Holiday said:
Kash, you make some good points I hadn't really thought through - You are right that most people don't understand the degrees of punishment - they understand felony vs. misdemeanor but not the shades of grey related to the sentences and offenses. And the legaleze included with the registry listings of offenses can be daunting and misunderstood.
Sure, I agree. But I don't think that every John Doe needs or wants to know every facet of every crime. I didn't say they don't understand the difference, quite the opposite. What I meant to say, and will now say more plainly is; Most people don't
care about the differences or nuances between sex offenses. It's enough for John Doe to know that there just
are RSO's in the neighborhood. Most everyone understands that what someone is convicted for often has little to do with the actual crime. Plea bargins change the offense, often prosecuters will charge an offender such that a victim doesn't have to testify. John Doe understands this and doesn't place much stock in the numerous varities of sex offences.
Think of it as a "yield" traffic sign. A driver doesn't want to know about every accident that ever happened on that corner that caused a yield sign to be put up. The driver just wants a heads up to watch out for potential danger around the bend. I think that is the intent of online RSO listings, or at least the practical use of them.
I also think the fact that other offenders DON'T always go through the parole system etc is a flaw in the system. I know someone-a sex offender- who served their time via work release, completed their probation successfully so is off parole...so why/how is that any different than another offender fulfilling a full court mandated sentence?
Lotsa questions here, I'll try and address them one at a time; How is this different? I'd say that most people consider sex crimes to be worse than property crimes. Also, if a judge orders that as part of the accepted sentence that a convict not *insert condition here* then the offender is agreeing to the sentence. Usually, or perhaps often, an offender might be charged with a greater crime and as part of a plea bargin a lesser charge is accepted with some conditions. As in "never visit public parks". The offender may well have had the option of refusing the deal and instead take the harsher charge.
Why should they be tracked when others aren't?
Again, many people think that sex crimes are worse than property crimes and harsher sentences are just. Also the ability to keep databases is a relative new one to courts. It's the information age. Years ago a judge might well have made a conditional sentence such as, "You may never seek employement as a teacher ever again". And if the convict accepted such, and later was caught violating the agreement, then they'd be facing that judge again. It's just easier to track now. The internet makes public records much more accessable.
Why should they have to remain on the list AFTER they have completed the probationary part of their sentence? What the registry does is extends their sentence to 10 years. Regardless of the degree of the offense. Is that right?
It all goes back to the deal that was struck or perhaps to manditory sentencing guidelines. In many cases partiular offenses carry manditory minimum sentences and conditions such as RSO listing. You ask, "Is it right?", well, it's the law and there are plenty of examples of poorly written laws, I'll not pretend to defend all of them. I would argue that it sure seems to be what the population wants. Stiffer sentences for sex crimes seems to be the buzz word. Even you seem to agree with that, yet rapists are let out with short time and other seemingly lesser offenses have have much stricter jail times.
As for the sick revenge cases - as I got exposed to this whole issue, I learned of multiplepeople - professionals and educated people - who the system had screwed because of misrepresentation during the trial and issues with the law enforcement end of the judicial process, and so they are on the lists. Have had their lives seriously impacted because the legal system failed them - again they have served their time, but the punishment continues because of the lists.
First off I'd like to address the comment, "professionals and educated people". Just who do you think that sex offenders are? They're from all walks of life. You can't assume that sex offenders are only unemployed drifers wearing a trench coat. Sex offenders are Doctors, lawyers... heck even the Deputy of Homeland Security just got busted for soliciting what he thought was a child online. A person's education or vocation does nothing to remove them from the potential pretator pool. Strangely enough, it's almost the opposite. Sex offenders, particularly those that target children, are often the most crafty, manipulative, intellegent criminals out there. Some studies suggest that child predators often have 100 or more victims before being caught. To get away with it for so long, they aren't exactly dumb. Pathological, sociopathic, yes, but not uneducated.
I really have little sympathy for those that complain about being on the list. To me it's similar to every person in jail claiming to be innocent. Sure they are. Poor babies. If it's one thing that most sex crime criminals have in common it's the ability to deny, obfuscate, misdirect, place blame, fault the system and cry crocodile tears. Where is the continuing punishment of being on the list? It's bogus. The records are public, they were found guilty. The only thing an online list does is make the research easier for John Doe. All those convicted sex offenders are easily found with a public records search. When I hear about some contrived "continued punishment" it makes me laugh, they just want the truth buried behind some difficult to navigate, seldom used corrections database.
In essence, I say tough nuggies. They need to live with the crime they've been convicted of. No more sweeping it under the rug. No more believing their sweetly spoken lies.
Talk about issues with the legal system - did you know that one burb in UT tried to pass a law preventing sex offenders for entering public parks? How in the hell would that be monitored? tracked?
While I wouldn't object to haveing dangerous felons GPS tagged for life I don't think this measure was intended on creating a big brother to track these criminals. Instead it's probably a nice way to revoke their parole or make an "add on" charge for future actions. In any case, this would be an example of a state legislature attempting to create a sentence guideline. That isn't odd, and neither is a judge ordering a criminal to stay away from certian public areas. Ask anyone that's had a DUI, they've most likely been ordered to stay away from any place that serves alcohol. This isn't really very strange at all.
As for my friend and what she does - the reason I don't find it objectionable is that this man has been a repeat offender, but the legal system has neglected to punish him. He should be incarcerated - permanently, but the legal system has deemed that even with some of the acts that have been committed he is not a pedophile that has permanently damaged - physically and mentally - numerous children related to him and not.
I don't find it objectionable at all either. Rather I wish that more individuals went to a wee bit of effort to inform and protect their neighbors. However, I might caution her that flyering a neighborhood with libelous information might wind her up in hot water. Not knowing the particulars I'll only comment further that "provable truth is the absolute defense against libel". If she has facts on her side, then I say "go girl".