| Author | Post |
|---|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 14th, 2009 10:45 pm |
|
| http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2008/10/state-groomers.html
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 14th, 2009 12:57 pm |
|
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2007-12-13/news/sex-offenders-set-up-camp/
Delaware is not to far away from having their own sex offender camp . To many are being placed on the list and they are there not for violent crimes.
Oh there's one other funny fact
Did you know a prison full of tier 3 Sex offenders , drug addicts and murders can be place with in a thousand feet of a school but a tier sex offender can not live next to that same school ?
Last edited on Thu May 14th, 2009 01:03 pm by oop!
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 14th, 2009 12:24 pm |
|
jejopama wrote: I know that in the case of my son, the mere fact that he was on the registry contributed greatly to his death! Due to the Huntington's Disease being a rare disease, there aren't any nursing homes in Delaware that have much experience caring for an HD patient. He was refused placement in an out of state specialized nursing home due to the fact that he was on the internet. You see, it was not the actual crime that kept him from being accepted, they understood how the disease could affect his brain enough to lead to the inappropriate behavior. However the company that ran the nursing home had a corporate policy... if the rso was viewable on the internet, then they could not take him in. I was personally told that if he could have his tier level changed and therefore he would not be posted online, then they would be able to take him in! Talk about a witch hunt!
http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/sexofreg.htm
There are state that will consider,but Delaware is until you die state or untill they beat you down and you want to die .
This state is not about to give up all the funds connected with the list
|
jejopama
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 24 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 14th, 2009 03:52 am |
|
I know that in the case of my son, the mere fact that he was on the registry contributed greatly to his death! Due to the Huntington's Disease being a rare disease, there aren't any nursing homes in Delaware that have much experience caring for an HD patient. He was refused placement in an out of state specialized nursing home due to the fact that he was on the internet. You see, it was not the actual crime that kept him from being accepted, they understood how the disease could affect his brain enough to lead to the inappropriate behavior. However the company that ran the nursing home had a corporate policy... if the rso was viewable on the internet, then they could not take him in. I was personally told that if he could have his tier level changed and therefore he would not be posted online, then they would be able to take him in! Talk about a witch hunt!
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 11:51 pm |
|
By any chance did any one read page 9 of the state news today ?
A very interesting article where Delaware Sen Brian Bushweller presents a Senatorial Tribute to DAPI
Delaware Adolescent Program Inc.
Reading the article you will find their claim to fame is helping 12 to 19 year old moms to get a education ( this is all good ) But what happens their babies fathers ?
They are jailed and place on the sex offender registry
If Delaware Senate can recognise that these young woman and mothers need and will to allow them to have a second change with out being put on some registry outing them for making a mistake in judgement then why not give the father and some of these young men ages 12 -19 the same chance?
Last edited on Thu May 14th, 2009 02:17 am by trailer park trash
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 10:46 pm |
|
Well it would seem to me the state would not want to release them if they need to be supervised.
The registry was a good ideal in the begin with , then it started being and still is more trouble for the public then one would think. I find it invasive to some existent. When it was first introduced it was to protect the children against violent repeat sex offenders . Letting you know who they are and where they live . They should never have been out in the begin with, now you have kids and adults on there who did nothing more then actions such as kissing , mooning , holding photos of their own children ( taken cause of a cute family moment ) young people who were having consensual sex. to the extreme of raping and killing. Now how can it be fair to link the two together.
Then there are those business who hire the lower tier persons , just having a sex offender working for them causes a problem in it's self .
Protection of the public is one thing , but to punish someone for hiring a offender by putting their place business on line and the same with the address in most cases the offender lives with a friend or family member who had nothing to do with the act but they are also being punished in the public eye
Last edited on Wed May 13th, 2009 10:48 pm by trailer park trash
|
I am not making this up !!!!!!
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 09:35 pm |
|
trailer park trash wrote: Fred
I'm some where in the middle on this.
I work for the state and I see it as a set up . If they do not want them to have contact with children while on probation then they should have some sort of 1/2 way housing for these offenders until there probation is through.
This mean give them a job to work for the state with proper supervision, keep housing for them until the probation period is completed .
They use prisoners for all kinds of state jobs , from cleaning road ways to cutting trees and building ect...
If they state feels they are not fit to be arround children during their probation period then keep them away .
Those classes could be given in the prision. The way I see it if I were to see him in a mall I could report him for being around children, He could go to a hospital for treatmeant and I could report him for being there cause children are there.
My concern in this case is the probation officer ( could have been me ) would have done this if not there at the court house and the Courts would have sided with her in full vision of court cameras. How can this be right ?
What about after probation? Who will supervise them then?
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 09:29 pm |
|
Fred
I'm some where in the middle on this.
I work for the state and I see it as a set up . If they do not want them to have contact with children while on probation then they should have some sort of 1/2 way housing for these offenders until there probation is through.
This mean give them a job to work for the state with proper supervision, keep housing for them until the probation period is completed .
They use prisoners for all kinds of state jobs , from cleaning road ways to cutting trees and building ect...
If they state feels they are not fit to be arround children during their probation period then keep them away .
Those classes could be given in the prision. The way I see it if I were to see him in a mall I could report him for being around children, He could go to a hospital for treatmeant and I could report him for being there cause children are there.
My concern in this case is the probation officer ( could have been me ) would have done this if not there at the court house and the Courts would have sided with her in full vision of court cameras. How can this be right ?
Last edited on Wed May 13th, 2009 09:31 pm by trailer park trash
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 07:16 pm |
|
oop! wrote: heres one for you
http://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/(hrxidxu2e4ex0455pdrwhgny)/download.aspx?ID=78470
This person was in the Georgetown State Service Center parking lot before attending a court ordered class for sex offenders in the same building that children have access to at least 14 hours a day . ( hours they are opened ) nothing happening to the said child before during or afterward the encounter he had with his adult girl friend.
The man was damed if didn't attend and was diffently damed for attending
The drug accusations was a after the fact , nothing other then the words of the PO officer were considered.
Only one of the sex offenders were charged
So do you think it was a wild hair or not
Cost man 2 1/2 more years in jail cost to the state tax payers
Orignal crime would fall under today's Romeo / juliet law ( 1999 crime )
While I think our laws tend to be a bit harsh, especially on the lower (third and fourth degrees of offenses)....I really can't see what the judge was supposed to do. He DID have contact with a child, regardless of what did or did not happen. Yes, he had to go to the class, but it would be his responsibility to get there without a child in the same vehicle.
Now...should there have been such a prohibition? During probation, all bets are off, so I'm not quite as sympathetic in this particular case.
|
Helen here
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 04:02 pm |
|
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090513/NEWS0107/305130034/Man+accused+of+having+sex+with+teen
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 03:40 pm |
|
heres one for you
http://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/(hrxidxu2e4ex0455pdrwhgny)/download.aspx?ID=78470
This person was in the Georgetown State Service Center parking lot before attending a court ordered class for sex offenders in the same building that children have access to at least 14 hours a day . ( hours they are opened ) nothing happening to the said child before during or afterward the encounter he had with his adult girl friend.
The man was damed if didn't attend and was diffently damed for attending
The drug accusations was a after the fact , nothing other then the words of the PO officer were considered.
Only one of the sex offenders were charged
So do you think it was a wild hair or not
Cost man 2 1/2 more years in jail cost to the state tax payers
Orignal crime would fall under today's Romeo / juliet law ( 1999 crime )
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 01:57 pm |
|
Depends on what he gets to plead to.
If he is lucky, they'll get him to plead to official misconduct and a host of other charges, but the sex bit won't be in it. If it is, (I dunno, maybe unlawful sexual contact, if he is lucky) he will be on the list, no alternatives.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 13th, 2009 01:26 pm |
|
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=6807068
Argo one of their own, what will the officers of the court ask for ?
Is he a sex offender or will they decide it was two consenting to a act .
10 to 1 odds he will be on the list and they woman will be sit free
|
Two Cents
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1464 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 06:04 pm |
|
| That's why I wondered aloud if these youngsters have a dad in their life. Somebody molests my youngster, he is no longer above ground.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 04:53 pm |
|
Two Cents wrote: oop! wrote: I just check the names on the sex offender registry ( first ones in each letter of the alphabets) 26 of them. 8 are employed out of the 8 they are 5 that work for them selves or family owned business.
That leaves 18 we are supporting as tax payers!
Well, at least two of them we, as taxpayers, provide a paycheck and benefits to as employees of the state of Delaware, now that they have been released from prison. And we held their job positions open so that they could return to them!! Convicted child molesters!! It makes me wonder whether these children have a dad in their lives.
Two cents
Let me assure you I have no problem with sex offenders being punished , but there is punishment that goes to far in some of these cases.
The label sex offender is a hard pill to swallow and some are rightly charge and covicted and punished but this is not a all for one , one for all matter here !
People need to get past the words ( modern day witch hunt ) .
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 04:32 pm |
|
http://www.counterpunch.org/shannon07102007.html
http://www.reformsexoffenderlaws.org/statement.php
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-mendelson/mother-behind-megans-law_b_180524.html
http://www.cfcamerica.org/
|
Two Cents
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1464 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 04:17 pm |
|
oop! wrote: I just check the names on the sex offender registry ( first ones in each letter of the alphabets) 26 of them. 8 are employed out of the 8 they are 5 that work for them selves or family owned buisness.
That leaves 18 we are supporting as tax payers!
Well, at least two of them we, as taxpayers, provide a paycheck and benefits to as employees of the state of delaware, now that they have been released from prison. And we held their job positions open so that they could return to them!! Convicted child molestors!! It makes me wonder whether these children have a dad in their lives. Last edited on Tue May 12th, 2009 04:23 pm by Two Cents
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 03:32 pm |
|
Well, maybe. And if they are, do you think that perhaps the fact that you could see who their employer was might keep some employers from hiring these people? Sure, their convictions makes finding work more difficult, but some do...but I recall the fuss about a towing company that hired an offender and got all kinds of grief because the guy might have to go out on a call that might cause him to come in contact with kids.
I happened to see someone over the past weekend that I haven't seen in almost 10 years because this guy committed a serious crime. I can't say that I knew them all tha well, but they certainly were an upstanding member of the community at the time, and is apparently back with a decent job after paying the debt to society.
Should we have a registry for all people who commit felonies that follow them around for the rest of their lives?
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 03:09 pm |
|
I just check the names on the sex offender registry ( first ones in each letter of the alphabets) 26 of them. 8 are employed out of the 8 they are 5 that work for them selves or family owned buisness.
That leaves 18 we are supporting as tax payers!
Last edited on Tue May 12th, 2009 03:09 pm by oop!
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 02:23 pm |
|
http://www.choicesoforegon.com/no_contact_rules.htm
I can not find Delaware laws on this but it interesting to know that a State of Delaware slogan " Children First " really is all about the money the state can receive.
The fact of the matter is this.
In all the state building children are permitted , some parents even use their children as a ploy to stay out of jail , to have income and to not work. If a sex offender comes in that same state building as order they could be charged just for being there why a minor is there , the state makes no effort to stop this injustice for the children or the offender they are putting at risk. Setting them up to fail
sex offender ( Romeo / Juliet, a mooner a bra snapper , granny with family photo daddy who changed a diaper or some who had a play -girl or boy book in the house and three year old saw it . Even the person who pierces a baby's ear
Because you too can be labeled a sex offender in Delaware and be ordered no contact with a minor as part of your Probation Department rule ( them being your slave master , and god ) you could spend time in jail
It is better off that when you catch this charge you ask just to spend time in jail then stay on probation.
The the state could save a lot of money this way , in fact the state should have a sex offender town ( operated by the state ) Homes , stores jobs and fences with wire. It would save the time of having to chase people down and changing laws. Just think of time and money we would save.
In stead of 3500 sex offender spread through out the state they would be all in the same housing development. Hey I think I may have just solved the housing bust.
You know the state is all about protecting rights of the people.
There would only be one neighborhood to notify , there would would be be no need to put up place of employment.
That's another subject ( place of employment ) The Justices seem to think the sex offender registry ( naming place of employment ) is not a punishment!
In fact they are punishing the employer for hiring a sex offender who is ordered to get a job ( but when they get one the state goes to the business and surrounding area and informs them there is a sex offender working at the business which cause people not to use it causing loss of income causing a cut back in jobs causing the offender to be out of work causing a probation violation .
Costing the state more money !
Last edited on Tue May 12th, 2009 02:41 pm by DNA
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 02:57 am |
|
| Thanks for shining a light on this in sound off today
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 11th, 2009 02:49 pm |
|
http://open.salon.com/blog/amytuteurmd/2009/03/09/does_statutory_rape_discriminate_against_boys
Another side of the facts , all true but are they fair ?
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 11th, 2009 02:21 pm |
|
This is a must read document and you will see how the Federal and State Government along with the Justice departments in all state lay in the trap of rape for teenagers ( mostly young men between the age of 12 and 19 )
Statutory rape, rape in the 4th degree with out consent oh yes rape in the 4th with consent ( this one they do not put the word consent but make sure the word rape is there ) to heighten the senses and have others thing the worst .
This is why the registry needs to chage
http://www.clasp.org/publications/tanfpln1.html
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2003/08/03/251/06785
Last edited on Mon May 11th, 2009 02:35 pm by oop!
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun May 10th, 2009 08:56 pm |
|
Please for give my satire ! But I just have to.
Stop giving out birth control , have the birth rate rise , start charging plan parent hood clinic's if they give it out ( for corruption of minors start charging the parents for child neglect and kids who commit the act of having consensual sex ( both parties ) not just the guy
give fines to every one , then collect the money that the Federal government gives out for the studies of
Sex offenders
Teen pregnancy
Teen sex
Abused children
Foster care
Then have all the children taken away from their parents , Oh wait the justice department and US Government is already doing this except one charging both children.
Last edited on Mon May 11th, 2009 01:58 pm by oop!
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun May 10th, 2009 04:13 pm |
|
http://oncefallen.com/CivilVCriminal.html
I think all states need to rethink the laws they are passing , protection of all children in the lands from harm is paramount , but do we want a modern day witch hunt?
There are ways to fix this , but who will jump off the wagon to do the right thing. Many state are looking at ways to protect our children , but are not seeing that they are going in the wrong direction.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat May 9th, 2009 08:36 pm |
|
DNA wrote: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/05/de-registration-bill-for-conse.html
I would love to see our congress do this in the state , it would give more young men areason to get up out out of the gutter in which they live because of making one wrong choice ( thinking with the wrong head )
A pretty good solution to at least one part of the problem. I'd like to see it a bit more comprehensive, but it is a start.
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat May 9th, 2009 01:12 pm |
|
| http://truthinjustice.org/ed-jagels.htm
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 8th, 2009 01:06 pm |
|
| http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/01/death_of_sex_homeless_offender.html
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 8th, 2009 12:14 pm |
|
http://www.geocities.com/seamusmcgraw/unforgiven.html
calling for help at 12 , But state laws are unforgiving.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_age_of_sexual_consent_in_South_Carolina
http://www.contracept.org/minorsaccess.php
How can the federal and state laws differ so much ? They are all about giving meds out ,not letting parents know ,
Giving kids the ammunition but retreating on policies
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 8th, 2009 04:32 am |
|
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/05/de-registration-bill-for-conse.html
I would love to see our congress do this in the state , it would give more young men areason to get up out out of the gutter in which they live because of making one wrong choice ( thinking with the wrong head )
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 12:34 pm |
|
Instead of turning and covering your eyes and hunching your backs , you must start seeing that Delaware politicians and many other state will soon seeing the light about how wrong they have been to allow the sex offender laws to reach ( until death you do part ( the words until they expire ).
http://on-murders.blogspot.com/2008/02/de-ailing-sex-offender-chokes-to-death.html
More then likely the state has already said they had no help in this but they did.
They denied him the right to have health care in a proper setting, was harm to anyone in his condition.
I know there are aling seniors in nursing homes that could be charge with the same thing , but we over look their actions cause they are out of mind ( are they ?)
Last edited on Thu May 7th, 2009 12:53 pm by trailer park trash
|
jejopama
Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 24 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 04:21 am |
|
This is a subject that is very disturbing to me. I lost my son a little over a year ago and the reason he died is that he was a registered sex offender! He had a terminal illness and the disease caused brain cells to die. His brain was degenerating due to the cell death and he was also affected physically. Because the disease is little known and even less understood than it is known he was not able to receive many of the services that should have been available to him through the state.
His impulse control and judgment were terribly affected. It is all a VERY long story but the end was his horrific death at Dover Behavioral Health. In a cafeteria full of patients and staff, he choked to death. He was denied a bed in every nursing home in the state and even in the Hospital for the Chronically Ill. All because of his being a RSO. Everyone knew his story, there was no option for being removed from the registry, even under extreme hardship. If the disease progressed as predicted he would not live long enough to get off the registry which was the only option offered by our wonderful attorney generals office.
Your are welcome to Google his name if you like, Joseph Heverin. I can't even begin to tell you the pain and suffering that has been caused by his labeling. Now he is gone and NEVER can it be made right.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 04:07 am |
|
| http://www.geocities.com/eoped/def-001.html
|
tell all
Member
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 03:08 am |
|
There was a 11 year old placed on the delaware's sex offender list in 2003 . I was afraid to put his name down for fear , I could be in trouble.
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 7th, 2009 02:32 am |
|
Being charged with sex crime can happen to any one, thank goodness they saw the light in this case.
http://www.sunherald.com/285/story/1289436.html
But there are countless other ones that go undetected as false arrest and conviction.
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 09:33 pm |
|
http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/sex-offender-map.pdf
either there is a whole lot of perverts , or the US Goverment has a lot of money to hand out for studies.
To save states money , because they are alreay violating the rights of these so called accused sex offender( tier 1 and 2 ) who have done thing like mooning , peeing by a tree , took baby pick of their own children , snapping bras and having consenual sex with their partner. Maybe if they just keep them in Jail knock out Probaion part of it they would have money to spend else where.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 04:24 pm |
|
I heard a statistic yesterday that 4% of those arrested for sex offense crimes are on some sort of sex offender list.....which means, of course ,that 96% of those arrested are NOT on said lists.
What we need are the following:
1. A review of the tier process. There currently are three tiers, the top two being public, the third one accessable only by the police. The assumpution for most convications is that they go on the public list instead of the semi-public list....does this make sense? Why not give judges a bit of discretion as to what level (if any) that someone should wind up on?
2. A review of the punishment. I think that prosecutors like to have their cake and eat it to with this....being on the list is not a punishment to them, but anyone can see that it clearly is, as it effects many phases of one's life. My main issue with this is that someone can do something far worse, do their time, and other then the issues that come with a felony conviction, can pretty much blend back into society. These guys (and gals) have the conviction AND the constant reminder, and even their employer is listed with them.
3. A process for coming off the list entirely. There are no foolproof ways to make sure that someone convicted of any crime doesn't do something else, but I'd like to see a process where after the time is done or a "reasonable" time on the list, one can apply to be downgraded.
I think the reason it won't get done is that both liberals and conservatives are afraid of touching the issue. Neither side wants to be thought of as being soft on crime, or being labeled as someone who doesn't care for the safety of our children.
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 04:05 pm |
|
http://www.nolanchart.com/article5167.html
More true facts
|
trailer park trash
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 02:49 pm |
|
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/104075.html
Being a sex offender is the new Sarlet Letter of our times .I think Delaware should post the detail of the crime on line with the persons name.
If the state wants us as the public to judge them then we should have the right to have detail of the crime.
Why only give us part of the information ?
Last edited on Wed May 6th, 2009 02:51 pm by trailer park trash
|
Helen here
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 11:36 am |
|
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650
Hey guys this one has confusing thoughts as well.
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed May 6th, 2009 02:24 am |
|
http://criminal.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-basics/state-age-of-consent-laws.html
still more way to trap with in the laws
Get married under the age of 18 but don't have sex
Get married for all the right reason and get charged with being a sex offender by the state
http://www.kulr8.com/news/wyoming/26157929.html
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 09:37 pm |
|
2 more seeing the light haaaaaaaaa
Now just the whole Delaware Justice System and Delaware House and Senate ( AKA) Congress to open their eyes.
If this state really believes "Children First " they will look into Romeo / Juliet laws.
http://womensissues.about.com/od/datingandsex/a/Romeo_and_Julie.htm
Saving the state thousands of dollars and letting our police chase the real offenders instead of children playing house and family feud.
Last edited on Tue May 5th, 2009 09:38 pm by DNA
|
dover-diva
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1973 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 08:47 pm |
|
Fred wrote: oop! wrote: Strange how the state finds all kinds of reason to keep sex offenders from children , some rightfully so.
Do all the can to hinder them in finding jobs or keeping jobs , finding or keeping their housing
But have no problem taking taxes from their pay to support school programs , food programs for the people who refuse to work for them selves .
Our Probation and Parole Officer are even paid out of funds that sex offender work to pay in
Now if the sex offenders are not to live or have any contact with children does it seem right to be taking their money to support schools and children programs ?
Maybe a probation officer will violate one for this.
I think some of the programs for some of the people are not over reaction...I think we need to focus more on the large number of people who are put on there for wide ranging offenses and refine exactly who is, and for how long they actually are a threat. I'm not defending any of these creeps, but I find it hard to accept that someone who has "consensual" sex with a 17 year old or who downloads some types of porn is a clear and present danger for the rest of their lives.
OMG Fred I actually wholeheartedly AGREE with you.  First there must be a clear and concise definition of a sex offender. Then the courts have to be retrained to understand this. (Now I must go lay down, because this agreeing with Fred stuff is EXHAUSTING) Last edited on Wed May 6th, 2009 12:36 am by dover-diva
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 8242 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 08:01 pm |
|
oop! wrote: Strange how the state finds all kinds of reason to keep sex offenders from children , some rightfully so.
Do all the can to hinder them in finding jobs or keeping jobs , finding or keeping their housing
But have no problem taking taxes from their pay to support school programs , food programs for the people who refuse to work for them selves .
Our Probation and Parole Officer are even paid out of funds that sex offender work to pay in
Now if the sex offenders are not to live or have any contact with children does it seem right to be taking their money to support schools and children programs ?
Maybe a probation officer will violate one for this.
I think some of the programs for some of the people are not over reaction...I think we need to focus more on the large number of people who are put on there for wide ranging offenses and refine exactly who is, and for how long they actually are a threat. I'm not defending any of these creeps, but I find it hard to accept that someone who has "consensual" sex with a 17 year old or who downloads some types of porn is a clear and present danger for the rest of their lives.
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 07:21 pm |
|
http://www.sexetc.org/state/DE/#abort
http://www.moraloutrage.net/staticpages/index.php?page=Delaware
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c041/sc03/
oh boy a trap if I ever saw one
|
DNA
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 22nd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 71 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 05:08 pm |
|
| HEY oop watch out they will be saying you need help for writing the truth
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 04:19 pm |
|
Strange how the state finds all kinds of reason to keep sex offenders from children , some rightfully so.
Do all the can to hinder them in finding jobs or keeping jobs , finding or keeping their housing
But have no problem taking taxes from their pay to support school programs , food programs for the people who refuse to work for them selves .
Our Probation and Parole Officer are even paid out of funds that sex offender work to pay in
Now if the sex offenders are not to live or have any contact with children does it seem right to be taking their money to support schools and children programs ?
Maybe a probation officer will violate one for this.
Last edited on Tue May 5th, 2009 04:28 pm by oop!
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1020 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 02:44 pm |
|
Sex offenders should refuse to go to state building unless their probation officers keep all children out of them:
Sex offender should not be order to go to building where children are bound to be present and could cause them to be in violation of their PO's order
If sex offenders have to take classes by order of the judge they should have a safe place to go with out interference of being violated .
If it is a case of parent's rage or you broke my heart so I'm going to say it was rape .then the state should consider both sides not just say it was rape case just because the present laws say so.
The offender has the right to protect him self against self incrimination , and if there orders are to stay away from minors then the classes should be brought to them.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/09/16/2007-09-16_custodian_falsely_accused_of_child_rape_.html
Last edited on Tue May 5th, 2009 02:50 pm by oop!
|
dover-diva
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1973 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 01:48 am |
|
| That's exactly why this moronic "zero tolerance" is so outrageous. Common sense is DEAD.
|
violetdragonfly
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 5th, 2009 01:45 am |
|
| There is a young man in my family who is a Tier I offender because when he was 14, he mooned a bunch of kids (ages 12-14) that were neighbors. One girl told her parents that some boy pulled his pants down and the next thing you know, he's arrested. 15 years as a registered sex offender for some dumb teenage behavior. This kid is no threat to anyone, even the court ordered evaluation stated that it was due to impulsive behavior and not for sexual gratification. But he's there, and now at almost 18, is having a hard time finding a job even in the fast food industry because they all ask now 'Have you been convicted of a sex offense?' on the application. This will determine where he can live or go to school until he's 29. And yet, as you say, my new neighbor could be a convicted murdered who was released and I'd never know.
|
Current time is 01:27 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|