^^^ or maybe the lesson is don’t rape. Ever.
I go further than @privatebanker. Once a person has completed their sentence and completed their probation, they have paid their debt to society. We should not put people on sex offender registries.
In this particular case, the facts are not murky. There were two witnesses! I’ve said before that I thought the sentence was too light, and I voted to recall the judge. But, when a person has paid their debt to society, they should be done. We should give them a chance to turn over a new leaf.
@“Cardinal Fang” With your insight and vocal and unwavering support for the victims and women, I defer to you and would totally support what you suggest.
If it’s ok for you, it’s simply ok for me. I respect you that much in regard to these matters . And others also fwiw.
Although the child offenders I would suggest a registry of some sort does have a public benefit for the level three types at least.
@privatebanker Awww, what a gracious, classy comment. (Applauding.)
I guess I think that maybe certain sex offenders should have to register with law enforcement, so the police know where they are. But this information should not be available to the public on a public list of shame.
@“Cardinal Fang”
Would orgs like Boy Scouts, foster parents groups big brother or a church group etc be able to access a criminal data base to make sure a level 3 person wasn’t getting in the door as a volunteer if it wasnt publicly available in a registry? Shouldn’t it be a crime if they gt caught trying to infiltrate such a group.
Can you have a level 2 or 3 offense expunged?
I’m not presupposing. I’m really asking.
If childcare providers and schools and similar orgs are supposed to do background checks, such checks won’t be of much use if everything is expunged. Just making an observation. Sadly, I believe recidivism rates among sexual assaulters are quite high, even after such individuals “have served their time.” I have not studied this matter.
I thought criminal convictions were a matter of public record, but I’m not sure how it works.
At any rate, there’s a big difference between the Boy Scouts being able to ask whether Jason Smith, who wants to be a Scout Leader, has any sex offender convictions, and me being able to ask for a list of all the names and addresses of anyone within 5 miles of me who has a sex offender conviction. I support the former but not the latter.
Personally, I see a big difference between classmates who have sex with apparent consent but happen to have commuted statutory rape because one of them was too young to give legal consent.
Although it is possible that someone could use public records to (a) look up anyone with an address within 5 miles of a given location, (b) run a criminal record check on each person who comes up, and (c) produce a list of any person with a record of any particular crime(s) of interest (sex related or not).
When public records were paper ones that had to be searched by hand, sex offender registries made it much more convenient to look up sex offenders than those with other criminal records. Now, with public records being more accessible (e.g. through services like https://staterecords.org/ ), we may be getting to the point where anyone can make a custom registry of any crime(s) of interest. Sex offender registries may be becoming effectively obsolete, because all criminal records are becoming as accessible as those relating to sex offenses.
^^^That website is very powerful.
Some of these groups do required background checks on folks who want to volunteer. Foster parents definitely. This sort of thing would come up on a background check.
If a person was ever criminally convicted, and if it was not formally expunged, it will turn up on a background check… My church does background checks for volunteers who work with children. Day care workers in my state must be background-checked. I work at a college that shares a campus with a school where children attend (but the buildings are not adjacent) … everyone who is employed here, even my student workers who work only for our school, must be background checked. All of our volunteers in our museums are background checked. It can bite you in the rear, for sure.
Well having your name cone up through frequent appeals would help fix it in many people’s minds (in a bad way), even before a background check is ever done.
So far Turner has not appealed his conviction “frequently.” He appealed it once, and was rejected by the Appeals Court. I haven’t seen news that he tried appealing the decision to the California Supreme Court. Experts say that he would be unlikely to succeed if he did.
This latest revival of this thread is because his victim is reportedly writing a memoir.
I believe in life registers for those most likely to reoffend. I don’t believe a person automatically should be taken off a registry when probation is completed.
In my state what has been a topic of public discussion is whether it is legal to lock a sex offender up for life even when they have completed the sentencing.
There is a man in my county who did 10 years or so for assaulting and kidnapping middle school aged girls. He got out on probation and had to live in a rural area far from schools, churches, etc.
His probation was coming to an end. The police searched his home and took his computer. On it were hundreds of photos of child porn. I feel like no amount of prison therapy will change him and he is a danger to society. However, the new charges will not carry a sentence of 50 years.
How do we decide who is likely to reoffend? And why do sexual offenses, but not other serious offenses, merit a registry? How about men who commit domestic violence – they’re very likely to reoffend, aren’t they?
As much as I disliked Turner’s sentence, I wouldn’t think he was likely to reoffend.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
As good a reason as any.
To add to the list of things to move away from discussing on this thread (although one is free to start a new discussion): the efficacy of sex offender registries, recidivism rates, Boy Scouts of America, etc unless specifically tied to Brock Turner.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
Why is this still being discussed? I don’t think I was unclear in the post above. Several more posts deleted.