Where to put those darned sex offenders?

[Coral Rhedd]

Here is some informations from Predators

 

In one study in the 1980s

Two hundred and thirty-two child molestors admitted attempting more than fifty-five thousand incidents of molestation. They claimed to have been successful in 38,000 incidents and reported they had more than 17,000 total victims. All this from only 232 men. Men who molested out-of-home female children averaged 22 victims. Although there are fewer of them, men who molested out-of-home male children were even more active than molesters of female children, averaging 150 victims each.

(page 11)

 

On the reoffense rates of convicted molesters

Dr. Robert Prentky found that the long term reoffense rate for rapists was 39 percent and for the out-of-home child molesters, 52 percent.

 

The Canadian researcher Karl Hanson found that those offenders who were never married, had boy victims, and had previous offenses demonstrated a detected reoffense rate of 77 percent in the long run.

(page 60)

 

As we can see from the above, recidivism is quite common. Certainly in the interest of informing the public, parents need to know when a child molester moves near them so that they make take more than the usual precautions for their children's safety.

 

However, that is only part of the story. Pangloss raises a good point when he says that this information and these restrictions need to be meaningful. I wonder if Pangloss has information on the number of "date rape" offenders who end up on these lists. I look forward to reading more.

 

What I find interesting in this thread is the eagerness to single out children as needing the greater protection of this radius. They are of course potential innocent victims. But women or men who might be raped by offenders also have an interest in knowing if a potential offender is living nearby. Tell me, please, who are the guilty victims who are not worthy of this information?

 

Anna Salter worker with both victims and offenders.

[Coral Rhedd]

I just think that a jury would convict for life if the pedophile was one of those who preyed on young children.

 

No. From my experience as a victim advocate I know that juries do not behave that way and many more case are pleaded out because it is difficult to take a child witness to court.

 

Have you seen what defense attorneys do to adult witness for the prosecution on television? Well they can also be pretty formidable in a courtroom. Imagine what they can do to a child while smiling all the time.

 

If the guy picks up someone in a bar who happens to be under the age of consent but looks 22 that is a little different. I think the jury can sort that out.

 

It would be interesting to have statistics on actual time served in prison by statuatory rapists. I' date=' for one, am not too worried about them seeing extended prison sentences. It is also not realistic to assume that statuatory rape is never the lesser charge pursued in more serious offenses.

 

But if these bozo's are the type who are out looking for little children of 8 and 9 years old, then what is wrong with life in prison? They are not going to get over their affliction and therefore they will always be a danger to kids.

 

Lately most Western nations put a great deal of faith in the psychiatritric community to cure all behavioral ills. In fact, behavior is extremely difficult to change. Child molesters are notoriously hard to treat and not many providers are interested in working with them for that reason. Add to this the fact that they are often narcissists and/or sociopaths and the picture gets even bleaker. Many therapies are predicated on the idea or validating and believing the client. To work effectively with offenders, therapists have to begin by doubting the client. Lying and child molesting go hand-in-hand.

 

Don't worry. Most of them look quite normal and live quietly among us, gaining our confidence and continuing their activities. Many, if not most, will never see the inside of a prison.

[Pangloss]

However, that is only part of the story. Pangloss raises a good point when he says that this information and these restrictions need to be meaningful. I wonder if Pangloss has information on the number of "date rape" offenders who end up on these lists. I look forward to reading more.

 

I don't, but I think you're forgetting that what we're discussing here is a ban on living within 2500 feet of a school or park. Not exactly the normal hunting grounds for the date rape crowd. They're going to get in their cars and drive down to South Beach with a bag of X and a list of this weekend's raves. So it's really a moot point.

 

But I suggested earlier that we have a judge or case worker look at these category one individuals and decide if the ban needs to apply to them. I still think that's a reasonable compromise, and it's one I would be willing to pay for.

[Bettina]

Perhaps in the end it is our own morbid curiosity that is at fault' date=' but I feel that the media plays up each and every child abduction case on a national stage. If the child is being sought nationally, or the suspect is still at large and authorities are hunting for them, I can see the reasons for such coverage.

 

More often than not, as with most of the recent cases, the police know the boundaries of the search and they are quite small. Why then the constant media blitz? Rather than being a lesson to keep better care of our children, I think this type of attention actually encourages copycats and those who crave the limelight. And worse, it makes everyone distrustful and overly sensitive to dangers that are being over-dramatized to boost ratings.

 

The stories are awful. I feel very sorry for the victims. As I stated earlier, I think crimes involving such helpless victims should carry an extra penalty due to their impact and the seemingly wasted efforts toward rehabilitation. But again, the media is capable of focusing on each occurence as it happens all over the country, with the random assurances of probability you get when dealing with hundreds of millions of people. They make it seem like it's happening every day with more and more frequency. And if it is becoming more prevalent, I think we have the media to blame for giving some of these sickos the attention they crave.[/quote']

 

Ok, I see your point now and can't dispute it but I don't think many are doing it to be "copycats". I agree that the news may push some over the edge when they hear of others doing it but I believe they would have eventually acted anyway. These people aren't trying to make a name for themselves, they are driven by a sick lust for a child or teenager.

 

This teen in Aruba was raped on a beach and killed out of pure lust. They weren't looking for headlines.

 

Bettina

[Phi for All]

This teen in Aruba was raped on a beach and killed out of pure lust. They weren't looking for headlines.

This is a big part of the problem I see with media hype. You, like so many others, are lumping an 18-year-old girl, boozing it up and making out till 2am with strange men in a foreign country, with a 9-year-old girl abducted from her bedroom by a child molesting murderer. Both are terrible crimes but I can't help pointing out the not-so-fine line between them. I'm not saying violence was the necessary outcome in both cases, but in the former case much could have been done to prevent it.

 

Yet it becomes another in a seemingly endless line of predator crimes paraded before us on the nightly news, and too many people think it is becoming the norm. It's Jerry Springer-esque hype trying to make it seem like the whackos are taking over, and it's driving the United States farther and farther from unity.

 

My point was not to detract from a community's right to know where repeat offenders live. I merely wanted to show that the media unfairly influences the public's perception of their safety when it comes to passing legislation of the kind Pangloss has brought to our attention.

[Coral Rhedd]

I see the media as more of a red herring than the issue. Years ago a little girl named Jessica fell into a well somewhere in Texas and the media played her lengthy rescue for all it was worth. They are just doing what they do and the "If it bleeds, it leads" mentality is not going to go away. There is a circular relationship between the media and the public when children are in danger. It makes for drama, poignancy, personalization. We can all breathe a sigh of relief that it isn't our child. We can comfort ourselves with the notion that we would be more careful. We can be on tenterhooks waiting for the child to be rescued or the body to be recovered. None of this has anything to do with the rate of recidivism among sexual abusers. Or among rapists.

 

Sexual abuse offenders of all stripes are difficult to treat and they have an escalating pattern of behavior. Profilers like John Douglas have pointed out that the old garden variety flasher that we used to think was so harmless or the obscene phone caller are quite likely to decide that life would be more fun if they reached out and touched someone literally.

 

This is not to say that these criminals are likely to end up on a sexual offenders list because they are not likely to be sentenced to prison in the first place. However, my heart will not bleed for them.

 

It is a puzzle to me why in both this thread and the pedophile thread statutory rape became an issue. Of course these laws need reform (ie: Nineteen year old shouldn't be prosecuted for having sex with sixteen year olds.) but this offense is not always germane to rape or sexual abuse issues.

 

Here is my solution for thirty-five year old guys who are afraid they might go to jail for sex with a fifteen year old:

 

1. Card 'em. If the bars can do it, you can to. Then before engaging in sex take the ID to the nearest all night photocopy shop and make a copy.

 

2. Stop going out with women who might by any stretch of the imagination be under 21.

 

3. Avoid casual sex. (I know it is a revolutionary idea but try actually getting to know the other person first. ) Some fifteen year old might fool you on a drunken one night stand, but giving a relationship time to develop will make it much harder for you to be so brutally trapped into getting it up for a child.

 

4. Do it sober. Alcohol may be a disinhibtor but it does little for male sexual functioning.

 

5. Try communicating about sexual techniques with your wife or girlfriend. Maybe the reason she isn't so enthused is that she would like you to try something different.

 

6. Pay for it. The penalties for being caught with a prostitute are much less than for statuatory rape. This way the prostitute bears most of the burden for illicit sex. Johns rarely go to prison.

 

To solve the problem of limp willies ending up on the sexual offenders list. Confine inclusion on this list for people who have any of these in their history:

 

1. Had sexual relations (any kind) with children under 12.

2. Used a weapon or a drug on the victim to commit the offense.

3. Used a position of responsibility (Ie: parent, teacher, priest) to coerce sex from anyone under 18.

4. Had three strikes of sexual offenses. (Too bad three strikes laws were used to incarcerate drug offenders and petty thieves.)

 

As to the public's perception of what notification laws do, the police should do a better job of informing parents that their children are more likely to be abused by people they know than by strangers.

[Coral Rhedd]

Phi, please note that we posted above about the same time. While you are correct to point out that the news media should not fan hysteria by making all sexual crimes appear to be equal, I must point out that people with poor judgment do not have the seriousness of the crimes committed against them mitigated by that poor judgment.

 

We don't want to go back to the days when all rape victims had to be virgins and sober to have their cases seriously considered by the police.

[Pangloss]

We're getting off track here. By all means, state your opinions about prosecutions and sentences, but the question before us in this thread is how to deal with criminals who have served their time, and that question is not answered by "don't prosecute them in the first place" or "don't let them out". They're already out, and they have to be dealt with.

 

I agree the barn door needs to be closed. Unfortunately it's the rampaging horse in the yard that I'm dealing with at the moment.

[Bettina]

This is a big part of the problem I see with media hype. You' date=' like so many others, are lumping an 18-year-old girl, boozing it up and making out till 2am with strange men in a foreign country, with a 9-year-old girl abducted from her bedroom by a child molesting murderer. Both are terrible crimes but I can't help pointing out the not-so-fine line between them. I'm not saying violence was the necessary outcome in both cases, but in the former case much could have been done to prevent it.

 

Yet it becomes another in a seemingly endless line of predator crimes paraded before us on the nightly news, and too many people think it is becoming the norm. It's Jerry Springer-esque hype trying to make it seem like the whackos are taking over, and it's driving the [i']United States[/i] farther and farther from unity.

 

My point was not to detract from a community's right to know where repeat offenders live. I merely wanted to show that the media unfairly influences the public's perception of their safety when it comes to passing legislation of the kind Pangloss has brought to our attention.

 

I understand you Phi, but I'm unsure if your correct. I just don't know.

 

But bottom line for the Aruba girl. She was 18 years old, on a beach in Aruba drinking with another young person having a good time. How often would she get another chance to be in Aruba.

 

What would you have done if you had the chance to go to a beach in Aruba with a beautiful girl? Would you have done anything differently? Would you have gone to the beach with the girl if she asked you? The time of night was irrelevent.

 

What she didn't know, was that she was with a predator. One with killer instincts. Why do guys do this?

 

Bettina

[Newtonian]

she didn't know' date=' was that she was with a predator. One with killer instincts. Why do guys do this?

 

Bettina[/quote']

UHH........Bettina thats pretty sexist of you!!

Sexual predatory behaviour is not unique to the male alone.However to answer your post its not the case in every instance wereby the unlucky girl just happens to be out with the MASS murderer,its circumstance.

 

The alcohol,a flirting girl in clothing almost naked,heavy petting.Deliberately getting the male hot and gagging for it as she performs limited sexual favours.Then the big NO stop !!

More than a few(i wish it were fewer)males im afraid are not rational,animal instincts take over.The males obvious physical superiority allows him to overpower the female and copulate.After a short time hormonal levels drop to normal and the male is full of remorse and apologetic.

Im not offering excuses,only highlighting some of the rapes and murders are commited by everyday seemingly well adjusted individuals like your brother or mine because of the circumstances.

 

Some individuals are serial killers out looking for an unlucky victim,but im telling you statistically the numbers are very miniscule.You will find the majority of offences of this nature are perpetrated by what we consider normal people,and i can only describe it as 'opportunistic moments present themselves'and some males act uncharacteristically.

[husmusen]

O.K. Pangloss I understand where you're coming from re the bolted

horse.

 

So here's a suggestion, I haven't given it enough thought yet to be sure of whether it would work in RL, but here goes.

 

Tail them.

 

To stop relying on stupid exclusionary rules that will make life agony for the reformed ones who will try and keep to them, and be ignored by the ones that actually pose a threat. And get decent teams that are good at their job, not any old John Porker. (It costs 50,000 per year to jail someone, so we can afford a bit of decent surveliance while they are out). Track them for 2-6 months after release(Random or by risk assessment),Then return for 4 week assessments 3 to 10 times over the next 5 years, at random intervals.

 

That should make recidivism difficult, and limit any harm from it.

Given that they have to let the bail office know their address for X years after they get out, tracking them should be fairly easy, and if your team turns up to a carpark, then you have an automatic excuse for an APB.

 

I realise there is a freedom and liberty issue here, but I feel that as long as their brief is only to intervene on serious crimes(e.g. large scale drugs, attempted molestation, planning a murder or armed robbery) and not for growing a pot plant in his/her backyardit should not be a problem.

 

Also there is the pragmatic reason that we wouldn't want the existance of tails to become a widespread knowledge, hence no arresting for misdemeanors in the larger interests of the program.

 

Also since the government routinely follows activists, and spies on them e.g. Extend and Defend Medicare, I don't see how it would be a worse breach of civil liberty to follow child molesters.

 

But it's up for debate and it wouldn't cost more than keepig them in jail would have. And it would let reformed ones be free to lead a reformed life.

 

Cheers.

[Pangloss]

Yah, I think the tracking approaches are pretty logically sound. The technology-versus-cost equation is not too great at this point, but I think there's a good opportunity here for Florida (which reported a budget surplus this past year in spite of four hurricane strikes) to spend a little money and lead the way. It's not a perfect solution either -- people may still be able to avoid even the latest tracking systems, and there are groups like the EFF and the ACLU that are still really unhappy about them -- but they seem like reasonable compromises to me.

 

I believe a law was just passed here that forces the worst types of offenders (the "predators") to be tracked for the remainder of their lives.

[Bettina]

UHH........Bettina thats pretty sexist of you!!

Sexual predatory behaviour is not unique to the male alone.However to answer your post its not the case in every instance wereby the unlucky girl just happens to be out with the MASS murderer' date='its circumstance.[/quote']

 

Do you really think so? I mean about it not being unique to a male alone?

Geez....I haven't read any girls raping and murdering boys in the news. I only call them like I see them.

 

The alcohol' date='a flirting girl in clothing almost naked,heavy petting.Deliberately getting the male hot and gagging for it as she performs limited sexual favours.Then the big NO stop !![/quote']

 

I know you meant that in a general way and didn't mean the Aruba girl was doing these things. We don't know and I would never speculate. The only thing I do know was that she was with a killer or killers.....not a boy or boys.

 

Believe me, I have no experience in this, but if boys and girls go parking somewhere and "heavy petting" takes place its because they are both enjoying each other and want it to continue no matter how "heavy" it gets short of "copulating". But if the situation gets out of hand, and a girl says NO....She has a RIGHT to say it, and the boy has a DUTY to stop. Overpowering the girl at that point constitutes rape. The girl, too, could be overpowering and the boy may say no. The bottom line is NO means just that.

 

More than a few(i wish it were fewer)males im afraid are not rational' date='animal instincts take over.The males obvious physical superiority allows him to overpower the female and copulate.After a short time hormonal levels drop to normal and the male is full of remorse and apologetic.

Im not offering excuses,only highlighting some of the rapes and murders are commited by everyday seemingly well adjusted individuals like your brother or mine because of the circumstances.

 

Some individuals are serial killers out looking for an unlucky victim,but im telling you statistically the numbers are very miniscule.You will find the majority of offences of this nature are perpetrated by what we consider normal people,and i can only describe it as 'opportunistic moments present themselves'and some males act uncharacteristically.[/quote']

 

I agree with you.

 

Bettina