Is it ok to hire a convicted sex offender? (ie. Plumber, Landscaper, etc) (Rome: crimes, how much)

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

Then you were looking at the wrong thing. That doesn't appear anywhere in the Georgia statutes. Also this discussion is implying that there is some age demarcation between statutory rape and child molestation, but that is not the case. Basically statutory rape is sex with a minor under 16 that was not forced (which would be rape). Also if the victim is under 10 it is rape in all cases. Child molestation is acts other than sexual intercourse on a child under 16.

source: CHAPTER 6 - SEXUAL OFFENSES :: 2010 Georgia Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia

Wow I looked up Chile Molestation too, because I wasn't quite sure what it was (but it is probably the most common thing I see pop up on the registry).

It is amazing how the 2010 version has added so much from the 1992 version!

[Lizita]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

not entirely sure)....

also about Roslyns comments... I'm just curious... do any studies back this up? Are a majority of sex offenders really serial offenders going from young girl to young girl?

or are a majority single offenders (which is why we have so many in our registry!) and a few are serial offenders (but cause alot of offenses).

According to "Illinois Voices", an advocacy organization, the vast majority of sex offenders on the registries do not re-offend. That's especially true for these young guys who were convicted of having consentual sex with a younger girl.
According to everything I've read Roslyn's statements are not true at all.

[testa50]

Knowing it is stat rape is nowhere near enough information--that's a big part of the problem with such registries.

Georgia's laws on this subject are spectacularly tough. Tough enough to gain writeups in the international press. You can go ahead and just categorically refuse to consider such people, and that's fine, but it's worth education yourself a little on the issue, at least.

Sex laws: Unjust and ineffective | The Economist

[cwkimbro]

Thanks for posting that!....

I want to highlight one paragraph that is half way in that article I think we should all read. It is about Georgia. It also puts things in easy numbers.

"Georgia has more than 17,000 registered sex offenders. Some are highly dangerous. But many are not. And it is fiendishly hard for anyone browsing the registry to tell the one from the other. The Georgia Sex Offender Registration Review Board, an official body, assessed a sample of offenders on the registry last year and concluded that 65% of them posed little threat. Another 30% were potentially threatening, and 5% were clearly dangerous. The board recommended that the first group be allowed to live and work wherever they liked. The second group could reasonably be barred from living or working in certain places, said the board, and the third group should be subject to tight restrictions and a lifetime of monitoring. A very small number “just over 100” are classified as “predators”, which means they have a compulsion to commit sex offences. When not in jail, predators must wear ankle bracelets that track where they are."

With that in mind... why can't the state divide these groups up, so we can know the difference of that 5%, 30%, and 65% better? Maybe for that 65% even have the registry expire, so they can move on with their life.

That will also allow those of us who are worried to focus on that 30%....and reeeeally focus on that 5%

I bet that 5% are the people roslyn was talking about that just go from one to another.

The very next paragraph starts off with this, "Despite the board’s findings, non-violent offenders remain listed and subject to a giant cobweb of controls."

Part of me thinks if we listened to the boards findings we could easily answer the OP's original question.... No, absolutely not.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Nope. It would be statutory rape. I'm not sure why people are so dismissive if statutory rape laws. After all age of consent in this and most states is sixteen. Most of the men in these cases are NOT a girl's eighteen year old boyfriend, but adult males in their twenties and thirties. Further better than 40% of teen pregnancies involve an adult male. Every HIV positive teen I ever worked with contracted the disease from an adult male. And a very high percentage of these men are serial offenders moving on to another young girl when the first one gets too old. Bottom line, no, he couldn't landscape for me. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my children.

Let's say you're a college guy in a bar, and you meet some hot chick and share a few drinks, then take her home. Turns out she was 15, mature for her age, lying about her age when asked because she wants some fun, and using a fake ID, but you didn't have a clue until a week later when her dad files charges against you.

You paint an interesting picture, but not everyone fits your stereotype.

I've known girls in the past who did things similar to the above for kicks. Not getting guys in trouble, but going into bars with fake IDs even though they were 15 or 16 and flirting with the patrons.

[RoslynHolcomb]

How is it a stereotype when I'm simply relating information I've gathered from a decade and a half of casework? And I've heard that girl in a bar story more times than I can count and I call B.S. on it every time. You know why? Anyone who has ever had even the pithiest conversation with a 15 year old girl knows darned well she's underage. And again, such cases are rarely prosecuted, and certainly don't make up the bulk of the cases by any estimation.

And if you want to know about statutory rapists and the re offense rate the place to look is not an advocacy organization, but at filings for child support. After all, like all rape, statutory rape is seldom reported, let alone prosecuted. Usually the minor won't testify and most prosecutors won't risk their batting average on such a case. However, when there's a baby (or an aborted fetus, yeah we've subpoenaed one) DNA evidence can be used to prove sex occurred. Time and again you will find cases where several young girls have been impregnated by the same guy over a period of years.

Most states, including Georgia have a Romeo & Juliet proviso in regard to young teens having sex, including the oft referenced eighteen year old with a fifteen year old. It would bea misdemeanor, nd the eighteen year old would NOT be on the registry.

And here in Georgia uou also habe to take child prostitution into account. I only ran into it a few times in Alabama, and most of itbwas informal, but as I understand it the practice is rampant here in Georgia. Bottom line is, statutory rape is not a trivial matter. At the very least it can be considered a marker for poor boundary control.

[atltechdude]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

Most states, including Georgia have a Romeo & Juliet proviso in regard to young teens having sex

Yes but that was only added recently, after that high profile case with the star football player.

Most people on the lists had their offenses before that provision went into effect.

[RoslynHolcomb]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

Yes but that was only added recently, after that high profile case with the star football player.

Most people on the lists had their offenses before that provision went into effect.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but again those type cases are exceedingly rare. I can't think of any I had over five years as a sexual abuse investigator. As I said, most prosecutors won't touch them.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by RoslynHolcomb

How is it a stereotype when I'm simply relating information I've gathered from a decade and a half of casework?

...and your work context is representative of everyplace in the state of Georgia, is it?

I certainly won't question your expertise in your local context, but your comments don't seem to correlate with the stats others have presented. Which to believe?

And I've heard that girl in a bar story more times than I can count and I call B.S. on it every time. You know why? Anyone who has ever had even the pithiest conversation with a 15 year old girl knows darned well she's underage. And again, such cases are rarely prosecuted, and certainly don't make up the bulk of the cases by any estimation.

Really... I've known some former 15 year olds who might have surprise you when they were that age.

I'm not surprised such cases are rare, but that doesn't seem to explain some of the stats that others are citing here.

[atlantagreg30127]

Originally Posted by livinginbuffalo

And you never said how old he is. Everyone is assuming he is a guy in his 20's and it was nine years ago. If he's in his 40's, would you all still think it was ok?

I took the OP's links down to his offender page - it's not only legally a bad move to post such things, but we simply don't allow links to personal pages of any sort at all. But for the record, when I investigated the link, he looked quite young as he is now, so I would be one of the people to assume that years ago when this happened he was in his teens.

That being said, the topic is shifting more into a Georgia law debate over sex offenders instead of the specific topic about whether you'd hire someone who's on the list, so please let's get this back on track.