Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately the definition of the crime and register has expanded greatly. Even people who semi-accidentally had stuff on their computer or were snooping around online can be charged. It's not like the olden daze when you actually had to take multiple actions and things like that.
Most real crimes would have plenty of newspaper and other stories following them.
In my extended circle I know of at least two "sex offenders" and there are probably more. I know one relation whose own kids turned them in...for spite....yet there was no crime, abuse or anything other than a report. Teens can do that sort of thing.
One guy....wouldn't call him a friend, just someone I hit tennis balls with....told me the first time we met he had just got out of jail for having a CD found in his lost backpack. He had been a teacher and had lost everything and spent a year in jail...not passing judgment on him, but if he was in my neighborhood I wouldn't worry in the least.
The other guy was a friend of a friends who got busted for having some pot plants in his house and he and his wife were very loose sexually in all ways (open relationship)....and he had some illegal porn found on his computer. Again, not passing judgement and if I did I'd say he was a perv of sort, but not gonna prey upon your or my children (in general)....
Let's put it this way. If we got into the computers, minds and actions of every male in your or my town, we'd have more criminal (in many ways) then we could possibly deal with.
One time in about 1999 my hard drive crashed and I got a utility to see if I could salvage anything. WOW.....just from being on the net there were some very bad words (and maybe images...I couldn't see) that had been downloaded to my computer that I had no idea about!
Consider that if you visited a web page with vast amounts of text relating to sex crimes or such on it..and the writer of that page had made that text white (invisible), all that text would be deposited on your hard drive without you knowing. This is in addition to emails (even SPAM) and attachments and viruses, etc.
Yes it’s really bad. They have cast too wide a net. It’s really unfair punishment as it’s basically a life sentence. Was reading recently about a guy who was on the registry due to downloading one 3-minute clip that apparently had underage girl in it. He lost his job and his home, then his family. 10 years later he was still unable to get past a background check for a job and was living in a motel on public assistance. His entire life was ruined from one three minute video clip.
I find it odd, because if OPs neighbor had done time for murder, he wouldn’t be on any registry and could be living next to anyone and no one would know.
Unfortunately the definition of the crime and register has expanded greatly. Even people who semi-accidentally had stuff on their computer or were snooping around online can be charged. I
By snooping around online, if you mean google searches, nobody is prosecuted for searching or clicking on a link on the internet. They have to be downloading things to get charged with a crime. If they pay with a credit card, that's usually how they get caught. I find it odd that someone can accidentally have stuff on their hardrive, as I've never had anything questionable "accidentally" put on my home computer, or just appear there out of the blue, but I suppose it could happen to someone, somewhere. Some mystery person puts something on their computer for whatever reason.
It may seem that everyone on the sex offender registry just accidentally got caught doing something they weren't aware of and didn't intend to do. But in the majority of cases, I'm pretty sure the person knew what they were doing was wrong.
Snooping around online, you mean google searches, nobody is prosecuted for that. They have to be downloading things to get charged. If they pay with a credit card, that's usually how they get caught. I find this odd, as I've never had anything questionable "accidentally" put on my home computer, or just appear there out of the blue, but I suppose it could happen to someone, somewhere.
It may seem that everyone on the sex offender registry just accidentally got caught doing something they weren't aware of and didn't intend to do. But in the majority of cases, I'm pretty sure the person knew what they were doing was wrong.
Even if it wasn’t an accident, OPs neighbor was 18...a pretty girl pops up and says click here to see me in action, A. Is it obvious looking at her that’s she’s 16 or 17 and not 18? And B. 18 year old guys making an impulsive decision to look at a pretty naked girl does not qualify him as a predator IMO. It is certainly not something he should have to keep paying for as long as he lives.
By snooping around online, if you mean google searches, nobody is prosecuted for searching or clicking on a link on the internet. They have to be downloading things to get charged with a crime. If they pay with a credit card, that's usually how they get caught. I find it odd that someone can accidentally have stuff on their hardrive, as I've never had anything questionable "accidentally" put on my home computer, or just appear there out of the blue, but I suppose it could happen to someone, somewhere. Some mystery person puts something on their computer for whatever reason.
It may seem that everyone on the sex offender registry just accidentally got caught doing something they weren't aware of and didn't intend to do. But in the majority of cases, I'm pretty sure the person knew what they were doing was wrong.
It still doesn’t mean they are any kind of danger to society. Why is it so important that you know your neighbor watched a porn clip when again, if they murdered someone they don’t have to notify anyone? Is a guy that downloaded a porn clip more dangerous than other types of criminals? They get to serve their time and fulfill their debt to society and then live their life in peace...but the porn downloaded must pay and pay with no end, ever.
With my monthly credit report, I also get updates on local sex offenders that have been registered in my immediate area. This month, a familiar name popped up. It's the same name as my friend's husband, however, her husband has a super common name, so I though it might be coincidence. The thing is that they live right by me, so I decided to look into more details.
When I expanded the registrant's profile it was surely him. It was his exact same birthdate and the address they live in. I looked at what the offense said and it said "child pornography/film/photos". It looks like he was registered two months ago, and they just had a baby (their first) a month ago.
Ugh. I am not even sure what to do? It sounds like a serious charge, but how serious if he's not in jail? She has been posting pictures of them together with the baby, and I just talked to her a few days ago. Surely she must know?
I am not even sure what to do? Do I ask or bring it up? In a way If he did commit this, how can I even be around him anymore? She is a great friend, but if she he did something serious and is looking the other way how can I also be friends with her? This is just also bizarre, and I am not sure how to approach this.
For what is likely a minority view, I'm indignant that your credit report would shoehorn something like this into your notice.
The point of the justice system is that someone gets convicted, he serves time or is otherwise punished, and then it's considered that he's paid his debt to society. You mention no children of your own, and you do mention that his crime involved no violence. So very possibly has never laid an improper hand on anyone.
I think you should get a grip and, most likely, do nothing.
This is just another example of why the sex offender registry should be modified with some judicial/legal discretion in who gets put on the list. Does an adult sex worker and his or her adult customer deserve the life time stigma of sex offender? Does a teenager who had relations with a girl a year or two younger than him deserve a lifetime of shame? To me it is a registry that should be limited to rapist and child molesters/pornography and even then with some judicial discretion.
Even if it wasn’t an accident, OPs neighbor was 18...a pretty girl pops up and says click here to see me in action, A. Is it obvious looking at her that’s she’s 16 or 17 and not 18? And B. 18 year old guys making an impulsive decision to look at a pretty naked girl does not qualify him as a predator IMO. It is certainly not something he should have to keep paying for as long as he lives.
In my state, the sex offender registry is not for life. So people don't necessarily stay on it forever.
Child porn laws aren't necessarily about who's dangerous or who's not dangerous. It's about stopping the child porn industry which means they have to go after people who support it by buying this stuff and downloading it.
People don't get prosecuted for child porn based on things that just "pop up" on their computer. They get convicted based on downloading and purchasing it with their credit card. The police don't, and can't, monitor everyone's internet searches or what pop ups on people's computers. That would take way too much time to investigate.
They are more likely to go after people like this woman:
In my state, the sex offender registry is not for life. So people don't necessarily stay on it forever.
Child porn laws aren't necessarily about who's dangerous or who's not dangerous. It's about stopping the child porn industry which means they have to go after people who support it by buying this stuff and downloading it.
People don't get prosecuted for child porn based on things that just "pop up" on their computer. They get convicted based on downloading and purchasing it with their credit card. The police don't, and can't, monitor everyone's internet searches or what pop ups on people's computers. That would take way too much time to investigate.
They are more likely to go after people like this woman:
I think that’s a stupid way to stop it. It’s like stopping prostitution by arresting Johns. It hasn’t ever worked in our history. Go after the sources, not just of content but distribution. Make internet companies pay for allowing it on their servers. Go after the sex traffickers. Instead of treating teenage prostitutes as criminals and arresting them, start trying to help them, maybe you’ll find out their pimp started them at 14. But arresting everyone who clicks on a link is not going to do one thing to end it. Really we will never end it probably (like drugs and prostitution, all of which have been around for thousands of years) but we can do more to help the girls who get forced into it. I just don’t think this is the way.
IMO an 18 year old who chose to look at a naked teen is not a pedophile. It’s ridiculous that he can’t live near a pre-school. I think we go too far with these terms. I had a patient yesterday in the nursing home I work in who was a widow who had been married 60 years. When they started dating, he was a in college and she was 15. Today her husband to be could have had his life ruined for it.
If the person isn’t an actual convicted pedophile or committed sexual assault, I don’t think it’s anyone’s business and no one needs to know when they move to a neighborhood.
Okay thanks for this info as I did extra research, this actually clears things up a bit and I am breathing a little easier. Looks like when he was 18 is when he was officially charged, not two months ago. It's two months ago that he appeared in my area, but after looking at the state's official website, the crime was committed when he was 18, and the victim was 17, so this makes more sense. That was almost a good 15 years ago too. The state has that has being his last (and only) offense.
I feel a little better now, as that situation makes more "sense". Still it's not a good thing, but it takes away from me thinking he was a possible child molester or something of that nature.
Yeah imagine being able to have something like that expunged. Inflexible laws like that can mark a person in such way. I mean look at your post. You immediately thought sex offender oh my god child molester. Come to find out he was marked as a sex offender for something that thousands of teenagers do every year. A kid 18/19 dating a kid who is 16/17.
These little registries are wrong. This was absolutely none of your business, yet you're getting the personal lifelong business of neighbors pushed to you with a monthly credit report. NOT a good look.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
