Convicted child molester going to your child's school

[doodlebug 3]

It's just that it sounds too unbelievable for it all to be at face value.

What exactly is so unbelievable?

What's unbelievable is that a guy who has been locked up for eight years has a five year old, for starters. What's unbelievable that the cops know about it, can do something, and are choosing not to, because 'good ol' U.S. of A.' comments aside, child abuse is one thing that gets most communities and local police departments hopping. What's unbelievable is that all the parents knows about this, down to the ages of the children molested, but not the guy's name. What's unbelievable is that in Missouri, a guy convicted of three counts (minimum) of child molestation gets eight years when first-degree child molestation is a class A felony for which there's no parole.

So it sounds to me like someone's got his wires crossed somewhere. Or it might just be that the cops can't do anything. I'm not sure what people are expecting them to do.

Well nothing shocks me anymore. Who would have thought that a Cardinal would mastermind a huge pedophile cover up of tons of sicko priests and that once discovered he wouldn't be prosecuted. Sh!t happens.

[Jenn! 918]

If we really believe that they can never stop, don't we have a responsibility to lock them up forever?

This is what I was getting at, not that I think sex offenders should just run free and we should never know who they are among us. They just shouldn't be among us.

As it is now though, I think a free man is a free man and should be treated as such.

Edited March 16, 2007 by jenn3539

[KarenCee 3]

I heard a story about a guy publicly urinating and they locked him up as a 'sex crimes offender'

he now has to register his whereabouts.

THIS I find ludicrous.

Agreed. I find it ludicrous as well. Public indecency and sex offender are so far removed from each other. Sounds like a case of zero tolerance gone awry.

[brnidokiegurl 0]

How ironic just now sitting here with the news on i think in Atlanta they just found the body of a missing 6 yr old and a convicted past sex offender confessed to do it they showed him getting arrestd. Ohhhhhhh the poor free man, what about the little boys family????

[Jenn! 918]

Ohhhhhhh the poor free man, what about the little boys family????

Was this directed towards me because I used the word "free man" in my post? If so, then you've completely missed my point.

[m&n 0]

I was just gonna say that....

Here we all are.....trying to be patient as we deal with the delays of new immigration policies like the adam walsh act that promise to help protect our children yet nothing can be done about a repeat sex offender who can't find anything better to do with his time than going to school and hanging out with his daughter's classmates....... that's all he served.....8 years for having messed up 3 children's minds........aren't there people on VJ whose spouses have been on AP longer than that for having done absolutely nothing!?!?

Here's the situation: A child in my daughters kindergarten class, her father was just released from prison approx a month ago for 3 convictions of child molestation. I'll add that the children he molested were two 8 year old girls and a 9 year old boy. He served 8 years. Now this guy goes to the school everyday, has lunch with his daughter, is going on field trips and is always around the school. I was under the impression that a convicted sex offender could not be so many feet from a school so I called the authorities here and asked many questions. They tell me that he DOES NOT have to register as a sex offender (depending on what the crime was) and that yes, some sex offenders are allowed to go to the schools when they have children there. The other parents and I are in an outrage. What gives??? I thought all these laws being made are to protect our children....not to put them right in arms way of a sex offender. At any rate....the other mothers and I are not done protesting. Don't know what we have to do exactly, but we're going to make sure he stays away from our kids.

He can't file for immigration benefits thanks to Adam Walsh, but the sick F**** is allowed in our schools. The government needs to practice what it preaches.

[Fandango 1,440]

I heard a story about a guy publicly urinating and they locked him up as a 'sex crimes offender'

he now has to register his whereabouts.

THIS I find ludicrous.

This is pretty much the reason I'm against the registry laws. They're going to result in too many false hits (public urination = indecent exposure, hope he didn't urinate on school property) and result in too little information to be useful. 'Sex offender' is a really broad brush.

Well, I think the logical solution would to strictly redefine 'sex offender' and then they can publish their names all the state wants.

[brnidokiegurl 0]

No Jenn not directed your way you were not the only one used the word "free" just using as in the way of saying also he did his time true and now hes free so he deserves to be left alone and in most cases yes and other crimes yes, this is only another example. Wonder if he also has small children, wonder if his neighbors knew to be aware.....and now he strikes again, only this time he killed.

[William33 110]

No Jenn not directed your way you were not the only one used the word "free" just using as in the way of saying also he did his time true and now hes free so he deserves to be left alone and in most cases yes and other crimes yes, this is only another example. Wonder if he also has small children, wonder if his neighbors knew to be aware.....and now he strikes again, only this time he killed.

Doing time does not exonerate his crimes. That is why sex offenders are required to be listed for all to see, further to not live or go near schools. That is a deserved lifelong sentence.

[brnidokiegurl 0]

William as you see i am so against all this, i said IN MOST CASES AND MOST CRIMES not meaning the sex crimes. A burgular get 5 years hes done hopefully he will live a better life, not so with these sex crimes I think it was Jenns statement earlier thinking a free man is a free man and my answer was most crimes and most cases.

[William33 110]

William as you see i am so against all this, i said IN MOST CASES AND MOST CRIMES not meaning the sex crimes. A burgular get 5 years hes done hopefully he will live a better life, not so with these sex crimes I think it was Jenns statement earlier thinking a free man is a free man and my answer was most crimes and most cases.

Well that clarifies your specific position. Thanks for the clarification.

[brnidokiegurl 0]

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I heard a story about a guy publicly urinating and they locked him up as a 'sex crimes offender'

he now has to register his whereabouts.

THIS I find ludicrous.

This is pretty much the reason I'm against the registry laws. They're going to result in too many false hits (public urination = indecent exposure, hope he didn't urinate on school property) and result in too little information to be useful. 'Sex offender' is a really broad brush.

Indeed - the moral panic whipped up in the UK by a certain tabloid newspaper certainly worked a treat.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4719364.stm

http://archive.salon.com/sex/world/2000/09...ante/index.html

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article7584.ece

[Caladan 19]

I heard a story about a guy publicly urinating and they locked him up as a 'sex crimes offender'

he now has to register his whereabouts.

THIS I find ludicrous.

This is pretty much the reason I'm against the registry laws. They're going to result in too many false hits (public urination = indecent exposure, hope he didn't urinate on school property) and result in too little information to be useful. 'Sex offender' is a really broad brush.

Well, I think the logical solution would to strictly redefine 'sex offender' and then they can publish their names all the state wants.

Ideally, yes. But just look at what happens when you try to define something as simple as 'a crime indicating moral turpitude'; you end up with weird lines being drawn. Or drug laws, where possession over X amount of grams makes you a dealer, not just a user. I'm not confident that a law that was narrow enough to be fair would be broad enough to be useful.

I think the logical solution is longer sentences, personally. If the guy's that dangerous, a list isn't going to help. And if he isn't dangerous (like public urination guy), he needs a fair shake at getting his life back. The state shouldn't be releasing dangerous people and relying on public notification and hysteria fests to keep children safe. Seriously, if the guy's likely to kidnap a child... what the heck does a public list do?

[Alex+R 0]

I heard a story about a guy publicly urinating and they locked him up as a 'sex crimes offender'

he now has to register his whereabouts.

THIS I find ludicrous.

This is pretty much the reason I'm against the registry laws. They're going to result in too many false hits (public urination = indecent exposure, hope he didn't urinate on school property) and result in too little information to be useful. 'Sex offender' is a really broad brush.

Well, I think the logical solution would to strictly redefine 'sex offender' and then they can publish their names all the state wants.

Ideally, yes. But just look at what happens when you try to define something as simple as 'a crime indicating moral turpitude'; you end up with weird lines being drawn. Or drug laws, where possession over X amount of grams makes you a dealer, not just a user. I'm not confident that a law that was narrow enough to be fair would be broad enough to be useful.

I think the logical solution is longer sentences, personally. If the guy's that dangerous, a list isn't going to help. And if he isn't dangerous (like public urination guy), he needs a fair shake at getting his life back. The state shouldn't be releasing dangerous people and relying on public notification and hysteria fests to keep children safe. Seriously, if the guy's likely to kidnap a child... what the heck does a public list do?

Totally agree. We've had these lists for a long time, and people being required to tell everyone they're a sex offender, and yet we still have statistics about how likely sex offenders are to reoffend. So whatever it is we're doing to protect kids and alert families is obviously not working, right? These people need to be locked up probably in most cases for the rest of their lives.