Dilution of "Sex Offender"

A helpful reader sent me this editorial about the dilution of the label "sex offender":

The term "sex offender" has the tendency to, quite rightfully, strike fear in parents' hearts, cause countless Web sites to track registries (complete with searchable maps), and inspire the citizenry to distribute fliers and call public meetings....

This week, a court declined to downgrade the conviction of Rev. Robert Whipkey, 53, to a petty offense of public indecency. Whipkey, a Catholic priest who has been on administrative leave from the archdiocese since his arrest, was charged with indecent exposure after being caught running naked around the Frederick High School track last June.

It was 4:30 a.m. The witness was an off-duty police officer, who followed the man home, and confronted him there....

Whipkey will be sentenced in October. He faces possible jail time and registering as a sex offender....

When you hear the term "sex offender" do you immediately think there's a risk to area children -- or does your mind start to wander toward how the term applies to a broad base of crimes, including streaking and urinating in public?

That's not to say these things are not crimes, because they are. Running around in the buff is illegal, and so is statutory rape, even when it's consensual. Lumping all of these crimes into the sex offender registry is, however, offensive.

"Sex offenders" include an incredible array of unrelated crimes. A flasher is different than an adult rapist is different than a person who has sex with a dog is different than an obscene movie director is different than a statutory rapist is different than a street prostitute, etc. Treating all of these groups essentially the same has been a shortcoming of sex offender policy for some time. Sure, registries contain tiered structures, but the distinctions made are relatively slight and no "sex offender" avoids registry listing under SORNA. I'm glad to see a newspaper recognize that what "sex offender" means under the law is pretty different than the iconic image of a child molester lurking in the bushes.

Comments

[ghostie]

it doesn't matter. While on Probation or parole, they should be able to apply the registry, but after sex offenders have done their time and are off of supervision it should end then. The cops know who they are, but they should be allowed to live their lives after it. We don;t make murderers 'register' for community safety.. nor thieves, people that beat people to a bloody mass. No, people are convinced that the greatest evil in the world are sex offenders and that all of them prey on children, both of which are absolute lies. The greatest evil are the people that want to track the world's population and who oppress groups that have no voice.

[abyss2hope]

I agree that not all sex criminals pose equal dangers, but I'm concerned about any minimization of the risk associated with those convicted of statutory rape based on the claim that the sex was consensual.

Statutory rapists are as a whole as dangerous to children as other rapists even if they don't snatch their victims off the street. A violent rapist who only rapes significant others may pose no danger to children while a statutory rapist who coerces children poses a great and ongoing danger to children. Then there are the violent child rapists who pled guilty to statutory rape while maintaining that the sex was consensual.

In determining specific risks to specific populations we need to look beyond what offense someone was convicted of or pled guilty to.

[Corey Rayburn Yung]

I agree that many statutory rapists represent higher risks. However, for the most part, they are dissimilar from other sex criminals. The definition of statutory rape also varies so wildly from state to state that the danger represented is hard to determine from just knowing that a person was found guilty of. I think the best solution for statutory rape is a non-categorical classification based upon the specifics of the accusations. That would account for instances where persons simply plead guilty to the lesser charged offense.

Corey

Alright. Since police reports will be the gospel and charges not found by a jury or admitted by plea assume guilt anyway, let's take it step further. Let's create a registry for police and prosecutors who stack charges. Any government agent who charges a charge that could not be proven before a jury is put on a registry and is banned from work and his neighborhood. Since this registry is not ex post facto we could go back 10, 20, 50, 60 years and look for overcharging. Banish them all. It would only be a regulation.

"Statutory rapists are as a whole as dangerous to children as other rapists even if they don't snatch their victims off the street. A violent rapist who only rapes significant others may pose no danger to children while a statutory rapist who coerces children poses a great and ongoing danger to children. Then there are the violent child rapists who pled guilty to statutory rape while maintaining that the sex was consensual."

What wild accusations. Have you asked teens themselves what they think? 65% say they indulged in sex without "Pressure from partner."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6839072

To claim that is the same as violent rape does an insult to rape victims. Parents, the state and society all have an interest in preventing teen sex and some laws are justified, but to claim it is equal to violent rape is irresponsible.

Maybe what you mean is that since about 50% of the teen boys have had sex they are all predators and deserve 25-to-life while the almost 50% of girls are all passive innocents responsible for nothing.

[Oric]

Why not include murderers in the registry? I don't want one of those living next to me or going near by kids.

Heck if we're going to include people who go streaking why not include people for disturbing the peace or noise violations? Why are people arrested for streaking? It offends some people. Same with those other two crimes so logically if we put people on a public registry and subject them to all kinds of restrictions because they go streaking we should do the same thing for people who are loud and obnoxious in public or blare the radio too loud.

And of course putting someone's life at risk is worse than being offensive. If you go speeding you put people's lives at risk because you could get into an accident. Therefore let's put speeders on the registry.

In fact why not just put everyone convicted of anything on the registry? Makes perfect sense.

[Robert]

Where to start...The Pledge of Alligance ends in "with liberty and justice for all". The "for all" goes for the "victims" and the "accused" and when we fail to protect any of our citizens, we as a society have failed. The whole "sex offender" thing is a disaster. We don't want to talk about it, we don't want to think about it, we don't understand it, we don't want it in our neighborhood, we don't have the resources to handle it and we most certainly don't seem to want to come up with a better system. When you have people living in a ramshackle community under a bridge, no matter what they have done, we have failed. Let us take this one step further, when the courts order you to move under the bridge and give you identification listing your address as "Julia Tuttle Causeway" we have totally failed and quite frankly those who have made these decisions should be charged with crimes against humanity. Now before someone wants to bash me for "protecting these perverts" or whatever you believe, I don't want to protect them from their crimes, they need to be punished, but I would however protect them from our crimes, not knowing what to do with them and continually punishing them forever. Let me take this further, if you keep pushing this group of people, what happens is that they go underground and then what? How do you keep track now? How do you help them, help themselves? I get it, not all want help or want to be "cured" but if you do not know where someone is, then what? Not every "sex offender" is a menace or prays on children. How about the person that cannot live near a school but lives next to an adult care facility and happens to like being way to friendly with Grandma? What about the 19 year old that sees his former U.S. History teacher in front of the school and moons him while riding by? He didn't think about those around the teacher, his focus was the teacher, but now he is branded by society as some sort of pervert...FOR LIFE! A person can commit murder, be released and be living right next door to you right now and as long as he meets all of his legal obligations, nobody would be none the wiser. I happen to live next door to someone who is not the list and this person constantly on alert because of the lists, asumptions and vigilanteism of others. This same person has paid is debt, follows all the rules, is not a menace, keeps up on the local laws to understand his part and goes to the police and checks in with them becuase in the years he has lived here they have never or rarely checked in on him. I know, this may not be typical, but you cannot lump all these people in one catagory, slap a label on them and then make them pay for their mistakes for life, this is considered cruel and unusual punishment. I believe in punishment, I believe in enforcement but I also believe the system as it stands is dysfunctional and society has failed not only the accused in this case but also the victims by forcing people underground. Liberty and justice for some.

[Robert]

Sorry to keep dragging on, I meant to address the opinions with regard to "statutory rapists". Here is another term that is exact in definition but vague in enforcement. Here is a little story; A girl and a boy are "playing doctor". Said girl is not quite to the age of consent, said boy is....nobody is forcing anyone, nothing kinky is going on...is that someone at the door? And there stand Mom & Dad, who came home early because their outing got canceled. Of course Mom & Dad, protecting their daughter's "honor" press charges and now said boy is a "statutory rapist", not a predator, not a menace, but still on the list for life. Yes this happens, there is case information to back this up. So the assumption again is that all statutory rapists prey on children, and once again lumping everyone into one cagagory is wrong. How about this twist, personal experience; when I was in high school I was friends with another student that was a different kind of predator, this minor friend of my was an aggressive predator of the middle aged. Now the law says that an adult should know better and therefore steer away from trouble, being that they have the ability to control the issue, but none the less, here was a teenage predator, who if caught in a compromising position, his victim would become the accused and society would never think twice. Society seems to think the "Cougar" is an acceptable way to little Johnny to become a man, but isn't this just an acceptable form of Statutory rape? Sorry, it does not all fit into one neat little package that we can wrap up, slap a bow on and shove into the back of a closet. Again, the law has to work both ways to work at all.