Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government The Courts United States Your Rights Online News

Maine to Launch Internet Sex-Offender Registry 725

Posted by timothy from the wait-til-it's-for-lesser-offenses dept.
scubacuda writes "On Monday, Maine Today reports that officials plan to put info about the states 1,200 registered sex offenders on the Internet to allow residents to easily determine if a convicted offender lives in their neighborhood. Some jurisdictions - including Portland, South Portland, Saco and Kennebec County - already post sex-offender information on the Internet. But the new site will cover *all* sex offenders registered in Maine, and will include their names, ages and birth dates, where they live, where they work or attend school, and which offense they were convicted of. Photographs will soon be posted, as well."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Maine to Launch Internet Sex-Offender Registry More

Maine to Launch Internet Sex-Offender Registry

Comments Filter:

  • Nothing new here (Score:5, Interesting)

    by boobsea ( 728173 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:07PM (#7593930) Journal
    The State of Texas has had this for some time now.. gives their picture, their crime, vital stats, etc ,etc.

    http://records.txdps.state.tx.us/soSearch/soSearch .cfm [state.tx.us]

    • Re:Nothing new here (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Mr Guy ( 547690 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:15PM (#7593993) Journal
      Going with a generic John Jones, here's one of the records you get: John Jones, Pervert [state.tx.us]


      Interesting to note he's DEAD and they still have a record of him. One does wonder how they took that "current" picture. He looks pretty good, what with being dead and all.

      Also interesting to note, did he die BEFORE or AFTER they stuck his name, address, picture, and the fact that he molested a 9 year old girl IN TEXAS up on the web?
    • ... vital stats...
      vital stats for a sex offender? What's that? Penis length? Will it be updated if they use "natural male enhancement" pills.

    • Re:Nothing new here (Score:5, Insightful)

      by krbvroc1 ( 725200 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:25PM (#7594060)
      Of course innocent people can get caught up in this and they have no recourse.

      In Texas, from 1999, from

      DALLAS (AP) -- Faced with a choice between convicts' privacy and the public's right to know about sex offenders, the Texas Legislature sided with the latter.

      The decision cost Thinh Pham his front teeth. Now he fears leaving his home.

      The 27-year-old Vietnamese refugee was attacked by four men who thought he was a sex offender because his address was listed on the state's Internet registry. But the address was that of a sex-offender who hadn't lived at the home for months.

      The vigilante beating came in September, three weeks after the effective date of a new state law mandating more detailed sex-offender information be posted on a Department of Public Safety website. Previously, the state released only block numbers and ZIP codes of sex offenders.

      Supporters of the measure said it would help parents protect their children from sex offenders living in their neighborhoods.

      But Pham's case raises questions about the state's ability to verify the accuracy of such a vast and detailed database. Top law-enforcement officials acknowledge they have little idea how much of the registry is accurate.

      • Re:Nothing new here (Score:5, Interesting)

        by krbvroc1 ( 725200 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:54PM (#7594267)
        If you want some more in depth details on Megan's law and the risks associated with this stuff see http://www.appa-net.org/revisitingmegan.pdf [appa-net.org]

        Some tidbits:
        In Virginia, an innocent man targeted by a detective, intent on nailing him for a sex crime, was falsely charged with indecent exposure, was arrested, had his home scoured in his absence, and had his computer and some family photos removed from his home (Jackman, 1999).

        In Lansing, Michigan, a 26-year-old man was branded as a child molester incorrectly. His name was immediately placed on a Family Independence Agency's "undesirables" list. The court ordered his name removed, but the damage had been done. The man lost jobs, friends, and family respect, and ultimately, his health was affected (Miner, 1998).

        A civil liberties group wants Michigan State Police to notify citizens if their addresses are placed on the sex offender list on the Internet. Recently, it was discovered that as many as 25 percent of registry addresses were incorrect, which has resulted in citizens having their addresses improperly included on the registry (Webster, 1999).

        • Re:Nothing new here (Score:4, Interesting)

          by annisette ( 682090 ) * <fdnewell@hotmail.com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:16PM (#7594379)
          In my home state to be caught(and arrested) urinating in public would make tht person name included in the sex offenders list. I brought this up with some friends when the subject was being discussed and I was told it had (the law) been retracted but who knows. It would be a definate case of the punishment outweighing the crime.

          • Re:Nothing new here (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Catbeller ( 118204 )
            Oral sex is still outlawed in some states. If caught, you would be a sex offender.

            Funny story about "sex crimes": a month or so ago in Singapore, a security guard was sent to prison for two years. He had paid a sixteen year old girl money to give him a hummer.

            No, he's not a sex criminal because of the underage prostitution he paid for. Prostiution is legal, so's a consenting 16 year old.

            He's in prison because oral sex is a federal crime in Singapore.

            People are absolutely insane on the subject of sex.

        • Re:Nothing new here (Score:5, Insightful)

          by JoeBaldwin ( 727345 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:29PM (#7594454) Homepage Journal
          In the UK there was a campaign for a "Sarah's Law" (in reference to the Sarah Payne abduction around Y2k), mostly spearheaded by the News Of The World newspaper (The Daily Mail with porn basically). Said paper even went as far as listing the names of some 100 registered sex offenders, which led to vigilante attacks on people who merely looked like those printed. This move drew widespread condemnation from everyone with a semblance of sanity.

          Thank the holy lord Jesus Christ that the law never became legislature.

      • Re:Nothing new here (Score:5, Funny)

        by eric76 ( 679787 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:33PM (#7594484)
        The one I thought was interesting was one guy who usually ran into trouble the first time he met his date's parents.

        He had never been in trouble with the law, but he did some work doing crime reenactments for a local tv station.

        While the girls he dated didn't watch the news enough to recognize him, their parents sure did.

      • Re:Nothing new here (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:56PM (#7594603) Homepage
        But Pham's case raises questions about the state's ability to verify the accuracy of such a vast and detailed database.

        Yeah, there wouldn't be any problem at all if they just kept the record accurate. Yep, there's no problem if a bunch of violent drunk yahoos run around beating the crap out of people so long as they get the right address. [sarcasm]

        P.S. The full article can be found here. [sexcriminals.com]

        -

      • Re:Nothing new here (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @08:25PM (#7595105)
        "But the address was that of a sex-offender who hadn't lived at the home for months."

        Now here's a question: Would it be "OK" if the vigilantes pounded the face of the person they were trying to get?

        Kinda makes you wonder where the line between this and the so-called Nuremberg List is drawn.

        • Re:Nothing new here (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Reziac ( 43301 )
          From my own rant page (seems we had a similar thought):

          6.18.01 Corpus Christi Texas is now placing "DANGER" signs on the homes and vehicles of some "sex offenders" (without much regard for whether the offense was a genuinely predatory abuse or a chance encounter with a consenting but underage girl). Does anyone else hear an echo of those signs warning "JEW" in Nazi Germany??

    • Re:Nothing new here (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Mr2cents ( 323101 )
      But what do you need jails for then anyway? Those people are punished for the rest of their lives..

  • This is terrible (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pingular ( 670773 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:08PM (#7593938)
    Someone commits one offence and for the rest of their lives their life isnt the public's hands? I guess if you can't do the time don't do the crime, but still...

    • Re:This is terrible (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sergeant_x ( 532428 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:29PM (#7594455)
      My brother got caught up in an incident recently where he and some friends had a little too much to drink and decided to go Jet-Skiing naked. Haha, great fun and all, until the local authorities arrested him. They threatened to register him as a sex offender. It took an expensive lawyer to fend them off. We need to be aware of how authorities will use these kinds of laws to expand their power. Anything they can threaten someone with will be used to achieve their will. We trust that usually that will be "good will", but not always. The constitution recognized this fact and provides a reasonable set of limitations on government power. We should think twice before we trash the social contract that keeps us free. While I sympathize with the victims of this kind of violence, there are already laws on the books to prosecute and punish those convicted of these crimes.

    • Re:This is terrible (Score:5, Insightful)

      by macdaddy ( 38372 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @07:06PM (#7594653) Homepage Journal
      I agree. Do you know how easily it is to become a "sex offender"? All you have to do is get caught mooning someone. I'm not kidding. Indecent exposure (a misdemeanor) will get you added to a sex offender list in many jurisdictions. How many of us here have mooned someone at some point and time? Come on now, don't be shy. All of those kids on the Texas, Florida, and California beaches during Spring Break could find themselves on a Sex Offenders list for the public exposure acts they commit. I would give you some links to follow if I was on my own computer. Since I'm not you'll just have to dig around for the articles yourself. That's one of the problems with these types of lists. Many times you don't even have to commit a felony or any sort of violent act. A simple misdemeanor like indecent will do most of the time.

      This also makes one wonder what good it does for one to "serve their time" and reform in prison. If we need to put a person on a list of sex offenders once that person is released then did incarceration not work? Why is it that only sex offenders are publicly displayed on a list? Why aren't murderers put on such a list? That's even more serious of a crime in my book. Why is it a reformed murderer can move in next door without me knowing their past and yet the whole world would know it if a reformed sex offender moved in next door? That hardly seems just to me. Does it seem just to all of you?

      • Re:This is terrible (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ONU CS Geek ( 323473 ) <ian DOT m DOT wilson AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @11:09PM (#7595906) Homepage
        "Serving their time," huh?

        At work this week, we had to tell a guy who had served his time 7 years ago from a Juvnielle crime that we wouldn't hire him.

        Regardless of the fact that he's probably one of the better technicians I've seen. Regardless of the fact that no one (even his former employer) has a bad thing to say. I've QC'ed his work...and he's truly a technician's technician...and he's good to the customer's and subscribers.

        It's really sad when we're getting to the point where you do one bad thing, and you're marked for life, regardless about having "paid your debt" to society.

        It makes me wonder what kind of deamons they'll find when I go through Airport Security next. "I'm Sorry, Ian, we can't let you go through because you stole a farm tractor when you were 15, and we consider you a risk."

        Ian

      • Re:This is terrible (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 01, 2003 @12:34AM (#7596251)
        It's even easier than you think. I know from very personal experience, having spent a year in jail - and I'm on the state sex offender's list - for a "sex crime" that never even took place.

        A young girl (a couple of weeks before her 15th birthday) confided in me that she'd been with her 16-year-old boyfriend only twice, but she thought that she was pregnant and she was considering running away from home. I tried to talk some sense into her head, but then a couple of her friends AND her boyfriend told me that she was also considering suicide. The boyfriend asked me to help, one of her girlfriends pleaded with me... and I, in complete naivete, decided to try to "do something" to help.

        She spent the night at my house. We spoke to her friends on the phone several times, I even offered to talk to her father (she freaked and threatened to leave if I did). Later in the evening, when she'd talked to her best friend again, and after a trip to the bathroom, she announced that she had started her period. So she wasn't pregnant after all.

        So I'd talked her out of running away from home. And I'd kept her from thinking about suicide, and she'd started her period, so the reason she'd been so upset had been resolved. The next morning, I took her home and talked with another friend of hers who thanked me for my help. She told me that she'd actually been fearing for her friend's life.

        Her father was pretty pissed, to say the least. And he wanted me arrested for something. But the original charge would have been "contributing to the delinquency of a minor". Sex never crossed his mind. But when the county's newly-formed Sex Crimes Unit got wind of it, it changed quickly into Child Molestation.

        Never mind that there was no sex involved, confirmed by her gynecologist. The doctor's report was deemed "inadmissable" by the Assistant DA. Can't have us talking about the girl's sex life in the courtroom! We have to think of the victim's rights! Talking about the suicide threat was disallowed, too. We can't pretend there's something wrong with the victim! So, by the time it got to court, there was nothing left but the single event: she spent the night at my house. What other reason could there have been? SEX!

        Isn't there something in the law about being able to confront your accuser? She wasn't going to be allowed to testify. Indeed, she wouldn't even have been in the courthouse.

        They kept me in jail for eleven months before getting near a courtroom. It could have been another year or two to go to trial. I was offered a plea bargain, and I took it. What I pleaded to was "Enticing a Child for Indecent Purposes". My conviction isn't for anything that I did, it's for something that they think that I maybe thought about doing.

        A sex crime. One equal to the child molestation charge, in the eyes of the court.

        I've been through three years of counseling (at my expense), and eight years of probation. And in two more years, I have to apply to have my name taken off the sex offender registration. Five years after that, I can apply to get my civil rights back (voting, etc.). I'll never be allowed to own a gun. It's downright difficult to find or keep a job. I'm currently self-employed, mainly because it's just easier than dealing with the FUD in the job market.

        Sex Offender registration has very little to do with sex offenses. It has even less to do with protecting the community. Its only function is to appease the media and the politicians, and the parents of kids who truly were abused, molested or killed by a parolled sex offender. I'm sorry that these things do happen, but erring on the side of caution and sending an innocent person to prison is not the way it's supposed to work in this country.

        I'm paying the price.

        AC for obvious reasons.

        • Now I completely believe that America is going overboard on this "sex crimes" crap. It is not only stupid but unconstitutional to mark people on a sex offender list for life for a crime. However, your story has problems:

          1) ADAs do not determine admissibility of evidence. That is up to a judge. If either side attempts to enter something into evidence and the other side objects on certian grounds, the judge may rule it inadmissable. However neither side may force the other side to not present evidence. Only

    • Re:This is terrible (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MSBob ( 307239 )
      There's also another flipside...

      You bought your house, renovated it, fixed it up enjoyed living in it and one day you get transferred and decide to sell it. Unfortunately, while you were busy renovating, painting and landscaping, a retired old man moved next door. He happens to be on the sex offenders list for a crime he comitted forty years ago. The value of your house gets reduced to zilch after the word gets out that your next door neighbour might be a sexual deviant... Methinks, sometimes ignorance mi

  • Many states already have this system.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shawnywany ( 664241 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:09PM (#7593940)
    Wisconsin [state.wi.us] for example already has this. You can enter a ZIP code to locate all sex offenders in your area. Actually, a sex offender recently moved into our otherwise quiet neighborhood. I found this out first through the website above, and a week later a town meeting was held about the very same person.
    • and a week later a town meeting was held about the very same person


      Since your post is very on-topic... here's five questions :
      1. Who was the instigating party for the meeting ?
      2. What reason did they bring forth to justify the meeting
      3. What was discussed at that meeting ?
      4. What was the general 'mood' at that meeting ?
      5. What, if any, steps were taken as a result of that meeting ?

  • Too far? Too little? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by liveD ehT ( 662508 )
    This is not a troll, but because of the sexual subject matter, it might look like one. How many of us are going to be surprised when we realize that nice old person down the road raped a bunch of kids? This registry is going to light up every neighborhood because it's built on the false premise that you can live in a neighborhood without sexual predators. These creeps are everywhere!! Maybe there are more than 1200 released convicted offenders, and they likely live all over the place, but what about the one

  • Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by giminy ( 94188 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:09PM (#7593947) Homepage Journal
    So who wants to start a pool on when the first sex offender will be lynched?

    • Re:Ugh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by nick_davison ( 217681 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:21PM (#7594037)
      So who wants to start a pool on when the first sex offender will be lynched?

      Today? [bbc.co.uk]

      Kind of ironic, isn't it. One state announces its program as another country announces someone who was named was murdered.

      Remember: It's only been within the last year that some states have been legally blocked from finding consensual, adult, homosexual relationships a sex crime - sodomy. Those who have been found guilty in the past, for crimes that still stand though are no longer prosecuted, would still be named. And, in many of those states, hate crimes against gays still result in people being murdered.

      A quote from the BBC article really sums it up: "But whatever he has done in the past does not give people the right to attack and kill him."

      • It's more than that (Score:5, Informative)

        by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:27PM (#7594087) Homepage
        The consentual sodomy case you are talking about is Lawrence v. Texas [wikipedia.org]. The PRIMARY reason they fought the case all the way to the surpreme court was to stay *off* the state's list of registered sex offenders.

  • We've had this in Alaska for years.... (Score:4, Informative)

    by ghettoboy22 ( 723339 ) <scott.a.johnson@gmail.com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:10PM (#7593952) Homepage
    http://www.dps.state.ak.us/nSorcr/asp/search.asp There hasn't been too much negative feedback about it except a lawsuit from 2 registered offenders who complained about having to be on the list even though their sentenances were completely served before the law creating the registry was enacted.

  • Your rights online indeed!!! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by B747SP ( 179471 ) <slashdot@selfabusedelephant.com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:10PM (#7593953)
    Whilst I guess that the people doing this will counter with "you give up your rights when you take it upon yourself to play with little kids bottoms", it kinda flies right in the face of concepts of rehabilitation, etc. Does the status of 'sex offender' have a timeout, or is it a lifetime thing, once convicted?
    • Whilst I guess that the people doing this will counter with "you give up your rights when you take it upon yourself to play with little kids bottoms", it kinda flies right in the face of concepts of rehabilitation, etc.

      Most psychologists and psychotherapists agree that it is not possible to rehabilitate pedophiles.

      I don't have a problem with lifelong parole or probation for them, but something like this will empower other unstable people to strike directly at them.

      What happens if someone is raped murder

    • Re:Your rights online indeed!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tassach ( 137772 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:03PM (#7594314)
      There's one major problem with this kind of thing: Sex Offender != Child Molester.

      There are plenty of sex crimes that do not involve children. Not all sex crimes are violent. There are still states where perticular sex acts between consenting adults are criminalized. Depending on your definition of "sex crime", a conviction for prostitution (or for using the services of one) could result in that person being branded as a "sex offender".

      This kind of list does not differentiate between a serial child molester and the guy who once drunkenly grabbed a girl's ass at a frat party.

      • Do you realize that oral sex is illegal in the majority of the jurisdictions? Ditto for sodomy. Did you realize that in many jurisdictions you could be convicted of a sex crime if you simply moon someone? Unbelievable isn't it.

  • Online hitlist (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RenHoek ( 101570 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:10PM (#7593956) Homepage
    I don't think it's such a good idea. You got nutters out there bombing doctors of abortion clinics, I'm sure there are loonies out there who wouldn't mind killing convicted sex offenders. Afterall they _did_ the time, and I don't think it will give people who really _do_ want to better their lives a fair deal.

    Also it gives people a false sense of security.. Who's to say that a registered sex offender doesn't take a weekend holiday to another state to rape and kill? And you thought you were safe in a neighbourhood without any sex offenders..

  • too much information? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Triggersite ( 697014 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:11PM (#7593960) Homepage
    Isn't anyone worried about vigilantes using this information to track down and assault these offenders (regardless if it's merited)?

  • So the american solution to reduce crime (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:11PM (#7593962)
    Is to segregate (because that's what you're doing, make no mistake about the consequences of this) and completely isolate a group of people.

    Expose everyone who's ever had any brush with justice at all, so they can't get any job at all. Then, without job and without a life they'll ... euhm ... cut off every legal option for a life they have and they'll ... get out and die ?

    What exactly do you think this will do ?

    • bullshit (Score:3, Insightful)

      by KalvinB ( 205500 )
      The registry protects kids and only prevents them from getting jobs that involve kids.

      And this is only done for sex crimes. Especially one's against children.

      And besides, companies already can find out if you've been convicted of a felony which a sex crime is.

      People need to get over the fact that some actions prevent you from being a "normal" member of society. When you abuse children in such a way you've just earned the distrust of society and it will rightfully take a very long time to earn that trus

    • Creating Criminals (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Maestro4k ( 707634 )
      • Expose everyone who's ever had any brush with justice at all, so they can't get any job at all. Then, without job and without a life they'll ... euhm ... cut off every legal option for a life they have and they'll ... get out and die ?

      Nope, many of them give up and commit another crime to get put back in prison. Sometimes they do it because they miss prison (after all, they are fed and sheltered there), others do it because despite their best attempts to start a new honest life, they're met at every t

  • And if they include your name by mistake... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:12PM (#7593969)



    ...you'll get a most sincere policy about having your life ruined.

  • Not necessarily such a bright idea (Score:5, Informative)

    by P-Nuts ( 592605 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:14PM (#7593983)

    When a paper in Britain started printing details about paedophiles, loads of people went rampaging, and even vandalized some paediatrician's house [bbc.co.uk]. (Though maybe that just says something about the Welsh.)

    Why is there special treatment for sex offenders? Generally, people can't look up and see which convicted burglars live near them, for example. If someone is so much of a risk to society that people need telling about them, then they shouldn't be free in the first place.

  • Sad... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iworm ( 132527 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:15PM (#7593985)
    It's sad that the authorities try and dress this up as somehow good - when the real motivation behind it is disgraceful.

    Standard disclaimer: sex offenders deserve whatever punishment the law deems fit. But, and this is what is forgotten, IF the authorities deem them fit to be released from custody, then it's because (or should be because) they are no longer a threat. If they are a threat, then keep them incarcerated. Don't let them out and then pretend it's OK to publish their name, address, etc. It's hypocritical.

    And why stop at sex offenders? Say I have no kids, but an expensive car? Shouldn't I be able to know that the guy next door was convicted of stealing cars? I'm not equating car theft with sex offences, but I do believe that the law should treat all people equally.

    If a sex offender ia a threat, keep the bastard in jail. Don't let him out and think that by posting his details on the internet that all will be well. All it does is victimize reformed offenders (who do exist...) and encourage vigilantes - neither of these is good.

    • Re:Sad... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 )
      It's not just that.

      Michigan had an internet-public sex offender list.

      After a bunch of legal wrangling in the legislatures and the court system, it was allowed to go public.

      When the newspapers had done accuracy tests, they found that 30%+ of the list was flat out wrong. The criminals hadn't bothered to register at their new job, new residence, etc. When someone was living in that house after the perp was long gone, the new residents get the brunt of the outcry, vandalism, etc.

      If the law enforcement and

  • A Very Bad Idea in at least one context (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Raindance ( 680694 ) * <johnsonmxNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:15PM (#7593987) Homepage Journal
    I hope the state of Maine also doubled the size of their Information Security department, as this will be a prime target for malicious hackers.

    Don't like someone? Just add them to the database and get the word out. They're ruined. This is new, uncharted, and dangerous territory, Maine.

    RD

  • Watching the watchers (Score:4, Interesting)

    by barzok ( 26681 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:15PM (#7593989)
    New York's registry [state.ny.us] requires that people using the search enter their own address. I think this might be a new feature, last time I saw the registry I don't remember having to give up my info.

  • This must have discretion (Score:3, Insightful)

    by skizrule ( 701743 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:18PM (#7594007)
    These registries have the potential to ruin people who should never have been marked to begin with. While many sexual predators probably deserve such a punishment, what about the teens who are convicted "sex offenders" simply because their (consenting) girlfriend's parents found out about the level of intimacy in the relationship, and pressed charges (against the wishes of the girl)? I know it sounds farfetched, but every so often you hear of these cases which, on an ethical and moral basis should never go to trial, but because of the wishes of the parents, results in a permanent black mark on the young man's record.

  • "Offenders" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:18PM (#7594013)
    There's sex offenders and then there's sex offenders. I have no problem with a guilty as sin child sodomizer being plastered all over this thing. But you also hear of 17 year olds being charged by overzealous DAs for being with their 16 year old girlfriends. Such "offenders" will be lumped in with the child fuckers and corpse zombies.

    This thing doesn't sound it recognizes there are levels of sex offense.

    • Re:"Offenders" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by back_pages ( 600753 ) <back_pagesNO@SPAMcox.net> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:35PM (#7594141) Journal
      It's an accurate observation but a misguided sentiment. I completely object to a sex offender registry because it circumvents the established, regulated, and acceptable forms of the penal system in the states.

      If you feel that the time served is insufficient for sexual offenders, that's fine. Petition your law makers to have the manditory sentences increased.

      These registries scream that the existing rehabilitation program is a complete and wholesale failure in the eyes of the public and the appropriate solution is to redesign that program rather than brand people with a crimson badge for the rest of their lives. That's what Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote about and it was a tragic tale of inhumane society. The Nazis used a yellow star and it was one of the most horrific events in modern history. Now it's being done to people who have completed their judicially ordered rehabilitation - if they are released, then the penal system has decided that they ARE rehabilitated.

      Reform the rehab, redefine the sentencing practices, but I'm of the opinion that attempts to brand a person through life after submitting to criminal rehab - physically or through public documentation - is outright unconstitutional.

      And if you think I sound like some liberal or other nonsense, I would rather live nextdoor to a guy who I trust is a reformed sex offender rather than a guy I know is a sex offender because I read it on the internet. Think about it. It is 1000% better that the rehab works than to know who completed an unsuccessful rehab program.

  • All sex offenders equal? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:20PM (#7594027)
    Ok, this is NOT a defense of sex offenders, but we should consider that everyone who has been convicted of a "sex offense" might not be the evil, child-molesting 70-year-old priest we all think they are.

    Remember, if an 18 year old (high school senior) sleeps with his 16 year old girlfriend (high school sophomore) and happens to get caught, he could be labeled a sex offender.

    How'd you like to have your picture posted on the web and have everyone know your life's details for eternity because you were a horny high school kid who did what scores of horny high school kids around the world do? Do you think the public is going to say "oh, well, he's the OK kind of sex offender...no worries"?
    • Since this is about Maine, and I live in Maine I thought I'd add a little about Maine laws:

      Actually in Maine the age of consent is 16, plus there is a minnimum age difference(4 years) so if a 15 year old has sex with a 18 year old it will not break the law, since the age difference is less than 4 years.

      None of this applies if the older person is a teacher. If a teacher has sex with a student they can be charged with statutory rape even if the age gap is less than 4 years or the student is over 16.

  • From a Mainer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TrippTDF ( 513419 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {dnalih}> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:20PM (#7594030)
    I grew up in Maine. The state is really, really small. I live in New York now, and anytime I meet someone from Maine, I find that I'm normally connected to them by 1 degree of separation. I also grew up in a small town. News there travels very, very fast. (I was 11 years old and I gave a kid the finger as I got off a school bus... my mother knew about it when I walked in the door 15 minutes later). It does not matter if the news is true, either. Once a piece of gossip gets out, it spreads faster than a celebrity sex video on the internet. Although I am a big advocate for privacy, I think this might in same cases help the sex offenders. If their crimes are easily accessible to the public, it helps stop the wild stories that could evolve around them. Yes, what these people were convicted of is TERRIBLE, but it's nothing compared to what a town full of gossipers can do with a nugget of near-truth. Living as a convicted sex offender is a difficult thing, but hopefully this will keep some of the smaller towns in Maine in perspective so that these individuals can be reintroduced to society. The above is a very weighted statement. I seriously welcome varying viewpoints, but please don't flame me for being open minded.

  • Poor security Hacking Death (Score:4, Insightful)

    by skinfitz ( 564041 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:24PM (#7594053) Journal
    I recall that when this sort of thing first appeared in the states, the databases were hosted on NT4/IIS4 systems that were unpatched and vulnerable to the RDS database attack.

    Basically anyone with rudimentary knowledge that was freely available on the net at the time could feasibly insert new records into the database.

    Couple this with the fact that vigilantes DO exist out there and DO kill sex offenders [bbc.co.uk], this is downright irresponsible and dangerous. If these people are a danger keep them locked up - don't encourage violence.

  • Not far enough! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ciaran_o_riordan ( 662132 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:25PM (#7594066) Homepage
    Just their name, photo, crime, and life history?

    Why not post their daily movements as tracked by their mobile phone? or insert a tag into them if they have no phone. People deserve to know the every movement of these ever-guilty people. This is reasonable because no court case has ever been incorrect.

    And phone records too. That should be public.

    and, .. oh let me think .. oh yeh, the names of their sibblings, in case "sex crimes" is a genetic problem, and ..
    • And hey, I just had a great idea:
      Sex Offender Text Alerts!

      and an arm band. I forgot that. (or a bell if an arm band is unacceptable.)

      Brilliant. You get a text message every time a sex offender is in the same geographic location as you. Then you just look around to see who's wearing an arm band :-)

      "Support our kids", and "it's unamerican to be a sex offender", and other good slogans will also be needed. This brave new world is gonna kick ass. No one will ever oppose this, "you don't support sex offe

  • And what better way to say, "I need a new ID" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by stienman ( 51024 ) <adavis&ubasics,com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:26PM (#7594076) Homepage Journal
    And what better way to say, "I need a new ID" than with the gift of a name, birthdate, address, and other personal information of a convicted felon.

    I mean, who'd believe them anyway?

    I'm all for sex offender registries, but I think a 'need to know' attitude should be adopted. I don't need to know the sex offenders in the next city, nevermind a completely seperate state, unless I'm visiting for an extended stay with my children, in which case those I am visiting, or the resorts/theme parks, will have access to that information.

    Don't make it so easy to abuse, but don't make it so hard that it's not worth the effort for the worrywarts.

    -Adam

  • Pros and cons to this... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Cyno01 ( 573917 ) <Cyno01@hotmail.com> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:27PM (#7594078) Homepage
    I've seen both sides of this issue and seen that sex offenses are very hard to try from the courts standpoint. I'd like to point out to everyone that not all sex offenders are child molesters, yes, child molesters are the bottom of the bucket of socioty and should be treated as thus, but like any other form of crime, people are falsley convicted. A very close friend of mine was raped, but unfortunatly they couldn't get a conviction. The guy was loaded and the defense made the argument that she was after money, it sickened me. I wouldn't want this guy anywhere near me, and if i ever did run into him i'd probly bash his face in, but hes not on any list anywhere. On the other end of this, a guy i know at school was accused of rape, he was 18, she was underage. He was arrested in class, with much spectacle. It was all cleared up after the girls parents heard her on the phone talking about how she'd lied about the whole thing. But if they hadn't found out i hate to think what would happen to my of age african american friend in the courts system after being accused of rape by an underage white girl. His life would pretty much be over. Think about all the possible scenarios before you cry "Wont someone please think of the children!". If people are a danger they should be kept locked up, either in prison or in an institution, otherwise if they've payed their debt to society , they should be allowed to go on with their lives. As for child molseters though, people that sick dont change and should be kept under lock and key.

  • What about wrong information. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by big_fish ( 84303 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:31PM (#7594115)
    First I want to say that sexual predators are terrible.

    On the other hand what about wrong information. If the government has incorrect information. What if there is an innocent john jones whos picture shows up on the site because the mistook him for the bad john jones?

    Not to mention the whole cracker problem. Put someone you don't like on the list for fun. Who cares if it ruins someone's life.

    I just don't have a lot of faith in the law enforcement system and their technical ability.

    Not to mention this is open season on sex offenders. Remember that statatory rape is a sexual offense. What about sodomy. Someone who commits these crime goes on the same list with repeated child molesters.

  • Cracks in the System (Score:3, Interesting)

    by alset_tech ( 683716 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:32PM (#7594119) Homepage
    How about a young man who is convicted of statutory rape with a consenting girlfriend? He's 19, she's 17 - he's listed on the net for the rest of his life. There are a hundred variations of this. What are you gonna do, explain to each of your neighbors that you were convicted of a sex crime with a woman you later married? Scary thought.

  • almost every state already has this (Score:5, Informative)

    by maddh ( 608481 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:35PM (#7594137)
    http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/states.ht m [fbi.gov]

  • Biggest problem with sex crimes (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mabu ( 178417 ) * on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:37PM (#7594154)
    The biggest problem with "sex crimes", specifically when it comes to pedophilia and statuatory rape, is the shame that the victim carries around with him/her. I've dated a few women who have been sexually abused by people in their family and parents' friends. It's totally sick, but they would never turn in the perpetrator, so they live with this shame and it results in distrust and dysfunction in every aspect of their lives.

    Enforcement is important, but it's more important to talk about these crimes and encourage people to not feel shame if they've been a victim, seek professional help and deal with it. There are too many people who hide away with these dark secrets and the damage done after the fact makes the original action pale in comparison. Databases, tracking and harsher penalties will never help heal the damage done, which is a critical aspect of these crimes that needs to be brought to the forefront.

  • Scott Free (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xjerky ( 128399 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:41PM (#7594182)
    Reminds me of a story here in the NYC area about a year ago, about a New Jersey guy who raped and killed a 12 year old girl in 1985 and is having a tough time reassimilating with the community upon his recent release. The report kept discussing the harassment this guy was facing by the locals and how he can't get a break. But not once did the report ask the question I couldn't stop wondering - "WHY THE HELL IS THIS GUY OUT OF JAIL?!?!?!?!" There's something wrong with the criminal justice system, at least in the Northeast. Last I checked, the girl is still dead, so why is this guy walking the streets in the first place? And why is the news trying to shore up sympathy for this guy????

  • Pre-crime (Score:4, Interesting)

    by lplatypus ( 50962 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:42PM (#7594185)
    Are these people are being publicly humiliated because they have committed a crime, or because they might commit a crime in the future? The fact that sex offenders are singled out seems to suggest the latter. This is a disturbing movement towards alternative philosophies of justice. Even the idea behind the "pre-crime" unit in Minority Report is less repulsive, as there seemed to be a greater probability of the anticipated crime actually taking place in that movie.

  • How about we do this with Drunk Drivers instead (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Multics ( 45254 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:55PM (#7594269) Journal
    More people are killed and hurt by drunk drivers... if we're putting Scarlet letters on people, let's do it to the drunk drivers.

    -- Multics

  • Overly broad definition of sex offender (Score:4, Informative)

    by rossz ( 67331 ) <ogre&geekbiker,net> on Sunday November 30, 2003 @05:55PM (#7594274) Journal
    Did you know an 18 year old guy with a 17 year old girl friend is a sex offender in some states? How would you like to be treated just like some rat bastard who molested a few 6 year olds because you were banging your girlfriend who was 1 month away from her 18th birthday? This could happen. You could be hounded for the rest of your life because of this exact situation.

    Child molesters are evil fucks, but the government has been getting overly zealous with their definition of the crime.

  • alternate proposal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by danharan ( 714822 ) on Sunday November 30, 2003 @06:36PM (#7594495) Journal
    In Canada, there is something called "Circles of Support and Accountability" (COSA) [csc-scc.gc.ca] .

    I have a few friends that have worked with this project, and basically a sex offender is with someone from the community pretty much 24/7; they are also re-integrated (job, volunteer activity), so they are less likely to re-offend.

    This is a restorative rather than retributive approach, and it works a lot better.

    Keeping dangerous offenders who refuse to go through therapy in prison, usefully re-integrating ex-offenders in the community with appropriate support: that is a solution that works, doesn't cost a lot, avoids lynch mobs and privacy issues.

    PS: As for those who ask why sex offenders should be treated differently than murderers, it's really simple: murderers are the least likely to re-offend.

  • Mooning is a sex offense (seriously) (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30, 2003 @07:09PM (#7594665)
    Keep in mind that some pretty low-level crimes count as sex offenses, it is NOT just molestation.

    For example, until the recent SCOTUS ruling anyone having gay sex in Texas, or hetero oral or anal sex in many states, was a sex offender.

    Prostitutes and johns are all sex offenders. So is anyone on any pornography related charge (sell Hustler at the Kwik-E-Mart in a conservative town, go on the registry). Go too far with a lap dance, sex offender. Put on a production of "Hair" in the wrong town, sex offender.

    So, apparently, is anyone who has mooned:

    From http://www.appa-net.org/revisitingmegan.pdf

    In another example from Michigan, an 18 year old male, who engaged in the "senior prank" of "mooning" his school principal was convicted of indecent exposure, had to register with the state for 25 years, and and has his name and address publicly exposed

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Close