Sex Offender Sues Every Prosecutor In Indiana

[mRx 16]

Child molesters don't deserve any rights.

Those lawyers at the ACLU are quick to sell their values.

[almaty 19]

america was founded on rights.....except for slaves...and now, sex offenders..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There isn't really a precedent for Thought Crime - I can't see how this will stand to be honest.

As I say - there should be action taken to ensure that people who represent a danger to others are kept out of society. These patchwork local laws aren't that.

[Ban Hammer 12,829]

america was founded on rights.....except for slaves...and now, sex offenders..

sex offenders become slaves!

[almaty 19]

america was founded on rights.....except for slaves...and now, sex offenders..

sex offenders become slaves!

lol...i think there is a few internet sites where they could check out....they find a new meaning of life there

[mRx 16]

They may not currently present a danger, but I don't think that molesting a child is a one-time "lapse of judgement". These people are sinister and sick.

There are alot of ####### parents out there who are incompetent to shield their children from these people. That doesn't mean that the children don't deserve protection from these predators.

In the end, this law is about protecting children, not stripping rights away from child molesters.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It sounds like a tough sell to a court judge.

[Caladan 19]

They may not currently present a danger, but I don't think that molesting a child is a one-time "lapse of judgement". These people are sinister and sick.

There are alot of ####### parents out there who are incompetent to shield their children from these people. That doesn't mean that the children don't deserve protection from these predators.

In the end, this law is about protecting children, not stripping rights away from child molesters.

If you believe that, then I think you'd have to conclude that they should be in jail or in a psychiatric facility, not having their Internet use checked.

[SteveLaura 0]

The crime happened over ten years ago. It's possible the bloke was 18 and he felt up a 15 year old. Why would we need to see his computer usage now, if so?

[almaty 19]

They may not currently present a danger, but I don't think that molesting a child is a one-time "lapse of judgement". These people are sinister and sick.

There are alot of ####### parents out there who are incompetent to shield their children from these people. That doesn't mean that the children don't deserve protection from these predators.

In the end, this law is about protecting children, not stripping rights away from child molesters.

brother matt, you are correct .,.but having worked with sexual perverts..the computer can be a trigger and a fantasy, but the thrill for them is the action and power and lost of virtue for the young victim.....

i think a better solution is monitoring by bracelet while they are on parole or probation//////with mandated counseling......

[DeadPoolX 9]

The issue here is that molesting a child isn't, as someone else stated, a "lapse in judgment." Unlike something such as drunk driving (which I also feel should have harsher penalties), you are fully aware of what you're doing. Nobody just "happens" to molest children. It's thought out ahead of time.

As such, the punishments involved need to take that into consideration. Many child molestors find their targets online -- usually in the form of chat rooms, instant messaging and websites like MySpace or Facebook. While no one is advocating the complete elimination of anyone's access to the Internet, I certainly feel it's reasonable to have the ability to perform unscheduled checks on a known child molestor's computer.

Unfortunately, the rate of recidivism is high among child molestors, so while we may hope they won't repeat their previous actions, it's likely they will, if given the opportunity. I realize criminals -- those inside and out of prison -- may have certain rights, but I'd like to believe that those without a criminal record (especially the children who have or would become victimized) would a few more, at least when concerning their safety.

[SteveLaura 0]

The issue here is that molesting a child isn't, as someone else stated, a "lapse in judgment." Unlike something such as drunk driving (which I also feel should have harsher penalties), you are fully aware of what you're doing. Nobody just "happens" to molest children. It's thought out ahead of time.

As such, the punishments involved need to take that into consideration. Many child molestors find their targets online -- usually in the form of chat rooms, instant messaging and websites like MySpace or Facebook. While no one is advocating the complete elimination of anyone's access to the Internet, I certainly feel it's reasonable to have the ability to perform unscheduled checks on a known child molestor's computer.

Unfortunately, the rate of recidivism is high among child molestors, so while we may hope they won't repeat their previous actions, it's likely they will, if given the opportunity. I realize criminals -- those inside and out of prison -- may have certain rights, but I'd like to believe that those without a criminal record (especially the children who have or would become victimized) would a few more, at least when concerning their safety.

In this case, we can't say with any degree of certainty that he was a far older adult molesting a far younger child. Would you still feel the same if the circumstances of this case were similar to what I had previously proposed?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The issue here is that molesting a child isn't, as someone else stated, a "lapse in judgment." Unlike something such as drunk driving (which I also feel should have harsher penalties), you are fully aware of what you're doing. Nobody just "happens" to molest children. It's thought out ahead of time.

As such, the punishments involved need to take that into consideration. Many child molestors find their targets online -- usually in the form of chat rooms, instant messaging and websites like MySpace or Facebook. While no one is advocating the complete elimination of anyone's access to the Internet, I certainly feel it's reasonable to have the ability to perform unscheduled checks on a known child molestor's computer.

Unfortunately, the rate of recidivism is high among child molestors, so while we may hope they won't repeat their previous actions, it's likely they will, if given the opportunity. I realize criminals -- those inside and out of prison -- may have certain rights, but I'd like to believe that those without a criminal record (especially the children who have or would become victimized) would a few more, at least when concerning their safety.

In this case, we can't say with any degree of certainty that he was a far older adult molesting a far younger child. Would you still feel the same if the circumstances of this case were similar to what I had previously proposed?

The other point here is that these laws are often one-size-fits-all and don't make a distinction between different classes of offenders.

[SteveLaura 0]

The issue here is that molesting a child isn't, as someone else stated, a "lapse in judgment." Unlike something such as drunk driving (which I also feel should have harsher penalties), you are fully aware of what you're doing. Nobody just "happens" to molest children. It's thought out ahead of time.

As such, the punishments involved need to take that into consideration. Many child molestors find their targets online -- usually in the form of chat rooms, instant messaging and websites like MySpace or Facebook. While no one is advocating the complete elimination of anyone's access to the Internet, I certainly feel it's reasonable to have the ability to perform unscheduled checks on a known child molestor's computer.

Unfortunately, the rate of recidivism is high among child molestors, so while we may hope they won't repeat their previous actions, it's likely they will, if given the opportunity. I realize criminals -- those inside and out of prison -- may have certain rights, but I'd like to believe that those without a criminal record (especially the children who have or would become victimized) would a few more, at least when concerning their safety.

In this case, we can't say with any degree of certainty that he was a far older adult molesting a far younger child. Would you still feel the same if the circumstances of this case were similar to what I had previously proposed?

The other point here is that these laws are often one-size-fits-all and don't make a distinction between different classes of offenders.

Exactly. Because to do otherwise would lead to attack ads come election time saying "So-and-so is soft on CHILD MOLESTERS!"

[DeadPoolX 9]

The issue here is that molesting a child isn't, as someone else stated, a "lapse in judgment." Unlike something such as drunk driving (which I also feel should have harsher penalties), you are fully aware of what you're doing. Nobody just "happens" to molest children. It's thought out ahead of time.

As such, the punishments involved need to take that into consideration. Many child molestors find their targets online -- usually in the form of chat rooms, instant messaging and websites like MySpace or Facebook. While no one is advocating the complete elimination of anyone's access to the Internet, I certainly feel it's reasonable to have the ability to perform unscheduled checks on a known child molestor's computer.

Unfortunately, the rate of recidivism is high among child molestors, so while we may hope they won't repeat their previous actions, it's likely they will, if given the opportunity. I realize criminals -- those inside and out of prison -- may have certain rights, but I'd like to believe that those without a criminal record (especially the children who have or would become victimized) would a few more, at least when concerning their safety.

In this case, we can't say with any degree of certainty that he was a far older adult molesting a far younger child. Would you still feel the same if the circumstances of this case were similar to what I had previously proposed?

I don't see how we couldn't know what the ages are of the offender and the victim (assuming the molestor is caught). When the offender is brought into custody, the police will be able to find out his information, including age. The age of the victim will already be known to law enforcement. So the age of the two (or more, which could happen) involved will be known.

As far as him being significantly older, he doesn't have to be. Depending on the laws of the state in question, and his and her ages at the time, he could merely be a couple of years older than she is and still be tried in court for molestation and statutory rape. The latter can be very unfair in that even if the female is willing it doesn't matter -- if she's underage and the male isn't, he can still be arrested, tried and sentenced for the crime.

Edited April 10, 2008 by DeadPoolX