home

Sex Offender Registration and the Internet

By Jeralyn, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 05:03:38 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

We get letters. This one is in response to one of the several posts TChris and I have written criticizing sex offender registries, particularly those posted on the Internet.

I read your article about sex offenders....I have to tell you i am on that list. In the state of Wisconsin I will be on it for the rest of my life. When I was 20 there was a girl that accused me of having sex with her. I will admit we messed around a bit but we never had sex. There was never any intecourse.

When i plead guilty ( bad attorney) there was no sex offender registration. If there was, I would have taken my chances and probably won with a jury. But I guess thats besides the point now. Now I get evicted from apartment, people vandalize my truck and I can't get a job in my chosen profession. And it's all because I'm all over the Internet. I'm 33 years old now, I did my time...but after the fact the state added a life sentence.

Thanks for listening. ill keep reading. Tom from Wisconsin

Thanks for writing, Tom, and check out SoHopeful.org.

SOhopeful International seeks to strengthen Megan's Law by excluding low risk former sex offenders, and only register and track those deemed qualified under the original stated legislative intent. It does the public no real good to have to wade through 95 lowest risk former offenders to find the 3.5 who are considered a risk to reoffend.

...Roughly 95 persons (out of 100) who are deemed low risk of re-offence must register as a sex offender (in may states the registration requirement is for life). What has not been publicly discussed is the impact of registration on those 96.5% of registrants and specifically their families and children.

SOhopeful International provides a venue for currently designated sex offenders to voice their experiences of discrimination, harassment, threats, violence, lack of housing and job opportunities. We are compiling these Testimonials and making them available to the public, legislators and media to educate those same about the real-life effects of a broken and misguided registration system.

As I said in the post linked above,

We strongly oppose sex offender registration programs that provide information about an offender to the public via the Internet. What business does a web surfer in Oregon have looking at the record of a sex offender in say, Miami? If they have a legitimate reason to know, let them contact a law enforcement agency in Miami and get the information.

Not all convicted sex offenders are violent rapists or child molesters who society needs to be protected from. There should be some way of discerning those who are not and relieving them of the burden, stigma and economic consequences of lifetime registration laws and lifetime probation. For these offenders, once they've done their time, let them be. If they re-offend, they can be charged anew and sentenced to longer sentences due to having a prior conviction.

< Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People | Tapes Show RNC Protestors Were Falsely Arrested >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sex Offender Registration and the Internet | 34 comments (34 topical)
    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:01:30 AM EST
    Excellent case in point of why these lists are a bad idea. Parents have to take the responsibility to personally get to know the adults their children spend time with, and then there is no need for any scarlet letter being afixed to the undeserving. As with many other bad ideas in criminal justice, the potential for abuse and harm done to the undeserving outweighs any benefits.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 06:36:04 AM EST
    Can anyone say ex-post facto? or how about double jeopardy? The sex registries are not the answer, but they are driven by a lot of hysteria and are full of people like Tom who almost certainly pose no significant risk to the public. There is a problem with violent sexual predators. I am not sure what the answer is, but these registries are a wide net approach that encourages vigilante activity.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:44:41 AM EST
    My first boyfriend committed statatory rape. I wonder what would have happened had we met this decade instead of in the seventies and if my parents had really wanted to get rid of him....

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:45:42 AM EST
    ...of course I was more than willing...but that doesn't matter if I'm sixteen does it?

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:47:20 AM EST
    I am also a registered sex offender. Even though I was a juvenile when I committed my crime, I was charged as an adult several years later. As it is, I will be almost 40 before I can stop registering for something I did when I was a freshman in high school. My registration information is available on the internet, and does not mention that I was a juvenile.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:03:53 AM EST
    This is seriously messed up, and I had no idea of this issue out there. Thanks for this, Ms. Merritt.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#8)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:15:58 AM EST
    3 of my 4 sisters were pregnant at 16 by older boys, 18-18-19 respectively. All married the boys. All the boys grew up as decent hard working folks with no criminal records. I shudder to think what would have happened had my mother or father hated the boys that got them pregnant.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:29:38 AM EST
    Does anyone see a pattern here? Little old ladies, Senators, evil sounding Muslim names like Osama being kept off airlines. I swear For some reason the folks who administer and make up these "Lists" must be required to have a minus level I.Q. before they get the job.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:48:52 AM EST
    I myself dated a 16 yr. old when I was 19, thank goodness her parents liked me.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:00:35 AM EST
    I worry about my neice. She is 17 and dating a 14 year old. I pray they break up before she turns 18 or her life is ruined because all it will take is for her to try to break up or make his mother mad.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:42:00 AM EST
    I was 16 and dated a 20 year old. We had twin daughters when I was 17 and he was 21. We are now 29 and 33. I think back now and I am happy that my parents were smart people and I wasn't a malicious person. I can't tell you how many people I know engaged in sex with people between the ages of 14-18 when they were over 18. Most of them were not even aware that it was illegal. There needs to be some major reforms regarding the sex offender registry.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:11:41 AM EST
    One person is on the list for "Lewd And/Or Lascivious Act" and "S0d*my." However, the S0d*my law was taken off the California books in 1976.
    Um, no it wasn't. I suspect what happened in 1976 was that the criminal penalties attached to S0d*my between consenting adults was removed (although there seems to, technically, remain an optional $70 fine that might apply); but a S0d*my statute remains on the books today, that only creates criminal liability in the case where one partner is underage, or there is lack of consent. [Ed. text of statute deleted. Unfortunately, Censor Software in use at businesses and law firms will block TalkLeft for use of graphic terms. It can't differentiate between a discussion on the law and an ad.]

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#9)
    by Lis Riba on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:12:37 AM EST
    FWIW, back in the summer of 1999 I took a close look at California's online registry, which may still be worth reading (even though the URLs have since expired). Disturbing just how many people were on the list for nonviolent crimes. For example,
    One person is on the list for "Lewd And/Or Lascivious Act" and "S0d*my." However, the S0d*my law was taken off the California books in 1976.
    In fact, I found a whole lot of elderly males whose offenses sounded like they were victims of official anti-homosexuality persecution. And even the most dangerous criminals on the list are only *potential* repeat offenders -- recidivism (sp) is by no means a certainty to justify this kind of public exposure.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 10:13:11 AM EST
    His case is not unusual, many kids under the age of 21 are marked by pleading guilty without understanding what will happen in the future. from what i read about this kind of thing 60 to 70 percent had sex with girls over the age of 16 and the boys are under the age of 21, and i am not talking about rape or forced sex crimes, but girlfriends mad at a lover. and the sad fact is up until 10 years ago boys could have a judge remove it from the record but not now.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#15)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:08:20 AM EST
    I myself am probably eligible to end up with a scarlet letter for the rest of my life, after grad night, if I'm remembering correctly. Good lord.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#16)
    by narius on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:40:15 AM EST
    The aim is not to get teenagers having concensual sex. I think it is easy by just redefining the offense by widening the age gap between the offender and the victim as long as no violence is involved. However, you have to admit there are sex offenders out there that prey on women and children. I would much prefer to lock those animal up for life or execute them. Without that, i think the public has the right to know who is the wolf in sheep skin amongst us.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 12:07:51 PM EST
    I say leave the list exactly as it is, and give non criminal adults every possible opportunity to protect their children from predators. If Tom hadn't made mistakes in judgement (like admitting guilt in something he did not do) he probably would not be on the list, but I am opposed to anything that would make it easier on true predators. And quite honestly my heart isnt going to bleed for you if your on the list because you deserve to be, or if your on the list because you made stupid mistakes. My kids are safer because of the list and thats a good thing. On the other hand, just like in any other case, if you allow government to administer over this list your probably not going to be happy with the results. Maybe the offenses that qualify putting your info on the list should be looked at, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water, so to speak.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#18)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 12:54:49 PM EST
    Dagma, this is not meant as an inflammatory question. How are your kids safer because of the internet registry? I have not seen a decline in the number of sexual assaults nor have I seen or heard of any case where an attempt at abuse was stopped because of the registry.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:00:31 PM EST
    That's the point Dagma, someone like Tom is not a "predator". No one can guarantee the unworthy will be kept off the lists, so I can't possibly support them. Anyone who values freedom can't support them either. If you wanna protect your kids from predators, don't leave them unattended with adults you don't trust. The only reason I can think of for parents wanting these lists is because they are too lazy to find out who their neighbors are, or too lazy to keep track of their kids. Don't ruin some strangers life over your irrational fears.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:47:14 PM EST
    To dogma...im happy for you that you sleep well at night because there is a regerstry...Im sure that the parents of that litle girl in florida slept well also, and to mention the girl that was just killed by a convicted sex ofender in iowa last week.The point is that if the states would stop waisting time and money on people like me that make up more then 95% of the list they could focus on people like that, then your children would be safer! And btw you have no idea what it is like to sit in a court room at the age and be told that you face up to 20 years in prison unless you just plead guilty and it will all be over. I can tell you its a verry scaring thing considering the only thing you did was kiss a girl!!!! I sugest you check out the link at the top of the page ints interesting reading.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 01:58:57 PM EST
    It does the public no real good to have to wade through 95 lowest risk former offenders to find the 3.5 who are considered a risk to reoffend. ...Roughly 95 persons (out of 100) who are deemed low risk of re-offence must register as a sex offender ...SoHopeful Well, SoHopeful, you are intentionally trying to mislead us. The first sentance is a flat out lie - assuming that your second explanatory sentance is true. It's not that of every 100 offenders in the database, 95 are low-risk re-offenders, but, rather, of every 100 low-risk re-offenders, 95 of them are in the database. The database itself is actually made up of a whole pile high-risk re-offenders in addition to most of the low-risk re-offenders. SoHopeful "forgets" to mention that. There is, in Ron Reagan, Jr.'s unforgettable words, a profound difference. Not all convicted sex offenders are violent rapists or child molesters who society needs to be protected from. ...TL No, they're not. However, by a quick look at CA's Megan's Law database, either most of the convicted sex offenders in CA are violent rapists and/or child molesters, or CA is already only listing those that are. I went on CA's RSO Megan's Law website. After choosing Los Angeles and typing in a random name (Reynolds) and looking at the first dozen or so (of many dozens) of offenders listed with that surname, each one (100%) had either violent sexual offense(s) or child offense(s) (or both?). Clearly not a difinitive study by any means, but I think some general impressions can be formed. In fact, in the small town outside LA where I live now, 100% of the RSO's on the on-line Megan's Law database are child abusers: RSO#1: 288(a) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS ACTS WITH CHILD UNDER 14 YEARS 288a(c) ORAL COPULATION WITH PERSON UNDER 14/ETC OR BY FORCE/ETC 647.6(a) ANNOY/MOLEST CHILDREN RSO#2: THIS SEX OFFENDER HAS BEEN IN VIOLATION OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS SINCE 06/15/2004.288(a) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS ACTS WITH CHILD UNDER 14 YEARS There should be some way of discerning those who are not [a danger to society] and relieving them of the burden, stigma and economic consequences of lifetime registration laws and lifetime probation. For these offenders, once they've done their time, let them be. If they re-offend, they can be charged anew and sentenced to longer sentences due to having a prior conviction. TL OK, let's say some do re-offend (although I guess we should really say: re-offend and are charged, tried, and convicted) would TL then support their name to be put in the database? Also, if we follow your suggestion and one of my children is abused by a one of these sexual predators deemed by the state as not a danger to society, do I then have cause to sue the State of CA for damages? What business does a web surfer in Oregon have looking at the record of a sex offender in say, Miami? Well, as a CA resident wheo previous lived in NJ, I was interested in looking up, in the NJ database, the guy who abused me when I was in the 5th or 6th grade, and the priest at my catholic high school who tried to abuse my best friend and was later charged and convicted of sexual relations with a 13 year-old boy. I believe it is my business.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#22)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 02:08:00 PM EST
    Sorry, TL, I missed the last sentance: If they have a legitimate reason to know, let them contact a law enforcement agency in Miami and get the information. You have a point, although in this information age, making possible life-changing info more difficult to access, rather than easier, just doesn't seem right.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#23)
    by cp on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 04:12:37 PM EST
    sorry TL, last time i checked, a conviction is a matter of public record. i don't actually need a good reason to know, i already paid for that right, with my tax dollars. sarcastic, taking your logic to its reasonable conclusion, everyone who's ever spent time in jail, for any offense, should be on a registry. why? because there is a historic 70% recidivism rate among all ex-convicts. it would most certainly be in my interests to have that registry available, so i know who lives around me. that isn't going to happen of course, not enough political capital to be garnered from it. there should, i think, be an analysis and revamping of both the laws regarding sex crimes, and the sex offender registries. most of these were passed in a frenzy, after some particularly heinous crime, with little, if any, thought given to the long-term consequences for others caught up in the hysteria. while i would agree that most 17 or 18 year-olds give little thought to the legal ramifications of sex with their underage partners, i do seem to recall, from my own errant youth, a saying. it went something like this, "16 will get you 20."

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 04:14:06 PM EST
    My brother is on the sex offender registry because his ex-wife accused him of abusing his daughter in a horrible custody battle. The county in which this occurred is notorious for always assuming the mothers are good caregivers and fathers aren't to start out with. He chose to not go to trial to avoid sticking his six year old daughter on the stand and instead agreed to plead guilty to a fourth degree misdemeaner (i.e. I was thinking bad thoughts, but no physical harm occurred). Because of this, he will forever be on the registry and his chosen career path has been thwarted. There are a lot of victims involved here, and many of them are the convicted.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#25)
    by BigTex on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:28:56 PM EST
    The list is a good idea gone terribly wrong. Outside of the cases of lewd behavior adding you to the list there is the issue of stretching the sexual assault laws too far and placing someone on the list for nonsex crimes. A while back TL did an entry about a 13 year old who was strip searched for bringing pot to a school dance. Some here advocated pressing charges of sexual assault against the chaperones for the actions. If they had been so charged and conviced they would be forced to require as sex offenders for an act that didn't involve sex in any way. In this day and age where crying rape has become the in vogue way to smear someone there is the significant possibility of actual innocents being placed on the list. This list has to have reason injected back into it.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#26)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:47:48 PM EST
    Tex - good points, and kudos for clarity. I can quibble about a couple of them but I see your point. The teachers involved could have been charged that way. And it would have been no more right for for them to be stigmatized than many others on the list.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 07:59:24 PM EST
    But what about the man originally quoted? He doesn't say how old the girl was or whether she wanted to mess around. He could be describing any situation from young love to the bullying and abuse of a retarded neighbor. But , or therefore, he leaves it at some girl, bad lawyer ,no intercourse and poor me. It sounds like how his "bad" lawyer told to describe the situation. Even young love has its questions for both partners. A jail term might be better. Its true marriage for girls 13 or 14 was , not so very long ago, accepted as natural even in the U.S. blue states. There was also I guess you would call it rural legend that their husbands were the most likely to have fatal accidents 10 or 20 years on. Tales of the Roman Empire seem to support this and there was Ty Cobb's mother. And sad spirits discussing these kind of disasters appear regularly in possession trances .

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 08:41:46 PM EST
    you are verry right i didnt state those facts...she was 15 i dont know how far from sixteen she was. and if details are needed we "maid out" . as far as the atourny, i dmaid $5.25 a hour and didnt qualify for a Public defender. i had to bowor as much money as i culd that was @ $300.00. if any one has to hire a auturny then you will know that isnt much. but i got what i paid for. Also i just want to say thanks for every one that has posted there thoughts, good or bad. Its nice to know that people care one way or the other!!!

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#29)
    by Richard Aubrey on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:03:18 PM EST
    Good to see Sarcastic doing the (simple) research to refute the usual exculpatory garbahje we get around here when it comes to those who victimize the innocent. I have no problem with narrowing the scope of the list, but the recidivism rates and the likelihood that the perp has eighty notches--average--on his belt, so to speak, by the time he's convicted convince me to support keeping a list. Ruth and other allude to false accusations and smears. Those don't make the registry. You need to be convicted. Perhaps more penalties for false accusations. I understand there's a view that a divorce attorney who does not counsel the wife to accuse hubby of molestation in order to get some leverage is considered to be a shirker. True? That, if true, requires public flogging. Among other things, each time it comes out, people on juries in the future are more likely to dismiss evidence of a real offense.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#30)
    by cp on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 09:24:03 PM EST
    interestingly enough, right here in river city, not too long ago, there were two cases of false allegations of rape, both by young girls. their stories started to fall apart as the police investigated them. unfortunately for the falsely accused, their names were published in the local paper. to the credit of said local paper, they gave just as much prominance to the story of the determination that the allegations were false, as they had to the original story. however, those men will probably always have a cloud over their heads, because all it takes is a google search to find both stories. they don't even need a registry for their lives to have been shattered, these young, stupid girls did it for them. not too mention, it makes all rape victims suspect. however, i am inclined to suspect they are the rarity, as are the angry mothers, seeking sole custody of the children, making false claims of abuse. no respectable attorney would so counsel their client. at least, not in my experience. again, i do think a careful review and revamping is in order. given the almost 100% recidivism rate of pedophiles, i'm loathe to discontinue the list entirely.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#31)
    by Richard Aubrey on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 05:45:39 AM EST
    CP. Bravo for the papers. How about we don't publish the suspect's name until, at least, the alleged victim's name is published? I don't think it's rare. The Air Force CID discovered that one-third of the rape accusations they investigated were false. Their standard for deciding that was the admission of the victim that it was false.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 08:24:11 AM EST
    I'm taking a big leap for a liberal, but here's my quibble with the democrats: When did it become the government's responsibility to protect us from sex offenders? And when did the argument arise that to not have laws protecting "potential victims" is to condone behavior??

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 11:28:02 AM EST
    Sex offenders, deserve the worst punishments availible. That and they deserve to have every moment of their live tracked.

    Re: Sex Offender Registration and the Internet (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 06:05:59 AM EST
    I have no pity for the rapists and child molesters, but boys 18 and 19 who have consenual sex with girls 13-17 should not have to registar as sex offenders. They should not have their lives destroyed. This is wrong.

    Sex Offender Registration and the Internet | 34 comments (34 topical)