14yr old girl charged with Child Porn for posting nude pics of herself?

[-Cp]

WTH?

Her comments came as authorities in Passaic County charged a 14-year-old girl with child pornography for posting nude photos of herself on MySpace.com.

If she is convicted, she would have to register with the state as a sex offender under Megan's Law.

The laws generally require governments to alert neighbors of convicted sexual predators in their midst.

Kanka said the girl needs help, not legal trouble.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Girl-Charged-With-Child-Porn-for-Posting-Nude-Pics-of-Self.html

[Yurt]

i'm pretty sure one cannot be charged if one is in the class of victims that the laws are specifically designed to protect (rape...). thought that was first year crim law...what do the other attys or posters think? i could be remembering it wrong.

hey avi does crim right...

[Trinity]

i'm pretty sure one cannot be charged if one is in the class of victims that the laws are specifically designed to protect (rape...). thought that was first year crim law...what do the other attys or posters think? i could be remembering it wrong.

hey avi does crim right...

Please don't get mad at me.....but your wrong on this one. I actually just did a speech on the criminalization of teen sex.

There are two different cases going on right now in Ohio That are fairly recent. One involved A 15 year old boy and two female classmates

http://www.journal-news.com/news/content/oh/story/news/local/2009/03/04/pjm030509phonepiccharges.html

and here is another one that involved a 13 year old boy.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2009/03/19/mj031909sexarrest.html


and another

http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/article/20090313/NEWS01/903130301&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL

Just do a Google search of Ohio and teen sexting there are many more.


And the new AWA (Adam Walsh Act) they just implemented that was created to protect the children, are turning these same children into sex offenders.

But that's what happens when you make knee jerk laws, and don't thoroughly review what other consequences could come of them. Kinda reminds me of the stimulus package.

[Trinity]

Warning.......... it is long it was supposed to be 8 - 10 minutes long.

The criminalization of teen sex


Sex offender does that word scare you? Of course it does. When people hear the word sex offender, they think about the man lurking behind the bushes with his hat pulled low, and a bag of candy in his hand, just waiting to snatch some poor innocent child to rape and murder. But in reality the chances of that happening are in fact very slim and highly unlikely.


According to the US department of Justice in 2002 these types of stereotypical kidnappings in the US is around 100 a year. In fact most sexual abuse cases are done by someone you know and trust, family members, friend, relative, coach, teacher. In most recent years we have allowed our law makers to implement all of these new sex offender laws to protect are children from a threat that is almost non existent. But in fact it has done the exact opposite; it is now turning these children the laws were intended to protect, into criminals themselves.


What has happened is called the criminalization of teen sex this has become a disturbing trend in our predator panicked society. We are simultaneously obsessed with sex and horrified by sex. And the laws created reflect this panic. We will allow 12 year olds to obtain birth control pills and abortions but they can not consent to sex.

Criminalizing teen sex is part of the look tough on crime stance which has become popular in today’s society. Yet few people are educating the public about the real possibilities of teens landing on sex offender registries for irresponsible sexual behavior.


In Iowa a sixteen year old boy meets another teen and they date and have sex; turns out the girl was only thirteen, and the teen finds himself on a sex offender registry. In Oregon two thirteen year old boys faced 10 years and life on the sex offender registries for participating in slap butt day at school. Common forms of horse play at the school; the district had prosecuted other children for sexual harassment, in similar cases. The Utah Supreme court recently ruled on a case in which a 13 year old girl was charged as both a victim of a sex crime and a perpetrator for having consensual sex with her 12 year old boyfriend. These cases are merely the tip of the iceberg in a society obsessed with punishing sex offenders.


The possibility of teens landing on the sex offender registry is very real, as teens having sex without knowledge of the consequences. The center for disease control found in one biannual survey of 9th – 12th graders that 45.3% of teen girls and 48% of teen boy’s have had sex. Furthermore 4.2% of females and 10.4% of males had sex before the age of 13 and 11.2% of females and 17.5% of males had four or more sex partners. A 2002 National survey of family growth found that of the teen’s age 15 to 19 who have never had sexual intercourse 24% of males and 22% of females engaged in oral sex. In short more then half of these teens have experienced sexual contact in some form. This does not even include actions such as naughty photos or butt slapping or even some innocent actions misinterpreted as sexually motivated conduct.


If you think your child is immune think again Children as young as pre-school students have faced severe penalties for inappropriate sexual behaviors. The Virginia Department of education reported in 2007, 255 elementary students were suspended for offensive sexual touching. The Maryland Department of education reported 166 elementary students were suspended for sexual harassment. These suspensions add a permanent mark on the child’s school records. The AP recently noted from 1993 to 2004 adult sex crimes decreased by 56% but juvenile crimes increased by 40% by the same period. However what percentage of these cases involves forcible rape or child molestation as opposed to consensual sexual activity with peers?


Sexting has become the hottest sex offense topic currently in the media. If you don’t know what sexting is it is sending nude or semi nude photos through your cell phone to someone else. I know of 2 separate cases not far from my home where a 13 year old boy had a nude photo of a girlfriend on his phone and he was charged with possessing child pornography and is awaiting trial. There was another case of a 15 year old who was texting in class the teacher took his phone and gave it to the principal. according to the principal the phone kept ringing so he opened it up to turn it off, and discovered 2 photos of two different female classmates who were nude. 1 female sent the photo of her self to the boy the other photo had been taken with the boy’s phone. Both teens are currently charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. What? How do you charge a minor with contributing to the delinquency of a minor?


Now let me introduce you to Ricky. I have spoken with Ricky and his mom from time to time and help them deal with this tragic, tragic end to a bright young boy’s life.


Ricky and Amanda met at an Iowa teen club on a Saturday night in December of 2005. Ricky was 16 Amanda told him she was nearly the same age. They got to talking found out they were from the same town and started dating. They had sex on two different occasions, definitely not the right thing for kids that age, but not uncommon. It ended when Amanda told Ricky’s mom that she was only 14 and asked her not to tell Ricky. Actually she was 13. Several months later Amanda ran away. Her friend urged her to call the police and tell them she was afraid to go home. The police picked her up and took her home. Ricky was questioned by police and admitted that he had sex with Amanda on two occasions however that stopped when he found out her real age. Ricky and his mother met with Amanda’s parents and given the circumstances Amanda’s parent’s opted to not press charges. But the district attorney had other ideas. On may 3 Ricky who was now 17 found himself in jail charged with 2 felony counts of third degree sexual abuse.

The public defender that represented Ricky made it very clear that he could go to jail for up to 20 years if convicted of the counts he was charged with. Ricky was advised if he pleads guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious acts with a child he could get a deferred judgment. He would not have to state felony on job applications and he would not have to register as a sex offender. But in the moments before the plea hearing, Ricky was informed that the laws had just changed, and he would in fact have to register as a sex offender for 10 years. Ricky wept at this devastating news. But he took the plea deal anyway, to keep from facing 20 years in prison. A deferred judgment was issued and Ricky was sentenced to two years probation and 10 years on the sex offender registry.

Ricky’s family left Iowa and moved back to Oklahoma where they had previously lived. Because of the three year age difference between Ricky and Amanda, Oklahoma law required that Ricky register as a aggravated life time sex offender. Shortly after, in response to the federal incentives that was created by the Adam Walsh Act. Oklahoma adopted a federal law that required Ricky to be registered for life with tier 3 predator status, which is reserved for the most dangerous sex offenders.

When the Oklahoma authorities became aware of Ricky’s status he was removed from high school, he is prohibited from being around children other then his 11 year old brother. He can’t go near schools, day care centers, parks. His brother can not bring friends home, and if his brother had been a girl Ricky would have had to move out. His social life has been destroyed. He’s been ostracized, taunted, harassed, video taped by neighbors and members of his community. He flees when spoken to by girls his age. His identity has been devastated; he lost his sense of security, his expectations of any kind of normal life and the ability to trust. Prior to this tragic series of events Ricky had planned to join the navy and pursue a career in law enforcement. With the help of an Oklahoma legislator Ricky was granted the opportunity to obtain his GED he is now going to college online and studying to become an attorney. As of November of 2008 Ricky’s conviction had been expunged which means it was erased. But Oklahoma and Iowa still require him to register for life as a sex offender.

The criminalization of teen sex is a very real threat to teens and their parent’s. It not only is detrimental to the teen and his family, but also to the system itself. You now have these kid’s who are on a sex offender registry and if they are not public yet, they will be as soon as these kid’s turn 18. You won’t be able to tell the real threat, from the teen sex. Think about that the next time you get online to see who the sex offenders are in your area. I personally know several people who are on the registry for having consensual sex as teens. And unfortunately the registry does not give you the information of how old they were when they committed their crime. Instead they get lumped together as one.


And unfortunately this is only the tip of the ice berg, when it comes to dealing with sex offenders and the laws. These laws have gotten out of hand, but according to your law makers they are made to protect the children. Educate yourself on these issues, and then question your local law makers and ask them why we have gone from a society of protecting the children, to a society of criminalizing the children. Society as a whole needs to re evaluate these laws and keep the registry for the true threats to our children. Like the guy lurking in the bushes.

[glockmail]

Unless I see the evidence for myself, I don't believe any of it. :o

[emmett]

Actually the Ricky and Amanda thing are like was said........the tip of the iceberg. It happens everywhere.

Families in my opinion are unknowingly responsible for allot of the activity. Improper education, the internet and fatherless homes. Like mentioned we are obsessed and horrified by sex and the American teenager.

I agree kneejerk reactions to legitimate concerns with sex crimes against children are a major cause. Seems more emphasis should be spent on language so as to clarify that teens cannot end up in circumstances like Ricky when even in our culture of growing up in 60's - 90s, many of us could have been in similar circumstances.

Its a serious situation and deserves serious attention!

Oh.... good speech too!

[Trinity]

Actually the Ricky and Amanda thing are like was said........the tip of the iceberg. It happens everywhere.

Families in my opinion are unknowingly responsible for allot of the activity. Improper education, the internet and fatherless homes. Like mentioned we are obsessed and horrified by sex and the American teenager.

I agree kneejerk reactions to legitimate concerns with sex crimes against children are a major cause. Seems more emphasis should be spent on language so as to clarify that teens cannot end up in circumstances like Ricky when even in our culture of growing up in 60's - 90s, many of us could have been in similar circumstances.

Its a serious situation and deserves serious attention!

Oh.... good speech too!

Thank you....Let's hope I get an A.

[Yurt]

Please don't get mad at me.....but your wrong on this one. I actually just did a speech on the criminalization of teen sex.

There are two different cases going on right now in Ohio That are fairly recent. One involved A 15 year old boy and two female classmates

http://www.journal-news.com/news/content/oh/story/news/local/2009/03/04/pjm030509phonepiccharges.html

and here is another one that involved a 13 year old boy.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2009/03/19/mj031909sexarrest.html


and another

http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder.com/article/20090313/NEWS01/903130301&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL

Just do a Google search of Ohio and teen sexting there are many more.


And the new AWA (Adam Walsh Act) they just implemented that was created to protect the children, are turning these same children into sex offenders.

But that's what happens when you make knee jerk laws, and don't thoroughly review what other consequences could come of them. Kinda reminds me of the stimulus package.

not mad at all...i dig you. i am not sure i have it right. hoping avi sees this thread.

i think though we are talking about two different things...alcohol is illegal for minors to protect them, but they are not what you would really call the "protected class" in the example i am talking about... your examples above strike me as analogous to alcohol not child porn laws

i am talking about a law where there is only one victim, eg rape where a woman cannot be convicted for her own rape. and don't laugh, in muslim countries a woman can be convicted for her own rape. i honestly don't remember precisely theory, it was first year lawschool, maybe second....so i could be wrong. i'm remembering a rape and/or kidnap case....

other than that, i find the very thought of convicting a minor under child porn laws ignorant and harmful. do we as a society really want to hang a scarlett letter around this girls neck for posting pictures of herself on the internet? was it wrong? sure. in my mind, the real question is:

should we punish her the same as someone who was an adult and took her picture and posted it on the internet?

[Trinity]

not mad at all...i dig you. i am not sure i have it right. hoping avi sees this thread.

i think though we are talking about two different things...alcohol is illegal for minors to protect them, but they are not what you would really call the "protected class" in the example i am talking about... your examples above strike me as analogous to alcohol not child porn laws

i am talking about a law where there is only one victim, eg rape where a woman cannot be convicted for her own rape. and don't laugh, in muslim countries a woman can be convicted for her own rape. i honestly don't remember precisely theory, it was first year lawschool, maybe second....so i could be wrong. i'm remembering a rape and/or kidnap case....

other than that, i find the very thought of convicting a minor under child porn laws ignorant and harmful. do we as a society really want to hang a scarlett letter around this girls neck for posting pictures of herself on the internet? was it wrong? sure. in my mind, the real question is:

should we punish her the same as someone who was an adult and took her picture and posted it on the internet?

I'm not laughing......... I find that absurd that a women can be convicted of her own rape.

and No she should not be punished the same, as if it was an adult who took the picture.

I have a question for you....not sure if you can answer it or not. I found this rather absurd as well. How can you charge a minor with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Considering both parties are minors. If it's an adult it makes sense, but a minor it makes no sense.

[-Cp]

I'm not laughing......... I find that absurd that a women can be convicted of her own rape.

and No she should not be punished the same, as if it was an adult who took the picture.

I have a question for you....not sure if you can answer it or not. I found this rather absurd as well. How can you charge a minor with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Considering both parties are minors. If it's an adult it makes sense, but a minor it makes no sense.

I agree- this should solely be a parental issue at this point ....

[Yurt]

I'm not laughing......... I find that absurd that a women can be convicted of her own rape.

and No she should not be punished the same, as if it was an adult who took the picture.

I have a question for you....not sure if you can answer it or not. I found this rather absurd as well. How can you charge a minor with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Considering both parties are minors. If it's an adult it makes sense, but a minor it makes no sense.

yes...that is what i am talking about with convicting her for an adult crime....she is the protected class...as such, she cannot be convicted of the crime. where it is different is...no teens can drink, because there is no real protected class of -- victim....a rape victim, in our country, cannot be guilty for her own rape...the answer to your question would seem to be....a teen could not be guilty of contributing to himself...that does not mean he can't be guilty of underage drinking.

that is why my opinion is....she cannot be guilty of child porn

[avatar4321]

i'm pretty sure one cannot be charged if one is in the class of victims that the laws are specifically designed to protect (rape...). thought that was first year crim law...what do the other attys or posters think? i could be remembering it wrong.

hey avi does crim right...

Sounds about right unless some laws chaned.

[sgtdmski]

This is a slippery slope is it not. Laws are passed to protect children, most would think that these laws apply to adults, however, when written, the laws themselves do not specify any age for the perpetrator.

In the case of Ricky, Iowa has a very detailed law describing what is consider Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree. Under Iowa law, a person is guilty of Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree when a person performs a sexual act when the other person is twelve or thirteen years of age. In this case the young lady was thirteen years of age.

What is troubling is that the Adam Walsh Act which now controls the registering of Sexual Offenders states the following:


(C) Offenses involving consensual sexual conduct.--
An offense involving consensual sexual conduct is not a
sex offense for the purposes of this title if the victim
was an adult, unless the adult was under the custodial
authority of the offender at the time of the offense, or
if the victim was at least 13 years old and the offender
was not more than 4 years older than the victim.

So it would seem that under the Federal Act, Ricky would not have to submit to the Sex Offender Registry.

Herein lies the problem, young teenagers are proudly displaying their sexuality. As noted Sexting has become all the rage. However, what this children do not realize is that the games play have consequences. Whether we like it or not, when one teenager sends a nude picture to another teenager, they have just broken the laws regarding child pornography.

Some may consider the laws badly written, however, I have read through a lot of them, and although I am not a lawyer or legal scholar, I have in regards to my political science studies, taken many legal classes.

One of the reasons that age is not always specifically detailed in a law, is to ensure that for those rare cases where the offender is a minor themselves, the law will apply. Seriously, if we were to rewrite the laws to apply to only those over the age of 18, what happens when a 17 years sexually assaults a 10, 11, or 12 year old, or when a 15 year old sexually assaults the same 10, 11 or 12 year old?

Whether you like it or not, sometimes laws are passed that protect us from ourselves. These cases are providing many young teenagers with a crash course in what happens when you don't think before you act. Like it or not, these cases are giving a lot of teachers a lot of information that can be passed onto the students regarding their behavior. Like it or not, our children are surrounded by sex. Its on the radio in song, on the television in commercials and shows, and it is in the magazines in the ads and stories, not to mention the movies they go and see.

In our culture sexual freedom is the mores, however, somewhere along the line, one must have to take responsibility for their actions. These cases, although in the extreme, show just that.

Personally I would rather see some of these teens punished, if in the larger sense these laws help to protect other children and teens.

dmk

[Trinity]

UPDATE: Megan's mom urges help for teen who posted nude pix



The mother of the girl for whom Megan's Law is named says prosecutors shouldn't treat teens who take nude pictures of themselves the same as they do adults.

Maureen Kanka said a 14-year-old North Jersey girl facing juvenile complaints for posting naked photos of herself on MySpace needs help, not prosecution.

“This shouldn’t fall under Megan’s Law in any way, shape or form,” Kanka said. "The only person she exploited was herself.”

If deemed "delinquent" by a judge, the girl would have to register with the state as a sex offender, under Megan's Law. (See my story from earlier today: Do 14-year-old's naked pics make her a Megan's offender?)

New Jersey's measure has varying degrees, but its basis requires convicted sex offenders to notify authorities where they live.

When the most dangerous sex offenders move to a neighborhood, police go door to door to personally notify citizens and past victims. Those considered to have a lower risk of re-offending are listed on an Internet registry available to the public. The lowest risk offenders must register but aren't subject to notification laws.

Lawmakers adopted the measure in large part due to Maureen Kanka's diligence, following the 1994 rape and murder of her 7-year-old daughter by a twice-convicted sex offender who'd moved into the family's neighborhood. Several other states then followed suit.

Since then, however, technology and overly proactive local governments have created problems that couldn't have been foreseen.



Rest of story

http://www.examiner.com/x-2446-North-Jersey-Crime-Examiner~y2009m3d26-UPDATE-Megans-mom-urges-help-for-teen-who-posted-nude-pix

[5stringJeff]

The whole idea of sex offenders being some subclass of criminals that need to register wwith the State for the rest of their lives is BS. If someone commits a criminal act, sexual or not, they should serve their time in jail and be done with it, period.

[sgtdmski]

The whole idea of sex offenders being some subclass of criminals that need to register wwith the State for the rest of their lives is BS. If someone commits a criminal act, sexual or not, they should serve their time in jail and be done with it, period.

Usually I would agree, however, real sexual predators have a 95% recitivisim rate. The one job I believe government is truly responsible for is protecting its citizens, not to notify people would be a failure.

dmk

[Trinity]

Usually I would agree, however, real sexual predators have a 95% recitivisim rate. The one job I believe government is truly responsible for is protecting its citizens, not to notify people would be a failure.

dmk

I also agree, that however is in fact the problem, the truly real threats are now sharing the lime light with the teen sex offender. Which doesn't really help people when they go onto the sex offender registry to find out who lives near them.

I know I have about 10 living within in ten mile radius of my home. I also know what to look for when reading through this information. Unlike most people. Out of those 10 (keep in mind I live out in the country and outside of a small town with a population of around 4000.) There is only one real threat, he is in fact a sexual predator, and not a sex offender, and his victims were male children under the age of 12. Both of my boy's know who this man is, and what he looks like. They have been instructed if this man ever tries to approach them to scream as loud as possible and run like hell!

[Missileman]

The whole idea of sex offenders being some subclass of criminals that need to register wwith the State for the rest of their lives is BS. If someone commits a criminal act, sexual or not, they should serve their time in jail and be done with it, period.

I agree, kinda. Registration should be a requirement for a repeat offender.

[5stringJeff]

Usually I would agree, however, real sexual predators have a 95% recitivisim rate. The one job I believe government is truly responsible for is protecting its citizens, not to notify people would be a failure.

dmk


I also agree, that however is in fact the problem, the truly real threats are now sharing the lime light with the teen sex offender. Which doesn't really help people when they go onto the sex offender registry to find out who lives near them.

I know I have about 10 living within in ten mile radius of my home. I also know what to look for when reading through this information. Unlike most people. Out of those 10 (keep in mind I live out in the country and outside of a small town with a population of around 4000.) There is only one real threat, he is in fact a sexual predator, and not a sex offender, and his victims were male children under the age of 12. Both of my boy's know who this man is, and what he looks like. They have been instructed if this man ever tries to approach them to scream as loud as possible and run like hell!


I agree, kinda. Registration should be a requirement for a repeat offender.

If a person is still a threat to society, they should be in jail - like the sexual predator in your community, Trinity, or a repeat offender. If they are not a threat, they should be out and free just like any other ex-convict.

[Missileman]

If a person is still a threat to society, they should be in jail - like the sexual predator in your community, Trinity, or a repeat offender.

There's no way you can measure that in most cases.


If they are not a threat, they should be out and free just like any other ex-convict.

I'm just saying that a second bite of the apple should earn them a place in a registry. It would eliminate most of the registrations a lot of us have problems with, like the girl in the OP.

[Yurt]

If a person is still a threat to society, they should be in jail - like the sexual predator in your community, Trinity, or a repeat offender. If they are not a threat, they should be out and free just like any other ex-convict.

i don't agree with a threat to society...we are all a threat to society. the person next door commits the most heinous crime....

[Kathianne]

There's no way you can measure that in most cases.



I'm just saying that a second bite of the apple should earn them a place in a registry. It would eliminate most of the registrations a lot of us have problems with, like the girl in the OP.

i agree. I think there should be exceptions, meaning juveniles and those that have sex with such, but within a 2 or 3 year time frame. So to a kid-up to 17 for peeping, that shouldn't follow someone forever.

In the main, even those 'against' list, are not for letting hard core offenders off the hook, with the recidivism rate being what it is.

The problem is in the 'broad brush.' A kid peeping in a girl's window, exposing themselves when they think wanted, but not. Statutory rape, with consent. Those are not issues/incidents that should follow one for life.

However, again considering the recidivism rate, I really do not have a problem with rapists, sexual predators, etc.

[Yurt]

There's no way you can measure that in most cases.



I'm just saying that a second bite of the apple should earn them a place in a registry. It would eliminate most of the registrations a lot of us have problems with, like the girl in the OP.

good lord....a second bite of the apple is about JUSTICE....not about a second chance at rape or other sex crimes.....

[Missileman]

good lord....a second bite of the apple is about JUSTICE....not about a second chance at rape or other sex crimes.....

Don't get your panties in a twist...I was referring to a second offense.

[Yurt]

Don't get your panties in a twist...I was referring to a second offense.

do us both a favor and stop thinking about me and panties...

[DragonStryk72]

i'm pretty sure one cannot be charged if one is in the class of victims that the laws are specifically designed to protect (rape...). thought that was first year crim law...what do the other attys or posters think? i could be remembering it wrong.

hey avi does crim right...

She should drop all charges against herself, lol

[sgtdmski]

If a person is still a threat to society, they should be in jail - like the sexual predator in your community, Trinity, or a repeat offender. If they are not a threat, they should be out and free just like any other ex-convict.

But it doesn't work that way. These people are sentenced and once they serve their sentence and probation afterward, then they are free and clear. If not for the registry, they would be allowed to live whereever they pleased and no one would have to be informed.

Problem is that more than likely they will repeat their crime. So tell me, should we allow are children to be targets just because it upsets your ideals to have this registry.

As far as those who will not repeat, I am sorry that they have to be on the list, however, I would rather error on the side of the children, than on the rights of an adult.

dmk

[Trinity]

If a person is still a threat to society, they should be in jail - like the sexual predator in your community, Trinity, or a repeat offender. If they are not a threat, they should be out and free just like any other ex-convict.

Yes that I can agree with completely.

[Trinity]

i don't agree with a threat to society...we are all a threat to society. the person next door commits the most heinous crime....

That is true you never know when that kind, wonderful, next door neighbor, who bends over backwards to help people......suddenly snaps.......and........

[Trinity]

But it doesn't work that way. These people are sentenced and once they serve their sentence and probation afterward, then they are free and clear. If not for the registry, they would be allowed to live whereever they pleased and no one would have to be informed.

What about the repeat DUI offender who has had 10 DUI's and then finally ends up killing a family of four? mom, dad, and two kids.

Problem is that more than likely they will repeat their crime. So tell me, should we allow are children to be targets just because it upsets your ideals to have this registry.

As far as those who will not repeat, I am sorry that they have to be on the list, however, I would rather error on the side of the children, than on the rights of an adult.

dmk

What about the repeat DUI offender who has had 10 DUI's and then finally ends up killing a family of four? mom, dad, and two kids. Is that ok? What because it involves sex it's different. Actually as for the recidivism rates here are some............

# Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
# The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers.
# Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.
# Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm


So you are saying that because some one has been convicted of a sex crime. You would rather the children have the rights and not the adults?

Just out of curiosity, the sex offender who was convicted for 1 crime, who has served his time and has straightened his life out. He now has a family, children to support and take care of. But is unable to care for them properly, because every time he turns around he has to move, or loses his job. He is ostracized by his community and so are his children. Where are these children's rights at? Do they not have the right to be happy and stable in their home? Do they not have the right for their father or mother to support them? Do they not have the right to go to school and not be ostracized because of something their father or mother did, before they were ever born?

[crin63]

Society gives these kids the nod of approval by giving them all the tools for, "safe sex" and abortion on demand while on the other hand convicts them of the, "sex crimes" that are propagated from these tools.

It just goes to show how upside down and screwed up our society really is.

It sounds like 2 sides at war and the kids caught in the middle. It sounds like one side is trying to corrupt the children, dissolve morality and say do whatever feels good to you at any given moment without consequences. While the other side is trying to combat that with laws and regulations to stem the tide of lascivious behavior.

This is a tough topic.

[Noir]

I memo asking a question of a simalar nature on the forum not so long ago.

It's pointless for them to charge her, there are thousands upon thousands of 13-17 year olds doing the same on Gaia, The Chans, AnonIB ect ect. To try and enforce this kind of reading of the law would be idiotic.

[5stringJeff]

There's no way you can measure that in most cases.

They already do: level 1, 2, and 3 sex offenders (at least, that's how they label them in WA). Level 1 is the least risk to re-offend. Level 3 is the highest. In my book, level 1 shouldn't have to register, and level 3 shouldn't be out of jail.


I'm just saying that a second bite of the apple should earn them a place in a registry. It would eliminate most of the registrations a lot of us have problems with, like the girl in the OP.

The "second bite" would be jail for a very, very long time in my book. Possibly life.

[5stringJeff]

i don't agree with a threat to society...we are all a threat to society. the person next door commits the most heinous crime....

We are all also innocent until proven guilty. I have no delusions about human nature; however, the government cannot assume that all its citizens are guilty, or that we're one sex offender registry away from becoming a nation of serial rapists.

[5stringJeff]

But it doesn't work that way. These people are sentenced and once they serve their sentence and probation afterward, then they are free and clear. If not for the registry, they would be allowed to live whereever they pleased and no one would have to be informed.

Problem is that more than likely they will repeat their crime. So tell me, should we allow are children to be targets just because it upsets your ideals to have this registry.

As far as those who will not repeat, I am sorry that they have to be on the list, however, I would rather error on the side of the children, than on the rights of an adult.

dmk

As I've stated, the state already measures a sex offender's propensity to reoffend. If someone is a Level 1 (i.e. unlikely to reoffend) they shouldn't be on a registry. They should be released and allowed to resume their life. If someone is a Level 3 (i.e. most likely to reoffend) they shouldn't be let free.

[sgtdmski]

As I've stated, the state already measures a sex offender's propensity to reoffend. If someone is a Level 1 (i.e. unlikely to reoffend) they shouldn't be on a registry. They should be released and allowed to resume their life. If someone is a Level 3 (i.e. most likely to reoffend) they shouldn't be let free.

So now we are to sentence sexual predators to life. Unfortunately, although I believe that is a great idea, the problem is that in most states the sentence are rather light. Especially those states that have not adopted Jessica's Law. Jessica's law requires a mimimum sentence of 25 years.

Personally, I believe that all convicted child killers and sexual predators should be sentence to prison and while said sentence rather than having them placed in segregated or protected populations, they should be made to serve the sentence in the general population.

It seems that criminals those convicted of other crimes other than against children, take real offense to those who harm children. Often times, beating them, or forcibly raping them. Whereas judges have given this predators light sentences or probation, what does it say when it is the criminals who truly dole out the punishment?

dmk