Treatment of sex offenders of all ilks

[Kacey]

In this thread, Flying Crane made an astute observation about the treatment of sex offenders - many of them people convicted of indecent exposure (while urinating behind a bush), sex with a minor (while only a couple of years older than the partner), and so on. While there are several levels of sex offender, once someone is labeled as such, the level is often forgotten. I felt that FC's post (quoted below) was a topic deserving more discussion.

Yeah, I gotta agree with this as well. Not every "sex offense" had anything to do with children. Not every sex offender is a pedophile.

Here is California, they recently were working on some new laws tightening the restrictions on the movements and living requirements of released sex offenders. The distance they had to live from a school or church or other "child" focused centers was increased substantially. Problem is, in a city like San Francisco, churches and schools are all over the place. It makes it effectively impossible for a convicted offender to live in the city at all. Sometimes if the person was a long-time resident of the city, they have to sell their home that they have owned for many years, and effectively move out into the sticks, just to be the requisite distance from schools and whatnot, and this can make it impossible to commute in to their jobs. It just becomes an unworkable situation, and the person is essentially banished from the city.

The US legal system determines that once a person has served his time for his conviction, he should not be continuously punished for his crime. His debt has been paid and he is supposed to be free to get on with life. The problem with sex offenders is that there is this continued monitoring and restricting of their movements. It is intended to keep them away from children who might be easy targets, which is not necessarily relavant to any individual case (remember: as I stated earlier, not all sex offenders are pedophiles) but it can be overdone and becomes in essence a lifetime of continuous punishment. They are unable to establish any semblance of a normal life, with the ability to support themselves and be a contributing member of society.

Now, I am not trying to soften the heinousness of the actions of any pedophilic sexual predators. That's a pretty heinous thing. But the system does tend to treat all sex offenders equally, even tho their offenses are often far from equal. It is a pretty messed up system.

 

[Flying Crane]

Thanks Kacey, I didn't realize my thoughts would inspire a whole new thread!

I have some further thoughts and examples, but I have to be careful about how much I talk about them. My wife and my Father-in-Law are Criminal-Defense Attorneys, and they have encountered this issue. I certainly will not give any information that might identify one of their clients. But beyond that, I'm not sure how much I can discuss these examples, given the sensitive nature of their cases. I'll have to think about it a bit.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

We as a society are very good at tarring large groups with one big ol' brush.

There's strong evidence demonstrating that many sorts of sex offenders will keep offending no matter how long or often they've been locked up. There's good evidence to suggest that, in some cases, they can't stop offending.

Thus the laws that keep them away from schools, churches, playgrounds, etc.

It seems, as many have said, that some peripheral offenses have been swept up in the net. My wife and I rent a couple of rooms out in our house. About 1/3 of the people who call about them are registered sex offenders -- I guess it's hard for them to get accepted into apartment buildings.

A couple of them were child molesting sons of bitches. Others were guilty of nothing more than being stupid. One of them (and he showed me some paper to support his story) picked up a girl at a bar who was using fake ID to buy drinks. Turned out she was 16 and he still got convicted.

 

[Flying Crane]

OK, here's a short example, this one has nothing to do with my wife's legal practice.

There was a fairly well known case here in the San Francisco area, maybe a year or two ago or so. It got a lot of publicity.

A sex offender was being released from prison, and he was subject to monitoring his movements and restrictions were placed on where he could live to keep him away from schools and whatnot. I don't recall the nature of his offenses. I don't remember if he was a pedophile.

Anyway, several times the authorities tried to place him in a hotel or home of some kind that fit the location restrictions, to get him out on his own. Every time he was placed, the local residents and landlords raised objections and basically drove him out. He ended up living on the grounds of the prison, because he had no where else to go.

If memory serves (which I may be wrong about this), I believe he eventually committed suicide. He saw no other way out, no way to get free of the system.

Again, I don't recall the nature of his offenses. But if he was to be freed from prison, then he needs enough freedom to make his way in life. If the legal system makes it OK to make his life on the outside this miserable and impossible, then he may as well have lived out the rest of his life in prison. But his prison term was over, he supposedly paid his debt to society, yet he could not escape the continued punishment of society after he left prison.

 

[Kacey]

We as a society are very good at tarring large groups with one big ol' brush.

This is, I think, a significant problem with the legal society in general - it is easier to draw broad lines than to clearly define the edges. In addition, "[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]The best laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft a-gley.--Robert Burns ("To a Mouse")" - that is, laws written with the best of intentions often have unintended side effects.
[/FONT]

 

[morph4me]

New York recently past a civil confinement law that basically says that after a sex offender serves his time, if the authorities still feel he's a threat, they can confine him to a mental institution. I thought that double jeopardy would be an issue, but apparently it isn't.

Violent sexual predators and pedophiles should be taken out of society permanently, but taking a leak behind a bush shouldn't even be classified as a sexual offense.

 

[Shaderon]

I agree morph, there are many things that I dont think should be regarded as a sex offence. The guy above a few posts who made a totally honest mistake should not have been charged with anything instead he should have had a complete apology from the girl for his trauma, which in the case of a decent bloke it would be traumatic to find out the girl he's just slept with was under age.

Records SHOULD be cleared in the cases where it was not thier fault, arresting and charging someone for taking a pee behind a bush is totally stupid.... even if it was for exposure purposes they should just have been warned and moved on. Now if it was taking a pee up someone's window that would be different.

Proper sex offenders should be charged. In my view they should also be castrated and tagged, but I wouldn't want to vote my view as I know I am an unforgiving person.

 

[setboy]

Violent sexual predators and pedophiles should be taken out of society permanently, but taking a leak behind a bush shouldn't even be classified as a sexual offense.

I agree 100%

 

[tellner]

A lot of it is America's really messed up and immature collective attitude about sex, at once grimly Puritanical and slaveringly prurient. Attach sex to anything and people go insane. The most powerful totalitarian power group in this country, the Religious Right, is obsessed with boys diddling boys, girls diddling girls, boys and girls diddling each other if they haven't paid a preacher to mumble holy words over them, stopping cancer treatments because they'd keep thousands of women from dying each year from diseases that they could catch from sex, protecting children from the mindblasting sight of a bare tit, preventing the complete collapse of the South by passing out twenty year sentences to anyone with more than five sex toys et cetera, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

Does it surprise anyone that we go ape poo over any crime connected with sex and try to punish such offenders for ever, world without end? Yes, rapists and child rapists, kiddie pornographers and the like need to be kept away from potential victims. And even then, there used to be the idea that eventually you paid your debt and you and society were square again. Beyond that it's not justice, it's just cruelty.

 

[jks9199]

Sex offenses and sex offenders run a wide gamut. The guy convicted of "carnal knowledge of minor" or "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" (or some similar offense) for adult activities with his consenting (maybe even initiating!), 17 year old girlfriend when he was 18 or 20... He's probably not going to be a problem for the cops in the future, I agree.

But the guy who gets off on showing his junk off in public, or who's into kids (like pre-teens) when he's 25 or 30? He's not going to change. That's how he's wired. He's not going to be "rehabilitated" anymore than we can make a homosexual person into a heterosexual. A very few can learn to control and restrain their behavior to a more societally acceptable option... but their wiring remains twisted, and given the right temptation, they'll likely re-offend. The same thing applies to peepers and exhibitionists, with a frightening caveat. Some of the peepers & exhibitionists progress to being rapists...

Rapists are an even more complicated issue; there are different types and degrees of rapists, and their chances of reoffending are different. When you get into some of the date rape scenarios, it gets even worse.

But -- in the end -- it's very simple. If someone's wiring is twisted to youngsters or where they get off on hurting, not sex -- we're not going to change them. Recall the movie A Clockwork Orange; they don't fix the main character -- they just make him even more twisted. These people will always be a threat to their victim class; even the very few that can learn to restrain or redirect themselves will remain a threat, though they don't act on the urges.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Thanks Kacey, I didn't realize my thoughts would inspire a whole new thread!

quote]Actualy we are thinking of Starting a whole new site because of you. LOL
Sean

 

[Flying Crane]

Thanks Kacey, I didn't realize my thoughts would inspire a whole new thread!

quote]Actualy we are thinking of Starting a whole new site because of you. LOL
Sean

Whoa! SO COOOOOLL!!!

 

[morph4me]

Proper sex offenders should be charged. In my view they should also be castrated and tagged, but I wouldn't want to vote my view as I know I am an unforgiving person.

Personally, I think you're being too lenient, but that's just me.

 

[Bigshadow]

A lot of it is America's really messed up and immature collective attitude about sex, at once grimly Puritanical and slaveringly prurient. Attach sex to anything and people go insane. The most powerful totalitarian power group in this country, the Religious Right, is obsessed with boys diddling boys, girls diddling girls, boys and girls diddling each other if they haven't paid a preacher to mumble holy words over them, stopping cancer treatments because they'd keep thousands of women from dying each year from diseases that they could catch from sex, protecting children from the mindblasting sight of a bare tit, preventing the complete collapse of the South by passing out twenty year sentences to anyone with more than five sex toys et cetera, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

Does it surprise anyone that we go ape poo over any crime connected with sex and try to punish such offenders for ever, world without end? Yes, rapists and child rapists, kiddie pornographers and the like need to be kept away from potential victims. And even then, there used to be the idea that eventually you paid your debt and you and society were square again. Beyond that it's not justice, it's just cruelty.

I like your post! Direct and to the point! I totally agree with you!

 

[Empty Hands]

There's strong evidence demonstrating that many sorts of sex offenders will keep offending no matter how long or often they've been locked up. There's good evidence to suggest that, in some cases, they can't stop offending.

What evidence? The FBI stats I have seen show a lower recidivism rate for pedophiles.

Thus the laws that keep them away from schools, churches, playgrounds, etc.

We should be honest with ourselves and call those laws what they are - banishment. So many "child centered" locations are being added now (where isn't there a bus stop?!), not only to residence but work as well, that effective banishment is the only possible result. Now, if these criminals are as hard-wired and likely to re-offend as everyone thinks, why couldn't they hop in their car and drive (or walk!) inside that 2000' radius? Are they really lazy about their perverse, unchangeable desires?

One of them (and he showed me some paper to support his story) picked up a girl at a bar who was using fake ID to buy drinks. Turned out she was 16 and he still got convicted.

Yep, that's the stupidity of "strict liability" laws. Almost every other crime requires a mens rea, but not statutory rape. To my knowledge, all the rest of the strict liability crimes are minor traffic offenses.

 

[Empty Hands]

Violent sexual predators and pedophiles should be taken out of society permanently, but taking a leak behind a bush shouldn't even be classified as a sexual offense.

What's so special about the sex aspect of the crime? Why do we get so worked up about it? Why can a premeditated murderer, or an arsonist that horribly kills dozens of people stay in society, while the rapist must go (without testicles or his life, if alot of people have their way)?

 

[Blotan Hunka]

OK, here's a short example, this one has nothing to do with my wife's legal practice.

There was a fairly well known case here in the San Francisco area, maybe a year or two ago or so. It got a lot of publicity.

A sex offender was being released from prison, and he was subject to monitoring his movements and restrictions were placed on where he could live to keep him away from schools and whatnot. I don't recall the nature of his offenses. I don't remember if he was a pedophile.

Anyway, several times the authorities tried to place him in a hotel or home of some kind that fit the location restrictions, to get him out on his own. Every time he was placed, the local residents and landlords raised objections and basically drove him out. He ended up living on the grounds of the prison, because he had no where else to go.

If memory serves (which I may be wrong about this), I believe he eventually committed suicide. He saw no other way out, no way to get free of the system.

Again, I don't recall the nature of his offenses. But if he was to be freed from prison, then he needs enough freedom to make his way in life. If the legal system makes it OK to make his life on the outside this miserable and impossible, then he may as well have lived out the rest of his life in prison. But his prison term was over, he supposedly paid his debt to society, yet he could not escape the continued punishment of society after he left prison.

Im less than sympathetic.

 

[Flying Crane]

Im less than sympathetic.

i'm not surprised.

 

[Empty Hands]

That's how he's wired. He's not going to be "rehabilitated" anymore than we can make a homosexual person into a heterosexual. A very few can learn to control and restrain their behavior to a more societally acceptable option... but their wiring remains twisted, and given the right temptation, they'll likely re-offend.

That just isn't true. For instance, the following meta-analysis shows that general sex offense recidivism rate was 13.4%, while the child-molester rate was 12.7% (n=23,393, 5 year span). This is less than the general recidivism rate, and the predictors for re-offense were the same for sexual and non-sexual crimes.
http://www.helping-people.info/articles/hanson_98_frame.htm

The same thing applies to peepers and exhibitionists, with a frightening caveat. Some of the peepers & exhibitionists progress to being rapists...

"Some"? How many? What evidence do you have for it? It better be good to place the extraordinary suspicion and probably public action on non-violent offenders that this sentence implies.

If someone's wiring is twisted to youngsters or where they get off on hurting, not sex -- we're not going to change them. Recall the movie A Clockwork Orange; they don't fix the main character -- they just make him even more twisted.

Once again, how do you know? The recidivism data doesn't support you. And a movie is not good evidence (they even changed the movie ending from Burgess' book).

 

[Blotan Hunka]

i'm not surprised.

Im not suprised you are married to a defense attorney either. Now.