Do residency, work, presence restrictions do anything to help public safety?
I just want to say that if you’re finding us from NARSOL, welcome! There is an email notification on the registry matters site that will email you as soon as a new episode is posted. But even better, would be to subscribe to the podcast however you get your podcasts.
We’re now on TuneIn. Just ask say “Alexa, play Registry Matters on TuneIn” to listen to the program. This is so cool!
But first, we have some news items to cover
From the Post Gazette: Legislature passes bill addressing legal concerns about Pa. sex offender registration law. A bill meant to bring Pennsylvania’s unconstitutional sex offender registration rules into compliance with state and federal law unanimously passed the state Legislature on Tuesday and is expected to be signed by the governor soon. But critics of sex offender registration laws believe that what the Legislature has done will further complicate the issue, likely forcing future court challenges.
From the Seattle Times: This is a change in law that criminalizes teen sexting. Teenagers should not be labeled as sex offenders simply for texting intimate pictures of themselves to someone else. But that is exactly what can happen right now in Washington state. The state’s child pornography laws make no distinction between teens who send pictures of their own bodies and adults who take explicit images of children to exploit them.
From The Baxter Bulletin: ‘Pedosexual Movement’ must be stopped in its tracks. Recently, through various social media outlets, I have come across a few articles concerning the ‘pedosexual movement,’ and their lobbying for the legalization and normalization of pedophilia. If you don’t know what that word means, look it up. If you have a minute, and choose to do your own research, you will find that the pedosexual movement is indeed a real thing, with its own flag, and its own agenda. They are coming, and they are bringing an army of lobbyists and lawyers with them. So far they have been really good at keeping their efforts relatively quiet.
From The LA Times: California must consider earlier parole for sex offenders, judge rules. California must consider earlier parole for potentially thousands of sex offenders, even those convicted of pimping children, a state judge said Friday. The judge preliminarily ordered prison officials to rewrite part of the regulations but Gov. Jerry Brown promised voters all sex offenders would be excluded. That goes too far, the judge said in rejecting Deputy Atty. Gen. Maria Chan’s argument that the ballot measure gave state officials broad discretion to exclude any class of offenders whose release might harm public safety. “If the voters had intended to exclude all registered sex offenders from early parole consideration under Proposition 57, they presumably would have said so”.
From Reason.com: 22-Year-Old Woman Facing Sexual Assault Charges for Relationship with 18-Year-Old Male Student. The teacher, who was 21 at the time, was charged with three counts of second-degree sexual assault, even though she was engaged in a consensual relationship with her purported victim. In fact, the 18-year-old’s parents said their son and the teacher are in love, and asked the prosecutor to drop the charges, according to WTIC TV.
We had a couple comments from Episode 10, Is it better to do something than nothing
Jack commented at registrymatters.co. He says:
The current whipping boy is child pornography. Most charged with this offense never made contact nor tried to make contact with a child (under 18 years of age). These are voyeurs looking at online porn sites (23 put up and stocked by our FBI) and had no intention of ever harming a child. They were compelled by their addiction to seek this porn. Given they have to register as SO’s the rest of their lives, the death penalty may be more humane. A new crop of SO’s is emerging, teens who are sexting pictures. This is sure to feed a lot of lawyers and prisons but an absolute death knell for the lives of the offenders. The registry must be reclassified for violent offenders or completely abolished. This is double indemnity for a crime and I would think, unconstitutional.
Linda writes in response to Jack’s comment: I totally agree with your comment . I agree there should be reclassification of registrants. People who view porn have different minds than those of violent offenders. No harm to anyone is intended. I know a guy who stumbled on child porn while viewing adult porn and he now is branded for life ! Have known him all his life and would never hurt a fly. They throw everyone into one pot and call it quits – so unfair to many!
And SW, possibly from the Northern Midwest, says “Most of us can’t vote” https://www.brennancenter.org/criminal-disenfranchisement-laws-across-united-states
Listener Chanta from Alaska left a voicemail message:
We are going to be talking about the use of and the efficacy of residency and work and presence restrictions of registrants.
First one was in AL in 1996
About 14 states had something by 2006
While this controversial residency law has raised questions of fairness and constitutionality, it is currently legal and valid. Some critics argue that it simply “plays to the fears of the public…and does little to actually curb sexual assaults.”
Who has the most restrictive policies? AL?
There are states that have no restrictions
Have any states filed challenges to reverse having restrictions?
What were the grounds, what was the nexus of the challenges?
The PEW Charitable Trusts says 27 states have restrictions – this is as of 2016
Psychologists who have treated sex offenders, such as Gerry Blasingame, chair of the California Coalition on Sexual Offending, say the impetus behind the laws — the belief that offenders who have been released will continue to seek out child victims who they do not know — is more perception than reality. Most perpetrators abuse children they know; just one in 10 perpetrators of child sex abuse is a stranger to the victim.
A U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics study in 2003, the most recent available, found that 5.3 percent of inmates released from prison after being convicted of a sex offense are arrested for another sexual offense within three years. (Although researchers generally acknowledge that the recidivism rate may be low because these crimes are underreported.)
But you Larry, don’t believe that statistics even matter. It’s about if this is constitutional. We can’t get past that. We can use stats to back up the claim. But it is unconstitutional from the start.
And before we go, I want to give a shout out to LifeTimes Magazine at lifetimesmagazine.org. It is a brand new publication about being on the registry, but takes a positive view and focuses on the successes.
5 thoughts on “Episode 11 – Residency Restrictions”
I don’t believe looking at pictures should be considered a sex offense. I’d really like to know how anyone can sexually abuse a picture. I remember the movie Blue Lagoon. Brooke Shields was 14 at the time, They showed her naked in the movie, not to mention the little baby in the water totally naked. I guess if we watch that movie we’re all sex offenders. I was married to a 21 year old man when I was 16. My parents gave us there blessing. I guess my husband was a sex abuser.
I am merely a user of this podcast, but you post makes great points.
The Sistine chapel itself contain glorious images of nakedness all considered art. My only experience with child pornography came in the hands of the Wisconsin, DOC. I agreed to their test in an effort to prove my innocence. DOC exposed me to pictures of children, nude and measured my arousals with a device. The process was shameful and disgusting to me, I cannot describe how I felt in words, but it was not excited. I had to prove to them that I was not the one, so I did it. They tried to confront me about the results, but I demanded they display the inputs and outputs simultaneously for the group to see. They refused to put it into the open and I know why! Safe to say that’s the only place I’ve seen pictures of naked humans age 4 to 16. OK aside from the old pictures parents used to take of 1 yr old naked and grinning on a blanket. Maybe those types of pictures would fall under CP stats today.
Let me turn to your statement about your husband being older by 5 years. In this state, WI, he would be. Statutory limits difference to 4 years. Our state would prosecute if they had knowledge. Our state sets adulthood by stat too, it is 18yoa. Yet that distinction is waived if a child commits a crime ( esp black or Hispthat youth) even as young as 9 yoa.
So the people complain that adult citizens are treating minor citizens like adults, yea we follow our leadership. There are a good many, “obscene” behavior occurring in our country some of the most by our leadership. It is one thing to assault and individual; and quite another to assault a mass of individuals.
Bless you & your family.
BTW before Lagoon, Brook did Pretty Women, she was 11! In that film she was purchase by a man for $ 400.00 in a New Orleans brothel auction. Her virginity was advertised at sale. That’s Hollywood for ya.
A bit of research on the Baxter Bulletin reveals their ownership by Gannett Company inc. This fact is problematic as Gannet only wants to sell papers. Thereof their motivations are not grounded in public safety. It is safe to say that Gannett cannot wait for the next sex story or school shooting to occur as it bolsters their bottom line. We have free press in America and Gannett can and will continue to exploit the issue for their profit. If no sex assault or school shooters were in play they would likely go bankrupt in this electronic age. In short Gannett knowingly and purposely promotes yellow journalism.
I sure do appreciate your podcasts, but avoiding stories provided by the Gannett group would be appreciated as they have no real interest in protecting anyone. Furthermore, by promoting if you will, Gannett stories on this podcasts you do us a disfavour.
I understand your point in who that institution is. However, the only point behind the article was to point out the crazy stance on someone with this issue. It’s totally crazy to bring up that this is a thing
I appreciate your reply. Misinformation is a key aspect of propaganda. America has been grossly manipulated with respect to the intent of the state’s SOR. While registration has been deemed civil, clearly residence restrictions closely resemble banishment & or exile and thereby are not intended to be civil. SOR is a sword used to cut certain aspects of liberty out of registrant’s lives. Registration is indenture by definition despite its misnaming by professional liars. Data demanded is a commodity. The uses derived from the machine’s existence may provide some semblance of safety but it is unquantifiable. To put it more simply, the needs of the machine do not by natural law out weigh the needs of humans to be part of a society.
Furthermore, indentured servitude according to the 13th is only permitted as punishment for a crime. Here Mr. Roberts convinced the highest court that registration itself imposed no affirmative disability, yet today that distortion (more precisely minimization) is plain on its face indenture. An indenture used to impose disability and restraint upon those already convicted. In effect directly imposing onerous obligations that inevitably force registrants back into DOC systems and sometimes imposing further incarceration or P&P, depending on how dangerous they deem you, based on the original case. My point being that the people’s intent with the SORs is now quite obvious.
As I have noted on previous posts, a database is a powerful tool. The two parties are engaged in unconstitutional uses of these databases and not just to protect citizenry. They are utilizing the databases to protect their political security. The two parties have fleeced the people of their money, their property and their liberty. 20 trillion and counting and that number does not in anyway reflect the debt owed by the states to some by way of pension obligations that are uncounted in budgets.
To end my post:
Alexa please tell me Andy’s: Whole name, SSI#, marital status, address, his parent’s and sibling’s addresses, his annual salary, driver’s license #, his school transcript, social groups participated in, known friends and associates. Please Alexa include any biometric data on Andys you can compile.