Sex crimes- I'm in the minority here

**LanDroid** · February 13th, 2006, 10:54 PM

"...start whining when their private emails are intercepted and they find themselves subject to criminal and/or civil liability for things they said in an email."

Or when political dissidents get tossed into the Abu Guantanamo Gulag without trial for the same thing...

**Piña** · February 14th, 2006, 04:23 AM

Originally posted by The Big Sexy:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />I'm not sure that a lack of "outrage" necessarily indicates an acceptance of a behavior.

Well it certainly isn't condemnation, either.<hr /></blockquote>Actually, you're making my point for me in a sorta sideways way. My point is that "outrage" and condemnation or lack thereof are independent of one another but most people seem to think that they are, that they must be, linked.

I am asking what "outrage" would add to the process. How would it contribute to justice being done, if you will. Seems to me that "outrage" has a greater likelyhood of injustice being done and while a normal and understandable response, might be something that actually gets in the way of our finding real solutions to some very ugly issues.

**reason** · February 14th, 2006, 11:48 AM

Oh who cares if people have to register as a sex offender, they're just a bunch of perverts.

Some neighborhoods are havens for sex offenders, primarily due to cheap housing. There are certain apartment complexes near me that are attractive to sex offenders.

A rapist lives a block away.

I'm thankful that I've been given the heads up.

**reason** · February 14th, 2006, 11:51 AM

You make it sound like because my guy didn't actually have sex with a teenage girl, he got off scot-free.

I never said that. On the contrary, my point was that despite the fact no sex act was committed, solicitation occurred, and that IS a crime.

**reason** · February 14th, 2006, 11:55 AM

But I do think it will be a hoot to hear this same public that thinks this is so great now to start whining when their private emails are intercepted and they find themselves subject to criminal and/or civil liability for things they said in an email.

Well, I 'm confused. How was the initial contact made? Was it exclusively email? Did it start on a chat board? I'm assuming the initial contact, the interest began someplace other than email.

**Lew** · February 15th, 2006, 02:33 AM

Oh and it even gets better. Just found out today that after having to leave his home, having to move to an apartment that met with the approval of the Sheriff, my guy got an eviction notice. Why? Because an 'anonymous' tipster advised the building owner that a sexual predator was in their midst (though I question how anything my guy did was 'predatory', but then again, the masses are idiots, there's no use in trying to explain anything more complicated than American Idol to them).

Of course, there ain't much use in us fighting it because, let's face it, what would we argue? Wrongful eviction? Sex offenders aren't exactly a protected class of individual. So out my guy goes. But where? Only low-class places, and that's not where my guy wants to live. It seems odd to me that a guy who pays his rent and keeps to himself (he has no computer in his apartment per the terms of his probation) and leaves others alone can't, himself, be left alone.

I'm going to offer a proposal to the legislature- let's build camps (like Gitmo, as referred to by Lan) and let's just put them all in the camps. That is, after they do their time in jail, of course. Because our criminal justice system has always been based on the idea that, even once you serve your punishment, you should still be punished for the rest of your life (and by the public at large, since they're in the best position to judge). That way, "the children" will forever be safe from horrible monsters like my guy.

I welcome anyone to explain to me the constitutionality of dictating where a free citizen can or cannot live.

Well, it's no one's fault by his own. He should have known that by chatting sexually with an undercover police officer over the 'net that he'd have to spend the rest of his life in the slums.

And Reason, regarding your query, I did not see the actual transcript of the chat so I cannot say how the contact started. However, in most cases, the cop simply poses as a teen girl, without saying anything sexual per se, and it's the defendant who usually drops the first references to anything sexual. I've never seen a transcript where the officer solicited first, though I suppose it wouldn't really matter, because it really isn't entrapment if they do. And in many cases,the sexual stuff doesn't start until several chats, sometimes over the course of weeks.

**jumper69** · February 15th, 2006, 01:02 PM

Tough break for your boy Lew. In this case I can sympathize. BUT...as I am sure you are no doubt aware, an Importuning conviction doesn't leave much room for interpretation. While you know, and we know, at least we think we know, that no solicitation took place, under the statute, that is irrelevant.

I hope he is able to get his life back together.

**Piña** · February 15th, 2006, 08:06 PM

Lew

I really hope you go with the first option. I kinda doubt your friend will agree though as since he?s on probation he may very well be scared of having his probation violated if he starts making waves and ending up in prison. Ending up in prison for sticking up for his rights, what a glorious country we live in , eh?

I?m disgusted by what we are doing to sex offenders and very scared for our children by what we are setting them up for. By in effect creating an untouchable class that has no way of returning to the good graces of society they will soon get to the point where they literally have nothing left to lose. These are mentally disturbed people and the best way we think to deal with them is to take away any hope of redemption?

Knee jerk politicians looking for a ?sexy? issue that they can get tough on is what is fueling the persecution of sex offenders and the unwillingness of most people to even talk about it is lest they get branded as sex offender lovers is allowing these misguided laws to be implemented without protest.

I look at what is happening and wonder; ?What the hell were we thinking??

**reason** · February 15th, 2006, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by Law Dawg:
Tough break for your boy Lew. In this case I can sympathize. BUT...as I am sure you are no doubt aware, an Importuning conviction doesn't leave much room for interpretation. While you know, and we know, at least we think we know, that no solicitation took place, under the statute, that is irrelevant.

I hope he is able to get his life back together.

You don't know that no importuning took place. Y'know if someone online is telling you they're 17 years old, and even if they solicit you first, you don't solicit back. And chances are, since this guy got caught, it probably wasn't the first time he was surfing around doing this thing. Most people don't get caught the first time, the second time...

If Lew's friend did such, he's an idiot. I'm sorry, but Lew's all over the place on this one.

Excuse me for being harsh, but Mr. Family Values has gaping holes in his morality.

Internet or not, you don't fucking even hint of having sex with a minor. You just don't do it. PERIOD.

**Piña** · February 15th, 2006, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by The Big Sexy:
And chances are, since this guy got caught, it probably wasn't the first time he was surfing around doing this thing. Most people don't get caught the first time, the second time...

Just out of curiousity how would you know when most people get caught?

If Lew's friend did such, he's an idiot.

Agreed.

I'm sorry, but Lew's all over the place on this one.

Excuse me for being harsh, but Mr. Family Values has gaping holes in his morality.

Actually I think he's pretty consistent. There is more than one issue here and they aren't inseperable. How do you think he's conflicted?

Internet or not, you don't fucking even hint of having sex with a minor. You just don't do it. PERIOD.

Well, that would pretty much kill off any Britney Spears videos over the net then.