Teenager’s Jailing Brings a Call to Fix Sex Offender Registries - Polidicks

[b]Teenager’s Jailing Brings a Call to Fix Sex Offender Registries[/b] Source: [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/us/teenagers-jailing-brings-a-call-to-fix-sex-offender-registries.html?rref=homepage&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Home%20Page&pgtype=article]NY Times[/url] _________________________ [quote][img]http://i.imgur.com/tEifFvh.jpg[/img] [i]Lester and Amanda Anderson at home in Elkhart, Ind. They said they were worried about the future of their son Zachery, because of his inclusion on a sex offender registry and the restrictions that such inclusion entails.[/i] - - - ELKHART, Ind. — Until one day in December, Zachery Anderson was a typical 19-year-old in a small Midwestern city. He studied computer science at the local community college. He lived with his parents and two younger brothers in a sun-filled home on the St. Joseph River, where framed family photos hang from the walls and a pontoon boat is docked outside. And he dated in the way that so many American teenagers do today: digitally and semi-anonymously, through apps where prospects emerge with the swipe of a finger and meetings are arranged after the exchanges of photos and texts. In December, Mr. Anderson met a girl through Hot or Not, a dating app, and after some online flirting, he drove to pick her up at her house in Michigan, just miles over the state line. They had sex in a playground in Niles City, the police report said. That sexual encounter has landed Mr. Anderson in a Michigan jail, and he now faces a lifetime entanglement in the legal system. The girl, who by her own account told Mr. Anderson that she was 17 — a year over the age of consent in Michigan — was actually 14. The case came to the attention of the police after the girl’s mother contacted them, concerned about her whereabouts. They were at her home when the girl returned, according to The South Bend Tribune. A few weeks later, the paper said, the police visited Mr. Anderson, who cooperated and, in February, turned himself in. He was arrested and charged and, after pleading guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, was sentenced to 90 days in jail and probation. As an Indiana resident, Mr. Anderson will most likely be listed on a sex offender registry for life, a sanction that requires him to be in regular contact with the authorities, to allow searches of his home every 90 days and to live far from schools, parks and other public places. His probation will also require him to stay off the Internet, though he needs it to study computer science.[/quote] It's cases such as these that makes it seem like that law wasn't very well thought-out.

[QUOTE]They said they were worried about the future of their son Zachery, because of his inclusion on a sex offender registry and the restrictions that such inclusion entails.[/QUOTE] And they are right to be. His future is gone now, and it's all because of one simple mistake.

[quote=the article]The girl, who by her own account told Mr. Anderson that she was 17 — a year over the age of consent in Michigan — was actually 14.[/quote] I'd want to have that bitch locked up for perjury.

[QUOTE=Michael haxz;48125664]And they are right to be. His future is gone now, and it's all because of one simple mistake.[/QUOTE] it wasn't a mistake, it was a broken "justice" system [editline]5th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=wickedplayer494;48125671]I'd want to have that bitch locked up for perjury.[/QUOTE] she didn't say she was raped she didn't lie to a court she had sex with another teenager it isn't like she wanted his life ruined, and she couldn't have anticipated the judicial unit being so stupid either

I really hate the idea that you'd have to tour the neighborhood and say "I'm new here and I'm a sex offender". The same thing, a child rapist (defining child as under twelve) has to do. I had underage sexual relations with an adult when I was fourteen and I wasn't exploited. I wanted it and so did she. This shouldn't even be a crime. Just playing devil's advocate even though she allegedly did lie about her age.

The girl should receive some sort of lash back for lying, although I don't know if there's a law for that at all.

[QUOTE=puppy156;48125683]The girl should receive some sort of lash back for lying, although I don't know if there's a law for that at all.[/QUOTE] neither person should be considered a criminal

[QUOTE=puppy156;48125683]The girl should receive some sort of lash back for lying, although I don't know if there's a law for that at all.[/QUOTE] It shouldn't be a crime to begin with but if somebody can believably lie about their age to get somebody into breaking the law it makes sense to punish them. Canada's age of consent, [QUOTE]The Tackling Violent Crime Act raises the legal age of sexual consent in Canada to 16 from 14, the first time it has been raised since 1892. But the law includes a "close-in-age exception," meaning 14- and 15-year-olds can have sex with someone who is less than five years older.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=bitches;48125685]neither person should be considered a criminal[/QUOTE] In an ideal world, this would be the case. However if I'm facing getting placed on a sex offender list and effectively being doxed for the duration of the rest of my life, all because of some idiot who thought it would be a GREAT idea to lie to me about being legal, then there's a massive problem. Even if the punishment is just a fine, a fine is still a punishment.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48125682]I really hate the idea that you'd have to tour the neighborhood and say "I'm new here and I'm a sex offender". The same thing, a child rapist (defining child as under twelve) has to do.[/QUOTE] I looked really weird back in high school for saying this, but if a pedophile introduced himself to me as such, I would try my best to treat him like a normal human being. The reason for that is if they have both the balls to do that and the compassion for others to say something along those lines, it's something to be respected. To retaliate to that with hate doesn't fix his problems, they exasperate them. The entire sex offender thing needs to be reworked, though. Since there's such a horrendous stigma against the entirety of sex offending in a way that doesn't promote forgiveness and progression, people's lives are totally ruined and often based on ridiculous technicalities.

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;48125704]In an ideal world, this would be the case. However if I'm facing getting placed on a sex offender list and effectively being doxed for the duration of the rest of my life, all because of some idiot who thought it would be a GREAT idea to lie to me about being legal, then there's a massive problem. Even if the punishment is just a fine, a fine is still a punishment.[/QUOTE] one injustice doesn't warrant another stop being so fucking blood thirsty

If you gave someone an edible weed brownie and told them it was a normal brownie and they later got arrested for public intoxication or given a DUI after pulling over once they realized they were tripping balls, the fault rests heavily on the person who lied to them. This shouldn't be much different - I know ignorance of the law is not a defense, but it's like giving someone public intoxication charges after they get roofied. It doesn't make sense.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48125688]It shouldn't be a crime to begin with but if somebody can believably lie about their age to get somebody into breaking the law it makes sense to punish them. Canada's age of consent,[/QUOTE] Most US states have similar exceptions on them, Michigan unfortunately is not one of them. The way our AoC law is written there are no exceptions at all, so if two people under 16 have sex with each other they're both in violation of the law. It really should be a federal standard.

I don't understand why consensual sex can be jailable like this. Surely the only reason the law even exists is to prevent teen pregnancy etc, so give him a ticket and job's done? No need to ruin his life.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;48125721]Most US states have similar exceptions on them, Michigan unfortunately is not one of them. The way our AoC law is written there are no exceptions at all, so if two people under 16 have sex with each other they're both in violation of the law. It really should be a federal standard.[/QUOTE] Fucking absurd law. Texas has a statute where there's a 3-year (?) age gap. If I was 16 I could legally have sex with a 13-year-old. Having a "no exceptions zero tolerance" rule on something as fluid and uncontrollable as teenage human sexuality is ridiculously stupid.

Really though it seems like it's not so much a problem with the system of sex offender registries (and if they do have any major problem it's how easy it is to run away from them) as much as it is how we handle statutory rape, in Michigan in particular (AoC laws are completely determined by state).

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;48125734]Really though it seems like it's not so much a problem with the system of sex offender registries (and if they do have any major problem it's how easy it is to run away from them) as much as it is how we handle statutory rape, in Michigan in particular (AoC laws are completely determined by state).[/QUOTE] There's definitely an issue with the sex offender registry in that you can be placed on it for pissing in public because you're technically exposing yourself. You then have to tell all of your neighbors for the rest of your life that you're a sex offender. For pissing in public. There's nothing sexual about that in the slightest, but it can (and will) land you on the sex offender registry. Even if you're in an alleyway behind a bar and nobody can see you, or if you're facing away from everyone else and pissing into the bushes. You'd expect a fine - nope, you have to report that you're in the same class as 40-year-olds that rape toddlers for every job you ever apply to.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;48125740]There's definitely an issue with the sex offender registry in that you can be placed on it for pissing in public because you're technically exposing yourself. You then have to tell all of your neighbors for the rest of your life that you're a sex offender. For pissing in public. There's nothing sexual about that in the slightest, but it can (and will) land you on the sex offender registry. Even if you're in an alleyway behind a bar and nobody can see you, or if you're facing away from everyone else and pissing into the bushes. You'd expect a fine - nope, you have to report that you're in the same class as 40-year-olds that rape toddlers for every job you ever apply to.[/QUOTE] It makes you wonder how many people in that situation would just end up spiraling into depression and killing themselves since they can't live a normal life.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;48125749]It makes you wonder how many people in that situation would just end up spiraling into depression and killing themselves since they can't live a normal life.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16040578[/url] "Sex Only" (non-violent and non-abusive) Child Sex Offenders have a suicide rate 183 times the population average. Violent Child Sex Offenders had zero suicides over the six years of the study. I think this shows that there's a very large difference in the psychology of child rapists and teenagers who fuck outside the government-mandated age limit.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;48125705]I looked really weird back in high school for saying this, but if a pedophile introduced himself to me as such, I would try my best to treat him like a normal human being. The reason for that is if they have both the balls to do that and the compassion for others to say something along those lines, it's something to be respected. To retaliate to that with hate doesn't fix his problems, they exasperate them. The entire sex offender thing needs to be reworked, though. Since there's such a horrendous stigma against the entirety of sex offending in a way that doesn't promote forgiveness and progression, people's lives are totally ruined and often based on ridiculous technicalities.[/QUOTE] We have a twenty something year old living here and he was forced to approach each home individually notifying them that he sexted his girlfriend while he was 19 and she was 17. People avoided them like the plague, as if he was the equivalent of the aforementioned child rapist. I hope one day, people like that's names will be removed.

[QUOTE=bitches;48125685]neither person should be considered a criminal[/QUOTE] As much as I agree that this is a horrible situation for him that no one could've prevented, there's a lot of legal issues in this area that make the whole thing a minefield. I think the best approach would be an overhaul of the sex offender system rather than dealing with the laws themselves. Currently the system treats all sex offenders the same, regardless of whether they were guilty of a relatively low level crime, like masturbating in a locked bathroom on a plane, or if they're guilty of the most heinous sexual crimes you can imagine.

[QUOTE=Paramud;48125822]As much as I agree that this is a horrible situation for him that no one could've prevented, there's a lot of legal issues in this area that make the whole thing a minefield. I think the best approach would be an overhaul of the sex offender system rather than dealing with the laws themselves. Currently the system treats all sex offenders the same, regardless of whether they were guilty of a relatively low level crime, like masturbating in a locked bathroom on a plane, or if they're guilty of the most heinous sexual crimes you can imagine.[/QUOTE] Read through a couple of states and some actually do that. [url]https://www.fbi.gov/scams-safety/registry[/url] Oregon has a tier system (level 3 means insane shit and only those get listed, etc). Most also seem to forbid using the info to actually harass people.

Statutory only violations should not warrant sex offender registrations if the investigation by authorities factually reveals such except in cases where minors are clearly being taken advantage of

The law requires people to be responsible for determining the age of their sexual partners. This is so people do not circumvent the typical "Don't ask don't tell" or "I can be 17, if you want?" wink-wink associated with hookup sex. It is not that difficult and not remotely equivalent to "eating a brownie" - this is sticking your penis inside a kid in the middle of a playground, an act that requires an extreme degree of trust beforehand, ignoring the fact they had intercourse in a public children's area. I do not agree with the relevance of the Judge's comments in sentencing, it should not factor into his punishment. [quote]“You went online, to use a fisherman’s expression, trolling for women, to meet and have sex with,” he said. “[B]That seems to be part of our culture now. [/B] Meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever.” The prosecutor, Jerry Vigansky, did not oppose a Holmes Act sentence, but noted that it had not been applied to two similar cases in recent months. For some reason, Mr. Vigansky told the judge in court, [B]this generation seems to think it is “O.K. to go online to find somebody and then to quickly hook up for sexual gratification[/B].”[/quote] Shouldn't be brought up. However, if you think sex is something equivalent to "eating a laced brownie" then perhaps you'd be able to petition the judge for a more lenient sentence because you view acceptance of sex as the equivalent of eating a random brownie offered to you. If having sex is like "eating an offered brownie" to you, then you do not have the mental capacity to be responsible to begin with.

Another interesting part of US sex laws is you can actually get imprisoned for having sex with someone under 18 abroad regardless of that country's age of consent: [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2423[/url] This law is hardly enforced but the fact it exists is something to consider. There's also this quote from Richard Posner, a federal judge: [quote]The U.S. Supreme Court has held that stricter rules [on age of consent] for males do not violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution, on the theory that men lack the disincentives (associated with pregnancy) that women have, to engage in sexual activity, and the law may thus provide men with those disincentives in the form of criminal sanctions.[/quote]

[QUOTE=spiritlol;48125951]Another interesting part of US sex laws is you can actually get imprisoned for having sex with someone under 18 abroad regardless of that country's age of consent: [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2423[/url] This law is hardly enforced but the fact it exists is something to consider. There's also this quote from Richard Posner, a federal judge:[/QUOTE] only reason i can think a law like that would be reasonable is to get people who go to some southeast asian country or something to take advantage of child prostitutes

Sex offender registries weren't designed with shit like this in mind. Based on this logic, if I lived in certain US states at some point then my girlfriend would be open to charges and that's bullshit. Lawmakers need to get their shit together and this guy should be pardoned.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;48125947]The law requires people to be responsible for determining the age of their sexual partners. This is so people do not circumvent the typical "Don't ask don't tell" or "I can be 17, if you want?" wink-wink associated with hookup sex. It is not that difficult and not remotely equivalent to "eating a brownie" - this is sticking your penis inside a kid in the middle of a playground, an act that requires an extreme degree of trust beforehand, ignoring the fact they had intercourse in a public children's area. I do not agree with the relevance of the Judge's comments in sentencing, it should not factor into his punishment. Shouldn't be brought up. However, if you think sex is something equivalent to "eating a laced brownie" then perhaps you'd be able to petition the judge for a more lenient sentence because you view acceptance of sex as the equivalent of eating a random brownie offered to you. If having sex is like "eating an offered brownie" to you, then you do not have the mental capacity to be responsible to begin with.[/QUOTE] The problem is, how are these kids going to find the age of their partners? Do they ask them for an ID? It's not that easy and it's ridiculous that this kid got his life screwed because of that, how can he be responsible for the lies of others?

[QUOTE=bunguer;48126259]The problem is, how are these kids going to find the age of their partners? Do they ask them for an ID? It's not that easy and it's ridiculous that this kid got his life screwed because of that, how can he be responsible for the lies of others?[/QUOTE] I didn't have ID until I was 17/18 like most kids my age. I don't see how he should be held liable for someone else's lies when it's certainly not reasonable to determine one's age without asking for ID or a fucking birth certificate. It doesn't help that girls generally look older than they are due to makeup (and let's be honest, what teenage girl is going to go outside without makeup on). Also, those comments that Starpluck highlighted [quote]this generation seems to think it is “O.K. to go online to find somebody and then to quickly hook up for sexual gratification.”[/quote] should be used to appeal the decision. I'm sure any skilled lawyer could make a case that the sentencing was not based on objective evidence but rather personal opinion on "hookup culture". Laws are generally blanket statements to protect the majority of cases but this genuinely seems like a "wrong place, wrong time, shitty circumstances" sort of case. Imagine if this guy started school late like some of the people in my graduating class, he could've gone to high school with her. This isn't some 25 year old man "taking advantage" of a 14 year old girl. This was a guy that had a fairly decent chance of going to prom with this girl several years after going through puberty.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;48125740]There's definitely an issue with the sex offender registry in that you can be placed on it for pissing in public because you're technically exposing yourself. You then have to tell all of your neighbors for the rest of your life that you're a sex offender. For pissing in public. There's nothing sexual about that in the slightest, but it can (and will) land you on the sex offender registry. Even if you're in an alleyway behind a bar and nobody can see you, or if you're facing away from everyone else and pissing into the bushes. You'd expect a fine - nope, you have to report that you're in the same class as 40-year-olds that rape toddlers for every job you ever apply to.[/QUOTE] After hearing this, no fucking way am I ever living in US now. Fuck your dumb laws.