. I mean, I’ve gotten some pretty freaky spam emails in the past… and I’ve followed some pretty dubious links by accident… who knows if the police will suddenly throw me on the floor one day and confiscate all my computer equipment because of some link I didn’t mean to follow and find some ancient jpg in the bowels of my computer I didn’t know I had?

It brings the Rick Roll idea to a whole new level, though.

I’m kind of agreeing with Maz on this one, and that scares me even more.

Logic can be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Bixby,
These levels are decided during a review upon completeion of the offender’s jail term. The review is usually based on several things: The offender’s response to treatment while incarcerated,, interviews with the offenders, (sometimes the offender knows he/she is not ready to commit to not re-offend), and often times the nature of the offense.

The drunk 16 year old having sex with a 15 year old passed otu is likely a level one. Registration with Law enforcement only for 10 years, (if stays out of trouble, then, un-registered forever.

The guy with multiple offenses, who doesn’t respond to treatment, etc. Will get tagged with a level 3.

Yeah, I know how it is supposed to work. I want to know how it really works in practice.

I want to know how it really works in practice.

Bixby…I believe it all depends on how much money you have.

Yeah, I know how it is supposed to work. I want to know how it really works in practice.

you may have to sexually assault someone to find out.

/staying away from Bixby…

Maz, I’m not a lawyer (not even close), but the SCOTUS has uphled laws related to child porn time and again. It is one of the only exceptions to the First Amendment that I am completely comfortable with.

Do you believe that people have the right to falsely scream “FIRE!” in a crowded theater? I don’t, and I also don’t believe that people have the right to possess child porn.