Sex Offender Dies in Cold After Being Denied From Shelter

Post Reply New Topic

If he was still a danger to society, then why was he not still in prison?

If he was not a danger, then why was he (or any offender) still being persecuted?

I think this is a fundamental flaw in the justice system. Why are sex offenders singled out to be persecuted for the rest of their lives, even after they've served their prison sentence? Why are no other crimes persecuted this way?

Don't construe this as being sympathetic toward child molesters. I'm simply saying that if a person is deemed to be dangerous still, then they should not be released. If they are deemed not to be dangerous, then release them and leave them alone.

I endorse Vibratetogether's analysis.

-stamp of approval-

So you're pissed off, so what.

Get over your expectations or get used to disappointment.

I wish we had a "report this post option". Anyway, they caught the sick f**k that wrote this not too long back.

If being an AS adult meant that I abused of children, women, etc, I would deserve to die, sure, as I would be a destructive element of society, as opposed to what I am now, a quirky yet very well adjusted man.

I have urges, sometimes bad ones, but I have the strenght to overcome them. That separates the f**ked-up people from the "ok" ones.

It's a crime to show genitals in public, When are men gonna learn not to be perverts! If you had a young girl and she was to see a guy showing his we we in public, how would you feel about that guy?

Sex offenders ruin the life of many innocent people, and God always brings justice.

Holy hollow rocks batman! You're gonna equate public urination with rape and/or molestation?

Seeing a penis does NOT destroy a young girls life (or anyones for that matter)... No matter the size/shape/dignity of the penis in question.

Many will argue for a lack of remediation on the part of the offender/inability to 'cure' pedophilia/recidivism. With sex offender laws being as permissive as they are, it's hard to support a lot of the legislation. If a bloke is drunk and urinates on a dumpster in a dark alley, he can be charged as a sex offender in some jurisdictions whether he sexually offended anyone or not.

It's true that recidivism is very high in general, but it varies greatly by the type of crime committed. According to the Justice Department's website, the overall recidivism rate is around 25% for all types of crimes, but over 70% for theft/burglary/armed robbery, which is the highest for any crime.

In contrast, about 5% of sex offenders overall, and 3% of child molesters are arrested for the same crime within three years of their release. By comparison, slightly over 1% of those convicted of homicide repeat their crime within three years.

So why aren't killers or armed robbers required to register? Do you want a convicted burglar living next door? How about some dude who shot his wife during an argument? Or maybe a guy who ran a stolen car ring?

Why just sex offenders? Why are these people persecuted for the rest of their lives after they've been released and after they've supposedly "paid their debt to society"?

Again, don't take my words to mean that I am sympathetic in any way to sex offenders, or to any other convicted criminals. I am simply baffled as to why one particular crime, heinous though it may be, is handled in this way, particularly when 97% of them don't repeat their crimes.

There are levels of sex offenders and websites ect were these men and women have their pictures it states clearly what they have done. There are a vary of rules that go with each level. The man in question was conviced of sexual penatration of more then one small girl. I've never seen anything minor listed on the meg laws website and I check once a months so I have a idea who lives near me and my 9 yr old nonverbal autie who I can't help but think would be a easy mark for someone looking ot hurt a child.
I suport megs laws because the reoffender rates are high and it does snowball in to worse and worse crimes. If I can look up the new babysitter before they get in my front dooor it's not perfect but it's something.

Perhaps you didn't read my post, which was just before yours.

No, the re-offender rates are not high, if the statistics from the Justice Department are to be believed. In fact, recidivism for sex offenders is one of the lowest of any type of crime. Of course, one could make the point that any recidivism is too high, and I can't disagree with that viewpoint.

But what about first-time offenders? What percentage of the overall population are ticking timebombs, from the standpoint of being a first-time offender? By focusing on those who have gone to prison, done their time, and then been released, thereby paying their debt (at least in theory), aren't we missing the ones who haven't yet been caught?




I totally sympathize with you wanting to know about babysitters, etc. But the vast majority of sex offenders are adult men. Are you employing adult men as a babysitter?

And I certainly understand your concern for your Aspie child. Believe me, I know what you're talking about. But my point still holds ... why are these people being persecuted for the rest of their lives, if no other crime is being similarly persecuted?

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-lik ... rimes-258/
The numbers are up for debait, I might be wroung on the reoffence rate. Of the child molesters I've know most have never been prosecuted or even reported because they were with in familys and the whole thing was just sweeped under the rug, these men have found new childern to abuse, the ones that I've know that did see the inside of a court room one was placed in a mental home and the other did sever jail time for the years he spend raping his step daughter as the other 3 girls in the home were forced to watch. With the cases being what they were the actions taken in both cases were vaild. As far as I'm aware those two men did not re offened the first be cause he got the help he needed he was a 20 yr old with the mental funtions of a 7 yr old and need to be placed in care were he learned that one cannot touch others with out asking and one can never touch childern under there clothing ,but what he had done to that date was mild. The other man died in jail of nautural causes so he was unable to be near a child again.
Most of the health workers willing to provite respet care for my son are male but there has been a rise in female offenders.

Yes, I believe those percentages are valid. Just to clarify, I wasn't arguing that recidivism was higher for sex offenders, just making not of a common rationale. I think that the response is in part political pandering.



I would imagine that it has to do a lot with the fact that these are generally children; and even in cases where there are adult victims, there's a lot of cultural baggage regarding sex in American culture (I'd say Western cultures in general) which cause sex crimes to be looked upon as particularly heinous.

I'm certainly bothered by the notion of the registry as continuing punishment; in some states it also happens with civil rights and felons. In Florida, for example, even after a sentence (including probation) is complete, a felon's civil rights are not automatically restored. The ex convict has to petition the governor to have those rights reinstated... and chances are slim that those rights will be restored.



I'm not sympathetic either, and I'm equally curious as to why these crimes are punished so differently from others.

Convicted felons (this includes murderers, rapists, sex offenders, grand theft, etc), even after they serve jail sentences, are not allowed access to certain things depending on the nature of their crime.

For example, those who commit violent crime are not legally able to buy weapons nor gain employment in some jobs and for some, they are denied the right to travel outside the country.

Sex offenders who'se crime involved children are not allowed to be near them in any public area or live near schools/parks/etc. a murderer can, but a child molester cant.



In this case the man was left alone until he tried to secure shelter in a place that was off-limits to him. It's terrible he died like that but blaming it on the system is just silly.

Sex offenders are like alcoholics by the way... they may sober up for many years but the likelihood of them going back to the bottle is high. Unlike alcoholics that can get drunk ONE night after 10 years being sober, realize the next morning he was about to screw it all up and not touch the bottle again... a sex offender's 'one night' relapse = a crime is commited.

Yes, I understand. But not being able to buy a gun or obtain a security clearance is hardly equivalent to continued lifelong persecution.



You must know something the Justice Department doesn't. Your statements do not agree with their recidivism rates, based on their own statistics of re-offenders. As I noted earlier, sex offenses have one of the the lowest recidivism rates of any major crime.

I don't really have anything further to add on this topic.

I'll add another wrinkle here for all the condemners to consider, if they will.

Guess what there is very little of in the vast majority of sex crimes cases? Physical evidence. Usually, there is basically none. Think about that for a while.

How do I know? I'm a criminal defense attorney. I see just how little evidence it really takes to convict someone of a crime (any crime really) every day. CSI is just fantasy TV. Real police work is nothing like that.

Yeah, sure, most people in prison will tell you they didn't do it. Some of them are telling the truth. Can YOU tell who they are?

This quote comes from The Lord of the Rings but I think it is perfectly true and applicable here: "Yes, he deserves death. And many that die deserve life. Can you give it to them...? Then do not be so quick to deal out death in judgement."