Via the Smoking Gun:
An Oklahoma woman facing arraignment Monday on charges that she engaged in lewd acts with dogs rejected a plea in the case after learning that she would have to register as a sex offender. Diane Whalen, 55, and her boyfriend were arrested in late-June after Whalen's son discovered explicit videos in his mother's home and turned them over to Tulsa cops. A District Court affidavit, a copy of which you'll find below, shockingly details what Whalen is alleged to have done with several canines. Donald Seigfried, 55, allegedly filmed Whalen during these acts.
While the case is clearly horrific and bizarre, it illustrates how collateral sex offender restrictions (chiefly, registration and residency restrictions) complicate plea bargaining. There is a growing body of anecdotal evidence that shows defendants are refusing to plea guilty if registration is required for the crime. This could be even more problematic at the federal level if more courts follow a non-categorical approach as the Ninth Circuit has adopted to defining "sex offense" under the AWA.
In addition to the plea bargaining problems illustrated by the case, the story again underscores the wide array of crimes that can lead a person onto the registry. While I'm sure most Americans would not want these defendants near their children, there isn't any empirical evidence to support the notion that these persons represent a greater threat to children than do persons convicted of assault or robbery. Continuing to treat all "sex offenses" the same is just bad policy if the goal is to actually decrease danger to children.
Sarah Silverman licked a dog's behind on national TV, but no one is forcing her to register as a "sex offender." It all really depends on who's sensibilities you're offending and in what context. For example, swingers may offend the senses of devoutely married people, but some devoutely married people are swingers.
Posted by: Gourmet Swinger | August 15, 2008 at 05:11 PM