Convicted sex offender commits suicide over neighborhood signs

[CatWoman]

OCALA, Fla. -- A convicted sex offender apparently committed suicide in despair over signs posted in his neighborhood calling him a "child rapist."

Clovis Ivan Claxton was found dead by his father Thursday with one of the signs beside his body, less than a day after his release from a psychiatric hospital.

The Marion County Sheriff's Office is investigating, and autopsy was scheduled for Friday.

Claxton's death follows the high-profile arrests of sex offenders in the separate killings of two Florida girls less than seven weeks apart. State lawmakers have responded by passing a bill to require lifetime supervision of some child sex offenders.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/APN/504220526

[d_b]

1. Damn.

[Mojorabbit]

2. Another one from my home state of fl

http://tinyurl.com/9eugr
A local man says he's been wrongly branded a sex offender in his own neighborhood.
Someone's posting sex offender fliers outside his house, but he's not the man on the flier and he's not a sex offender, WESH 2 News reported.

It's been difficult, believe me,? said James F. Turner
snip

A flier started circulating in their neighborhood this month. Someone wrote that a registered sex offender from Maitland might now be living at the Turners' west Orlando address. Response was immediate.

My grandkids were outside and they come in the house crying because no one wants to play with them. The neighbors give me dirty looks,? James Turner said.

Who would do this? Neighbor Marlene Morton admits she did. It started when the Turners reported Morton to authorities for peeking in their windows. Soon after, Morton says James Turner's "strange behavior" led her to check the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's sex offender database.

[Occulus]

11. See? BLOODY FUCKING SEE, EVERYONE??

SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A STIGMA OF INCURABILITY ATTATCHES TO A CRIME?

SEE????

It doesn't just happen in the fucking movies, people!!! We can't stigmatize any crime, no matter how tempting it may be, because we do indeed punish innocent people in every sphere of criminal law!!!

How long is it going to take people to realize our legal system is not perfect, and erra occasionaaly, even in its properly reached convictions?

You cannot implicitly trust the legal system, people. Not for a moment.

[thecai]

15. I Agree, Kgfnally

Over 20,000 American's are wrongfully convicted each year in The U.S...
We cannot trust a legal system that does not work.

[0007]

45. A not so bright law enforcement with an over zealous

D.A. and a victim with little money = prison and death in some cases.

[thecai]

144. EXACTLY. That's All It Takes

and there are an abundance of "not so bright law enforcement" and "overzealous D.A.s". Throw in a false witness and you've got a conviction. It could happen to any of us.

[Megahurtz]

173. So WTF makes you both think that THIS GUY

fits in the catagory of wrongfully convicted???

Give me a fucking break.

[Kimber Scott]

181. He and a nine year old exposed themselves to each other 18 years ago.

He was mentally disabled. That's what they said on MSNBC. What's to say he wouldn't have picked a kid out of her bed and raped and killed her? I don't know. What's to say anyone won't? I think this whole thing is a shame. This poor guy, when he did what he did to get convicted may have done it with the mind of a nine year old himself. On the other hand, I'm tired of watching the news only to find another child has been raped and murdered and living with the feeling our kids and ourselves are not safe, even in our own beds.

This is an enormous problem in our society. I think several things need to be done to address it.

1. Sex offenders need to be classified better.
2. People with lessor offenses should be able to have their registrations expunged after an extensive period of time with good behavior.
3. Jails need to be cleared of petty criminals to make room for sex offenders.
4. Violent offenders should serve EXTENSIVE sentences - at least, life.
5. Sex crimes against children should be punished much more severly. Not with the slaps on the wrists many of them get now - in and out of jail 12 - 15 times for crimes against children. That is a disgusting sign of what we think about our kids. Pedophiles not only damage their victims initially and for life, but victims of pedophilia have a much higher likelihood of becoming pedophiles themselves, committing suicide, becoming prostitutes, etc.. The initial offense can reverberate for generations.
6. Offenders should have the option of surgical castration. Although, I'm not a doctor and have no idea if such a thing actually works.

Whatever the solution, and there has to be one, it won't be a one size fits all solution. I think this case is proof, all sex offenders are not created equal and blanket policies do not work. Common sense works, but that seems to be lacking in our society, as well.

[Megahurtz]

187. But how old was HE when

he exposed himself to the nine-year old?

In this case it's a very difficult call.

[proud2BlibKansan]

241. Read the link

"Claxton was convicted in Washington state in 1991 of molesting a 9-year-old girl. He was 20 at the time, but his mother said he was developmentally much younger due to a brain injury."

[zippy890]

223. dupe

[zippy890]

224. How about putting money into mental illness research

Curing mental illness would solve solve so many problems in the world.

[tkmorris]

25. I have been making this argument a lot here lately

and you would not BELIEVE how crispy I get. I would have thought DU'ers would have a little less of a vengeful streak than that but it would appear that even here there exists a contingent of people who seem unable to see both sides of an issue if the crime is considered dastardly enough.

[IdaBriggs]

52. Sorry, no sympathy.

Statistically one out of three women in this country have been sexually molested as children. One out of seven men have been sexually molested as children. In my family (including in-laws), we have a known 90% molestation rate of the women BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE (and that is a sample size of over 15). Conviction rate = 0%.

If you want to talk innocent people, we can start discussing the suicide attempts by the members of my family (including one twelve year old) directly related to sexual abuse issues.

Let them burn. No sympathy from me here, EVER.

[Orrex]

66. Across the board?

Is that your view even in cases in which the molester suffers from an uncontrolled mental disorder?

I'm not criticizing you, just trying to get a fuller sense of your perspective.

Sorry to hear about your family.

[IdaBriggs]

73. Across the board -- yes.

People with "uncontrolled mental disorders" should not have access to helpless people (like children), so if someone "knows" they have a problem (and usually someone in the family has an inkling), I want them locked up (at the very least). Assuming they were able to keep their shameful problem secret, and it only happened once, I still want them locked up. (I'm not sure what the statistics are on how many times predators molest before they get caught, but based on my family's sample size, I'm guessing its quite a bit.) Frankly, I don't care if predators can be cured or not -- I don't want them anywhere near children. That means the grocery store, Sunday school, or walking down the street.

It doesn't take much for a life to be shattered or ruined; five minutes of "I'll never get caught" or "this time I won't go so far" or whatever it is these idiots tell themselves can literally destroy lives. Better them than mine.

[LostinVA]

75. And, how often are sexual predators caught the FIRST

time they do it? I'd warrant not often, especially if it's a child. They don't get caught until it starts escalating beyond "only" touching, etc.

[DoNotRefill]

273. I recall seeing an estimate....

that an average child predator usually commits 50-60 crimes before he's arrested for the FIRST time. That's pretty scary, isn't it...

[Orrex]

102. Agree to parts of that

Sure, they shouldn't have access to helpless people (children or whomever). Does

In your initial post you suggested that we "let them burn," but in the current post you allow that they could be "locked up (at the very least)." Honestly, I don't know why locking them up wouldn't be sufficient; do you propose capital punishment for mentally defective people? Aside from raw vengeance, what benefit does execution provide that lifetime incarceration does not?

I grant that this veers into the larger debate about capital punishment, but I don't think that the question is inappropriate when so many (i.e., not you, specifically) cry out for sex offenders to be tortured to death, publicly if possible.

I grant also that, were someone close to me assaulted by a such a person, I would set aside my high-minded rhetoric long enough to clean the blood from my baseball bat, but I would subsequently accept the consequences of my actions, too.

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject.

[IdaBriggs]

110. This is definitely the grand dilemma of the criminal justice system.

How much is too much, and how far is too far? Do you have enough money for a good lawyer, so you can wiggle out of paying for your offenses? Forgiveness and rehabilitation, or vengeance and incarceration?

We have abrogated our safety to the police department, but as they will tell you, they are there AFTER the crime, not before it. The homicide squad is the last chance for the victim to receive justice, and they are usually both overworked and underfunded, yet for a civilized society to function, we can't have folks running around with oaths for blood vengeance -- or can we?

In a perfect world, I would advocate for the victim and/or the victim's family to decide. Lock them up, or execute them -- your pick. From selling illegal drugs to minors to rape and/or murder, let the punishment be decided by the victims -- and the consequences. For example, if a murder victim's family decides to let a serial killer go free because of their religious beliefs in "forgiveness," let them be prosecuted along with the killer if he kills again.

I am a cynic when it comes to "forced" rehabilitation; I think those who want to be "rehabilitated" BEFORE they commit crimes (and thus don't commit them) are the ones who deserve support. I wish I had a better answer, but I don't, so I guess I will just take my ghoulish satisfaction in the death of this particular child molester, and pray I am able to see such poetic justice delivered to those who have hurt the ones I love even if I have no part in making it happen....

[Ms. Toad]

227. So you would sacrifice one generation of abuse victims

to prevent future generations?

Since you know the stats, I am sure you are also aware that a large number of child abuse victims learn that there are two types of people in the world - abusers and the abused. Not surprisingly, faced with apparently only two options, many (predominantly male) victims "choose" the "better" option - to be abusers - and many (predominantly female) victims cannot envision anything other than to continue to be victims, and find themselves repeatedly raped or abused as adults.

There are some victims who are able, through inner strength, supportive family and friends, counseling, faith, or whatever, to envision more than two options and to become strong healthy survivors - as it sounds like many in your family have.

Unfortunately, never make it to becoming survivors and remain stuck in the abuser/abused dichotomy. I don't have any good answers to break the cycle, but I can't help but be saddened that the current generation of abusers is being punished a second time as a fairly direct result of the abuse many of them suffered as children.

[Eloriel]

255. One SUPERB answer for breaking the cycle -- thanks to Howard Dean

I never can remember the name of the program he instituted in Vermont, but it was the soul of simplicity, cost a mere $100 per child per year, and in 6 years cut child abuse by 42% and child sexual abuse by 72%. (I hope everyone realizes that those are utterly amazing stats, btw.)

It consisted of simply visiting new mothers -- ALL new mothers -- in the hospital after they'd given birth and offering (not requiring) a follow-up home visit by someone trained. A large percentage accepted the offer. During the home visit, the new mother would be offered whatever help she needed, whether it be info about food stamps and other services, parenting skills classes, job training, etc.

This one thing alone would have made me a permanent Howard Dean fan, and I always think of it when people claim that Dean "is no progressive." Excuse me? That's just ONE (my favorite one) of a number of incredibly progressive things he did in Vermont.

[Ms. Toad]

302. I can see why the program cuts child abuse

which is often linked to lack of knowledge (of what shaking a baby can do, of where to find assistance) and lack of resources. Because non-sexual child abuse often begins shortly after birth, it is also something which it is easy to believe could be measured in six years. For that reason alone (cutting child physical abuse), it sounds like a fantastic program that should be implemented across the country.

I am skeptical, however, that the program has more than a minimal connection to a reduction in child sexual abuse which has very different causes/catalysts, and generally a much different timeline. Although I did care for very young sexual abuse survivors, in the ten years I worked with survivors I can only recall two under the age of 6 (a two year old and a four year old). I find it difficult to believe that a program started at birth could cause a 72% reduction in six years to a problem that (on average) doesn't begin until after the six years has elapsed (8-12 is a more typical beginning age for abuse).

If anything, I would have expected a jump in reported sexual abuse stats, as new parents who have older children learn (through the program) of resources for reporting abuse that is happening to older children. I would like to know what the stats were based on, and why they believe there is a causal relationship. Do you have any links to studies?

[mainer]

322. I think that program orginated in hawaii

They called it the "Healthy Start" program or something. It's been copied in New England states now!

[DoNotRefill]

272. When an abuse victim stops being abused and starts abusing...

he or she stops being a victim, and becomes a criminal.

Abuse victims don't deserve what happened to them. But the fact that they were abused doesn't give them a license to abuse others.

[Ms. Toad]

282. Unfortunately,

it's a pretty tough cycle to break - and becoming an abuser often starts even while the new abuser is still being abused - and often at an age too tender to really understand what is going on.

Many who are abused experience the only gentle touch they ever receive as children as part of the abuse. Positive body reaction to the touch makes it very hard to really comprehend that what is being done to you is wrong - even though your head may recognize it on some level. Since you're not sure what was done to you was wrong, it is not too hard to believe it is ok to "share" it with someone else, and so the cycle continues.

That doesn't mean they get a license to abuse,or that they never deserve to be punished, but in many instances they are still both literal and figurative victims even when they are abusing the next generation. The problem needs treatment as a first and early resort, rather than locking them up and throwing away the key and branding them with a scarlet letter.

[IdaBriggs]

320. I understand your position; yes, I would.

For me, the bottom line is this: adults have choices, and someone who chooses to become a perpetrator instead of seeking "help" in dealing with their issues is now part of the problem. Its terrible that it is that way, but since we know it is possible (although difficult) for victims NOT to become abusers, I have to demand adults behave in a responsible and trustworthy fashion without using the challenges in their lives as an excuse to behave in a heinous fashion.

One of my sisters literally became part of the problem when it came to drug abuse. She has since passed on, but two years before her death, it came out that she was supplying illegal drugs to minor children; specifically, her daughter's boyfriend the day after he got out of rehab (when he was 15). Since then, he has been in jail multiple times for his own drug dealing, while her daughter (my once beloved niece) is now a heroin addict. Would we all have been better off if my sister had ended up in jail years before? She was a victim once, but in her late thirties, it was extremely hard to reconcile the innocent child she once was with the selfish evil bitch who was ruining the lives of other innocent children. It was a lovely Christmas that year...sigh...

[Democrats_win]

118. No sympathy is ok, but neighbors' harassment makes them blood guilty

Mob rule can be a very dangerous thing. There is no doubt in my mind that those who participated in this mob action have blood on their hands. This man will/has answered for what he did. Now the neighbors' must answer for what they did.

[DoNotRefill]

127. Yes Sir....

make them answer for posting signs warning people of a very real danger!!!

[lynne]

200. Baloney -

- the neighbor's are not responsible for his suicide. HE is. He had options - if he didn't like the signs but couldn't take the heat he and his parents should have packed their bags and moved.

If you want to pass blame, put it on the mental health officials who let him out the day prior. Or the physician who said he was competent to be released.

Or the justice system for not committing a mentally unstable individual who liked to expose himself to children to an appropriate mental health facility.

Given the lapses of the justice system and medical profession, I can't say I blame the neighbor's at all for watching out for their own children.

[primavera]

163. No sympathy for wrongfully accused innocent persons?

Damn, I hope you don't find yourself on jury duty very often.

[IdaBriggs]

182. I've only been on jury duty once; we voted guilty.

Female drunk driver. She was pulled over half way in the middle of the road, slumped over the steering wheel with a beer in her hand when the policemen came up on her. (She didn't notice the lights or the sirens, by her own testimony, and admitted to having the half empty beer bottle in hand.) The mostly empty six pack next to her had obviously been consumed; when they asked her to step out of the car, she couldn't stand up straight. The police offered to have her call her husband to come get her, but she was too drunk to dial, so they did it for her. He wouldn't come get her, so they took her in. Her lawyer tried to convince us that she wasn't DRIVING drunk, because she was stopped (with her headlights on and the keys in the ignition). I've never had any regrets for the "no brainer" decision we made. :)

In the case of the original post, the information referenced is NOT an innocent person, but a guy who molested a 9 year old girl when he was twenty. Later posts are suggesting he might have simply exposed himself (which is different than molesting), but I stick by my original comments: Dead sexual predators are good sexual predators.

[LifeDuringWartime]

166. 33%??

have 1/3 of american women actually been sexually molested as children? that is one of the most shocking statistics i have ever seen.

i looked around on google a little bit but i didnt find that figure. do you have a link handy?

[IdaBriggs]

179. Yes, 33%.

It is a HORRIBLE statistic; I picked it up from several books I read due to its prevalence in my own family ("Courage to Heal" and "Secret Survivors" being the two that came to mind quickest). Just from the casual conversation I have had with other women in the years since, I think it may be an understatement.

I just did a quick search on Amazon, and here is a link for Page 1 of "Courage to Heal": http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0060950668/ref=sib_fs_bod/104-9803486-6761558?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S00Q&checkSum=p8JgG7ziYnpiIFj9GmQSzRo0TvZRzmCzMtu2%2BVINKnw%3D#reader-link -- which has the statistic as its opening line; yes, it is extremely upsetting.

[DoNotRefill]

243. From what I've seen, that figure is low.

[lateo]

196. Sex Offender != child molester...

Before you get your panties in a bunch...it should be made clear that there are ALL sorts of sex offenders...not just child molesters.

Educate yourself on the topic a bit before you jump to conclusions.

[IdaBriggs]

197. The original post is about a 20 year old man who molested a 9 year old.

Later clarifications from other sources imply that he may have only EXPOSED himself, but since he was convicted of MOLESTING (which involves touching), and its his mommy who says it was "only" exposing, I'm kind of taking her comments with a grain of salt. :)

[Occulus]

300. that would be one of the biggest problems I have with registries n/t

[MileHiStealth]

262. Those numbers seem grossly exagerated to me ......

If some action happens 90% of the time, doesn't
that make it "normal" and the 10% otherwise
abnormal?

[IdaBriggs]

317. In my family, unfortunately, you are correct.

Childhood sexual abuse is the norm in my family. I have seven brothers and sisters (one sister now dead), and I have included my in-laws, aunts, and female cousins in my total. Sadly, the number is accurate, hence my strong interest in the topic. The "worst" cases (for me) involved my then 12-year old sister attempting suicide (twice), and one of my aunt's who made suicide attempts nearly a family "joke" (sarcasm intended). As a barely relevant side note, one of the perpetrators was in a wheel chair; the family victim was coherced into "helping him take care of himself" while under ten years of age. The stories would make you cry; when my mother takes me to the family cemetary, I hear the stories about various relatives, and what they did to different people. One SOB liked little boys....

:cry:

[barb162]

143. If you had a young child, would you want to be advised there was

a convicted child sex offender in your neighborhood.

In other words do you have a solution for BOTH parents who want to protect their children AND the people who have served their time in prison.

I am thinking about the little girl in Florida....

[Rich Hunt]

158. there is a problem with that

Those registers give a false sense of security - they can't tell you who many predators are, since many of them are successful at fooling
the community.

Those lists are mostly lists of people who have not harmed children - they are more often than not people who have broken some other law.

People seem to think that everyone on those lists has been convicted of rape - that is not the case.

[Verve]

145. How do you know he didn't kill himself because he couldn't control his

urges?

Pedophiles DO NOT get over their urges. No treatment used today has been able to "cure" pedophiles.

[loyalsister]

199. Other problems

How many "Jim Smiths" Probably exist in this country?

It has been a terrible problem in my city for students to discover that their "name" pops up on the sex offender list in the area.
Since it they are in a transient situation, it's easy for them to move into a situation where their name matches a sex offender.

[DoNotRefill]

261. So what's your solution to child-fuckers?

pat them on the back and buy them 5 gallons of ice cream and a clown suit? Will you at least provide them with condoms too, for the safety of the child?

[XemaSab]

264. I think child molestation

SHOULD be stigmatized.

People who are sexually attracted to children are sick and should be locked up. The risks of recidivism are just too great.

[skylarmae]

3. it frustrates me that we don't seem to have more choices

than this to resolve these kinds of problems. It's a heartbreak and a waste all the way around.

[stevedeshazer]

4. I'm no fan of sex offenders, but

the vigilante aspect of this story is eerily similar to those stories about judges we've been hearing.

:scared:

[Orrex]

104. Agree, but...

Be careful! I can see the headline now:

DU Poster Likens Judges to Sex Offenders

[stevedeshazer]

119. AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!

:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:

[Princess Turandot]

5. To get this info in NYC..

you have to go to a special webpage, enter personal information, swear to 17 things, and then get the results for your entered zip code.You see the person, the address and what they were convicted of.

I think the sex offender registries are appropriate, but it kind of bizarre that a County Commissioner would be passing out flyers about someone.

[Occulus]

12. I think sex offender registries should be abolished

I live with one. My address is on the registry. I have a squeaky clean criminal record.

A fanatic whacko doesn't know me from him, from behind. The real intent of these laws is to push these people onto the fringes of society, where they will be forced by circumstance to commit another crime- of any kind- and be locked away for longer and longer- all because "they can't be cured".

Thanks to the people who think that, I could be a target. All because I live with one. If we lived in FloriDuh, I'd have to put a bumper sticker on the back of my brand new car because he drives it too.

I'm infuriated at these laws and their defenders. They put innocent people close to the offenders at risk.

Your kids AREN'T worth my safety. Period.

[bling bling]

21. Yes, it is unjust that your safety may be in jeapordy.

When you (hypothetically) commit a crime, your actions don't just affect you -- they affect the people close to you. All the more reason not to commit a crime such as sexual offense -- the price is heavy because the crime is heavy.

[tkmorris]

23. His bill was marked "paid in full"....

when he walked out of jail. Society has no right to treat people in this fashion. If this doesn't fall into the "cruel and unusual' punishment area nothing does.

[nonconformist]

31. No, actually it wasn't.

Part of his debt to society is being listed on the sex offender registry.

[tkmorris]

33. Nonsense

Such things have been added on after the fact in response to public hysteria. Why should it be that virtually all crimes result in a sentence of a given length but certain ones result in a sentence PLUS being branded for life?

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. Not true

These people know the consequences of their actions--they just don't think they will get caught. Most of those who molest children threaten their victims into silence. And those kids are scared to tell...a majority of those victimized by sex offenders don't tell.

Save your sympathy for the innocent victims who suffer life long consequences.

[Orrex]

108. Equal Protection Under The Law

One-time shoplifters should be put on a permanent "Shoplifter Registry"

One-time graffiti artists should be put on a permanent "Vandal Registry"

One-time speeders should be put on a permanent "Dangerous Driver Registry"

The guy who stole the post-it pad should be put on a permanent "Corporate Thief Registry"

The guy who once voted Republican should be put on a permanent "Dangerous Sociopath Registry"

Okay, I'll agree to that last one... :D

If the terms of the convicted sex offender's sentence include lifetime inclusion on a watch-list, then that's acceptible. But if the convicted offender is put on the list after and separate from sentencing, that that clearly violates the right to due process.

[mongo]

153. I like the idea of the shoplifter registry...

I'd make it easier for me to keep an eye on the store.

Seriously, being in a poor neighborhood where ex-cons are likely to live, I get these "sex offender" notifications in the mail from time to time.

The last one was for the crime of "sodomy", which isn't even illegal under Ohio law anymore. The only thing I can think of is that he was caught having consentual sex while in jail and punished under a penal code. If it wasn't consentual I'm sure he would be convicted of sexual assult.

[Evergreen Emerald]

239. actually it does not violate due process--been adjudicated

The only dangerous ones on your list to vulnerable citizens are the sex offenders and (republicans).

Due process is not an issue according to the courts.

[Orrex]

305. I didn't know that

But that's pretty lame of the courts, IMO. How is a lifelong sentence, imposed after sentencing, different from the tacking-on of, say, an additional $5 million fine after you've already paid your parking ticket?

Can you suggest where I might find some good background on such a ruling? I'd be interested to know more.

Thanks!

[Eloriel]

268. Surely you don't want to put yourself in the position of

supporting, defending and enabling child molesters, do you? It makes you look, um, a little suspect yourself to be quite so staunch in your defense.

Let me try once more to explain it to you: the problem is that there is no known cure for pedophilia and all pedophiles are serial pedophiles.

It's not about continuing the PUNISHMENT, it's about protecting our children who are pretty defenseless despite our best efforts. In the past few weeks we've seen children snatched out of their own homes, molested and murdered. Good God, the little Lunsford girl was BURIED ALIVE after having been assaulted.

You do NOT want yourself on the side of defending child molestors and pedophiles. I'm not saying don't talk about their rights (they DO have some) -- but just be careful how you do it, so you don't align yourself too much with their crimes, or treat them to dismissively.

Unless, of course, you don't care how you're perceived and how your position might be misconstrued.

[Orrex]

306. Is that an accusation or a threat?

It's dangerous to label some group as fundamentally unworthy of advocacy, no matter how abhorrent they are to society-at-large. I'm certainly not defending their crimes, which are horrible (and I've already indicated that I would be moved to extreme violence if someone I know were victimized in this fashion). Yes, the victims of these sick criminals have suffered dreadfully, and the surivors will likely continue to suffer because of the trauma inflicted upon them. No one is claiming otherwise.

However, it sickens me that you see fit to suggest that I am guilty of a monstrous crime simply because I do not embrace the "kill 'em all" mentality. I could as readily note that your unwillingness to discuss the matter rationally suggests that you harbor a latent like-mindedness, similar to the rabid condemnation of, say, gamblers when one is oneself a gambler. Your acrimony makes you seem suspect, as well.

We (all) would be better served by a rational discussion of the issue without descending into the morass of "who has suffered more," as if such things can be reliably quantified.

Those who commit crimes should be punished for them, just as those who are mentally ill should be treated for their illness. If such treatment is not possible, then the person should be housed in a facility away from contact with potential victims.

But branding someone with a scarlet "P" and releasing them to the mercy of vigilante justice is not the hallmark of a mature society and is in fact no different from "rendering" terror suspects to torture-friendly foreign countries. Additionally, as some have noted, these fine "registries" aren't limited to pathological pedophiles but instead are allowed to include anyone who doesn't toe the line of what equals acceptable sex.

So let's recap: pedophiles should be removed from society and treated as the mentally ill people that they are. Non-dangerous people should not be put on these "registries."

[DoNotRefill]

281. Ummm...being a convicted felon isn't a "brand"?

when was the last time you saw a job application that didn't ask if you'd been convicted of a felony?

[Burma Jones]

327. I agree with you

I also think that people that sexually abuse children should never be released.

[jukes]

48. that's ludicrous

it's been proven time after time that threat of punishment is NOT a deterrent to crime, now you want to hold the relatives hostage?

the legal system makes mistakes. period. it's often abused. it can't be trusted, especially to deprive life or administer lifetime punishment.

the registry might as well be replaced w/ a "deviant" tatoo on the convicted's forehead. and while we're at it, let's tatoo "junkie" on the forehead of any drug-offender. and if they're "incurable", why are they released at all?

victimizing children is horrid, yet we brand the sexual molester & return the battered child to the custody of their torturers: where's the justice in that? certainly, no concern for the VICTIM, just rage and a thirst for revenge...

we are being TRICKED into a mindset on these crimes because the word "sex" is attached. it's only a prelude to stoning women for aultery, another "sex" crime.

[TryingToWarnYou]

96. No, whats ludicrous is releasing known sex offenders BACK into public

and not expecting them to offend again. Each of the ones that has been in the news recently for kiddnapping and murdering was a previous sex offender. If justice had been served, they would still be in their cell and their victims would likely still be alive.

I think of the poor girl buried alive after being molested. Can you imagine the hell she went through before either suffocating or being crushed by the weight of the dirt piled in on her?

Yeah, we need to make sure that guys that can do that can live among us in peace...

In case you missed it, thats sarcasm.

[jukes]

115. knock, knock

do i have your attention yet?

the thrust of this discussion is NOT our agony over the fate of any SINGLE victim; it's about whether a kid mooning a rival team or a drunk pissing in an alley, or 2 people of the same gender smooching in public shd appear on the same lists as some1 who rapes women and buries them alive.

PLEASE, every1, put your emotional outrage on hold and consider this rationally. where will the lists stop? they've inflamed us w/ visions of child-molesters, padded the list w/ any1 they consider "Deviant", and get us to accept the concept of "lists".

lists are inherrantly a BAD thing.

[TryingToWarnYou]

171. Lists are bad? LOL.. ok.

the thrust of this discussion is NOT our agony over the fate of any SINGLE victim;

Youre right. Its about your complete lack of sympathy for them in favor of what *might* happen over what has already happend and will happen again.

it's about whether a kid mooning a rival team or a drunk pissing in an alley, or 2 people of the same gender smooching in public shd appear on the same lists as some1 who rapes women and buries them alive.

Sorry, Im very familiar with sex offenders in Texas, and there isnt one of them on there that matches the fantasy criteria you just outlined. Maybe you can provide some links to some that were made sex offenders for mooning or pissing in an alley. The same sex kissing being named a sex offender is simply not true. I beg of you to back up your claims or quit making them.

PLEASE, every1, put your emotional outrage on hold and consider this rationally. where will the lists stop? they've inflamed us w/ visions of child-molesters, padded the list w/ any1 they consider "Deviant", and get us to accept the concept of "lists".

lists are inherrantly a BAD thing.

The only people emotionally outraged seem to be those defending the offenders. And Im sorry, but anyone on a sex offender registry IS a deviant in my book until proven otherwise.

As for lists being bad, I suggest we remove you from a voter registration list so that you wont be subject to that nasty list anymore.

[Evergreen Emerald]

240. Me hold the relatives hostage? No--HE DID

...when he committed the crime. As someone said eariler--there are many more victims than the one molested. There are life long consequences for family on both sides. That is what the guy SHOULD have thought about before using a 9 year-old to get his rocks off.

[mahina]

26. Hey?

"Your kids AREN'T worth my safety. Period."
No wonder you get in some difficult conversations.

[NeoConsSuck]

27. His statement wasn't out of line..

I happen to agree with kgfnally 100%.

[mahina]

30. I have compassion for his situation and would love for ignorance and fear

and hate to be in our past as people. (And as Democrats folks...)But when you talk like that it is no wonder people get hot.
I would do anything to protect my kids and yours, baiting like that is futile. As is this conversation.
Over.

[mitchtv]

35. huh?

your children are worth more than my safety? That's why teachers call the cops for temper tantrums. They want nothing to do with the parents.

[IdaBriggs]

54. Oh, poor you! You choose to live with a sex offender, and its hard!

Remember the victim? Or is that too inconvenient? How is the victim doing these days? Are they out of the prison your housemate created? Feeling sorry for the people who enable predators is not something I am going to waste my time on.

[jukes]

62. judgemental horseshit!

please hold your personal attacks on DUers! attack the message if you like, but not the messenger. "poor you" is a personal attack!

again, their's an assumption of a heinous crime, just what the fundies want you to do.

MAYBE the partner in this case was intoxicated, and took an ill-advised leak in the mouth of an alley. that person cd then accurately be charged w/ exposing himself, &/or "public indecency", both "sex" crimes.

outrage at the plight of the victim is a bit sanctimonious if that's the true facts of this case, but otherwise level-headed liberals will rush to judgement if it's a "sex" crime

[IdaBriggs]

69. I am judgmental about sexual predators.

While there may be a few instances of registered offenders who couldn't find a public restroom, common sense and personal experience point toward the more serious side of the planet.

Please think this through -- rapists have families. Murderers have families. Drug dealers have families. (One of my siblings dealt illegal drugs, and one of my nieces is a heroin addict, so I know what I speak of.) By pretending that it doesn't matter, these people think its okay to commit heinous acts, especially if they don't get caught.

I don't think the criminal justice in our country is working when it comes to violent sex crimes, especially against children. If you are providing shelter to a human being who raped or otherwise molested a child, then I consider you (again, metaphorically speaking) part of the problem. My compassion, which is great, is reserved STRICTLY for the victim. Predators and their enablers get ZERO.

Personally, this attitude has cost me relationships. I am okay with the "sacrifice." For example, a man who grew up with my husband walked into the home of his best friend, and climbed into bed with the man's sleeping wife. They were not having an affair, and he had no reason to believe his advances would be welcome. She woke up with him touching her "inappropriately", freaked out, and through a combination of hysterics and talk, got him OFF OF HER AND OUT. My husband confronted him, he confirmed her story (yes, we did wonder), and we are no longer "friends" with a guy who tried to rape his best friend's wife. It was another two years before we decided to cut off the people who decided to stay friends with him, because they said he felt really bad about it. (He never apologized to the victim, by the way, and in fact told her that "she had ruined his life." There was no prosecution because it was her word against his, despite his confessing to both my husband, and hers.)

I will definitely apologize to anyone who I offend if someone has taken a leak in the alley, as you suggest, but if their sex crime involves anything unwelcome (meaning molestation or rape) against another human being, especially a child, then I heap my well deserved scorn on them.

You may read some of my other posts in this thread for some of my personal history with this topic. People pleading for sympathy for perpetrators of these crimes really gets me going!

[jukes]

77. i'd rather 10 murderers go free

then have 1 innocent man executed.

if you expect justice in life, you're sure to be disappointed.

there are other victim's out there, too. i was not sexually molested as a child. my mother was the product of the magdelene schools and detested men and was asexual by the time she began attacking me. beaten, tied up for 8 hours at a time w/o being allowed to go to the bathroom, fed chili pods and dish-soap by the cupfull, forced to read aloud until my voice failed, locked in closets....
it went on for YEARS. i have actual scars.

my mother is dead. i shed no tears when she died, but i don't hate her. & i don't want all woman suspected of spanking their children burnt at the stake.

as REASONABLE people we need to get rid of a SYSTEM that unreasoningly stigmatizes people in one grand lump. this system will noy stop child-abuse. it DOES destroy the lives of some innocent, and some mildly-guilty people, WITHOUT achieving any civilized end.

[IdaBriggs]

85. Not me. I would rather save the future victims of those 10 murderers.

Because if I let a murderer go free to kill again, then I am just as guilty of their deaths as he/she is. The idea of letting ten go is abhorrent to me, and strikes me as immensely irresponsible.

I'm sorry you were abused. It is good that you are able to work through the issues she gifted you with, but if I may suggest, the word "balance" comes to mind. It happened to you, and frankly, you are not "special" enough for you to be the only person who it happened to. (That isn't meant as an insult, and I hope it is clear what I am saying.) Learning to be vigilant about the warning signs others exhibit is part of the responsibility all decent adults face, while at the same time "double checking" that we aren't over reacting. That being said, I sincerely hope you don't self doubt yourself to the point of being an ineffectual advocate for the helpless amongst us.

I am a very reasonable person about most things. I am NOT forgiving about sexual abuse. I hope I am a strong advocate for the victims, but the perpetrators and their enablers will NEVER find me a friend.

:)

[jukes]

88. please don't patronize me!

i was confident enough to work undercover narcotics for two years, confident enough to complete a successful career of law enforcement, WITHOUT the need to act out my personal frustrations on other people.

i was confident enough to serve a tour in viet nam.

i was also confident enough to grow-up, become an adult, & not be ruled by my emotions for the remainder of my life.

rationality, rather than rancor.

[IdaBriggs]

99. I am referring to the confidence that you can honestly assess

a child abuse situation without either minimizing it (in order to cope with what happened to you as a child), or blowing it out of proportion. When I said "balance" I wasn't trying to be patronizing; I am being honest.

I have an interesting parallel to your situation. My father recently passed (March 9). We spent most of the last year of his life not getting along as I struggled to integrate the fact he was a loving but lousy father into my world view. (I am also a member of the physical abuse brigade.) Being the person I am, it took him mistreating someone else for me to finally get in touch with my own anger. You see, I am a "nice" person. I spent thirty years doing everything I could to "get along" with my family, and in asking for nothing, received exactly that. When I was finally hit upside the head with the reality brick of "its not me -- its him!" my fury, suppressed for thirty years, was terrifying in its intensity. My fantasy life became violent (I am not a violent person AT ALL), and I would sometimes find myself shaking with rage. It was extremely scary, as I personally struggled to reintegrate the emotions of anger and rage (which I had been ignoring and denying) into my life. The "bad feelings" lasted about a month or two before they began to ebb; occasional flare-ups occurred for a while longer, but things have settled down, and I was able to do the eulogy at his funeral with sincerity and grace.

However, I now try to remember that owning ALL of my emotions is important, and that they are there for a reason. Anger, hate and rage are not fun, but they are a part of our survival skills. Children from abusive homes are rarely allowed to express these feelings, so we have a tendency to "empower them" more than they need, and view them as terrifying / life threatening. They aren't. Being mad, angry or filled with hate does NOT mean we are going to commit the same acts (or worse) that the folks who abused us did. We have a right to have the full range of human emotions at our disposal. What we do with them is up to us.

[jukes]

112. you've replaced patronizing pseudo-sympathy

w/ condescending psycho-babble. i "own" my emotions; i also "OWN" a rational mind that doesn't allow itself to be triggered by emotional-labels.

[IdaBriggs]

114. Well, I guess we know where we both stand.

You don't like sex offender lists, you feel sorry for the folks who commit (or at the very least are accused of) the crimes, and you automatically minimize damage to the victims. I like sex offender lists, don't feel sorry for the folks who are on them, and automatically assume there is serious damage for the folks who are victims. Its been fun, but I think we are done now. My sympathy was sincere; it honestly seems like you need it. Good luck! :)

[jukes]

122. obviously you DON't know

my stance!! your paraphrase is most inaccurate, and an unsubtle attempt to "color in" my views.

i don't like lists. they've always been used by oppressors.

the "sex-offender" list includes persons found guilty of "morals" violations and lumps them in w/ truly dangerous people.

i've not minimized any damage to victim's but i HAVE attempted to balance out the MINDLESS sensationalism of victims to justify an inequitable and unjust system.

you, on the other hand, want people punished. you don't much care whom, as long as they are on a list and the punishment is very, very harsh.

your "sympathy" was a lie; i don't fit into your "favored victim" pool. why wd i "need" your sympathy? i'm a confident, well-adjusted middle-aged man with a successful career behind me and a rewarding retirement ahead of me. i rather think that someone consumed by HATE and spite wd be more deserving of sympathy. i'll try to squeeze some out for you, if i find time.

your attempt at a dismissal of me and my argument are a shallow arrempt to save face, since you've been unable to control the discusion w/ emotional manipulations.

i don't need your wishes for "good luck", thanks anyway. i'm afraid you need more than luck however...

you may leave, now.

[IdaBriggs]

185. My face is quite fine, thank you.

I do dismiss you, because I don't find your arguments credible. You don't seem to be educated on the topic of the plight of the victims, you don't seem to care about potential future victims, and your belief that "emotional manipulation" is being used against you is simply your own perception, which has nothing to do with my reality.

I don't like sexual predators. I am okay with them being dead. I hate them, and the consequences they leave behind. I consider myself emotionally healthy, and mentally stable.

As for sympathy, I can feel sorry for the pain you suffered as a child, without thinking it gives you some special privileges in life (favored victim?), just as you can apparently "dismiss" my life experiences. But until you've sat next to the bed of a twelve year old rape victim who has attempted suicide, and is on life support while everyone waits to see if the drugs she took kills her or leaves her with permanent damage, or better yet, put yourself in my shoes for a minute or two while going through that experience, or maybe dealt with folks waking up with nightmares while they re-experience the pain of being molested by people they trust, or any of the other experiences * I * have personally gone through which helped me to learn that not everyone is worth the oxygen they breathe, I can live with ignoring your opinion. My shoulders are broad, and folks who feel sorry for the perpetrators of the crimes I've mentioned aren't worth my time. :)

[jukes]

161. a proponent of the death penalty!!

i'm beginning to perceive the taint of damp earth and moldy fur. we realize, of course, that some burrowing creatures are almost blind!

[TryingToWarnYou]

92. Slow your roll...

again, their's an assumption of a heinous crime, just what the fundies want you to do.

Sorry, if they are on a sex offender registry, thats enough for me.

MAYBE the partner in this case was intoxicated, and took an ill-advised leak in the mouth of an alley. that person cd then accurately be charged w/ exposing himself, &/or "public indecency", both "sex" crimes.

Not entirely true. While some areas may consider it a "sex crime", its typically one that falls under disorderly conduct and is NOT subject to inclusion on a sex offender registry. There is *some* discretion involved at the court level..not everyone taking a leak in public is put on there. You are trying to oversimplify the issue when its actually a lot more complicated than that.

outrage at the plight of the victim is a bit sanctimonious if that's the true facts of this case, but otherwise level-headed liberals will rush to judgement if it's a "sex" crime

I think more people are outraged at the comments from someone crying about how they live with a sex offender and that they dont give a crap about the risk to the kids, that they are only concerned about how living with a registered sex offender might impact their life since thats far more important than the risk to innocent children.

[jukes]

109. again

you are not aware of the facts and are leaping to judgement. it's foolish to assume that someone on a sex-offender's list has ANYTHING to do w/ a victimized child, that's the problem w/ the lists. they include ANY "sex" offense. until such time as they ONLY list child-molesrer's , it's perilous to make assumptions. we have NO idea of what the poster's houswemate was accused, or if it involved a child.

the originator's of these lists had no intention of clarifying them; they want all "DEVIANTS" treated as child-molesters by society, and society blindly marches in lock-step w/them, even so-called "liberals." THAT'S the peril oif these emotional "call-to-arms".


and so WE do the fundies' dirtywork for them, as mindless as ANY mob!

[TryingToWarnYou]

172. May I call you "Kettle"?

you are not aware of the facts and are leaping to judgement. it's foolish to assume that someone on a sex-offender's list has ANYTHING to do w/ a victimized child, that's the problem w/ the lists. they include ANY "sex" offense.

Yeah, thats kind of the point. Put all SEX OFFENDERS on the same list. I dont care if they are a rapist, child molester, weenie wagger etc. The public has a right to know who they are and where they live. You are trying to narrow this down to just kids when in fact, sex offender registries cover all sex crimes, as they should.

until such time as they ONLY list child-molesrer's , it's perilous to make assumptions. we have NO idea of what the poster's houswemate was accused, or if it involved a child.

See above. The fact that he is on a sex offender registry is good enough for me. And take some of your own advice. You dont know that he didnt rape a child. You also have NO idea what he is accused of. How about we error on the side of caution? Naaa.. we can always use one more victim in the world that didnt need to be one.

the originator's of these lists had no intention of clarifying them; they want all "DEVIANTS" treated as child-molesters by society, and society blindly marches in lock-step w/them, even so-called "liberals." THAT'S the peril oif these emotional "call-to-arms".

Or maybe they were a victim of sexual abuse? Maybe they dont want a rapist (child or otherwise) living in their community? If you are criminally, sexually violating people then yes, YOU ARE A DEVIANT and need to be locked up.

and so WE do the fundies' dirtywork for them, as mindless as ANY mob!

Yeah, right. Maybe you need to go start a sex offender support group or something. Obviously, the issue of community safety being greater than the privacy of a sex offender is a bad thing to you.

[Eloriel]

283. Why don't we help him out with some facts?

Facts about Sex Offenders
http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/facts.htm

Here's something from that site that I didn't know:

If someone sexually assaults an adult, he will not target children as victims, and if someone sexually assaults a child, he will not target adults.

False. Research and anecdotal evidence indicate that while some sex offenders choose only one type of victim (e.g., prepubescent girls, post-pubescent boys, adult women, etc.), others prey on different types of victims. Therefore, no assumptions should be made about an offender's victim preference and precautions should be taken regardless of his crime of conviction.

Lots more very interesting info at this CA Megan's Law site.


Here's the FBI link to all the state's registries:
Sex Offender Registry for each state
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/states.htm

Poking around a bit here and there, this state and that, I don't see any pissing in the alley sex offenses listed. I did see "Sodomy" which sort of made me suspicious -- until I read in the Description: "Victim was an four year old female." Here's another guy, this one older than I am, which makes him 61 or so, convicted of "Rape 2nd" who "engaged in intercourse with a 12 year old female."

There were 9 people in my zip code -- one female. Most of the convictions were for sex crimes involving children, including the woman sex offender whose crime was statutory rape. She's currently 22. You can say what you want to about that, but we don't know the details. I don't know if she's another Mary Kay LaTourneau (sp?) or just someone who got caught up with a younger guy -- and should NOT have. But what I CAN tell you about my county is that I volunteered for a while as a Court-Appopinted Special Advocate (CASA) which works on behalf of children who have been taken from their homes for abuse or negligence and thus are involved in the juvenile court system, and what it takes to get a conviction for child sexual abuse -- damn near impossible! You can have ALL the classic symptoms and acting out and other indicators and it just doesn't matter, those kids will too easily be sent right back to their abusive homes in the absence of really hard proof -- and WE have a really good judge who actually cares a lot about the children (but also cares a lot about the law, which isn't always that helpful for protecting children).

Anyway, I think your enormous concern for the drunken sot who pees in the alley and thus is likely to get scarred and tarred for life is WAY overwrought, overstated, and just a tad bit hysterical, given the real facts and threats children face in this world.

[Orsino]

215. "If they are on a voter-fraud registry, that's enough for me." n/t

[DoNotRefill]

208. Or maybe he fucked a 9 year old little girl.

He pulled 27 months in prison. You don't get a 27 month sentence in a plea bargain for indecent exposure. (I'm talking about the guy who killed himself)

[Mondon]

308. If a poster brings up his/her personal situation

to support a point, it is legitimate to comment on the personal situation. The argument "this law hurts me because I live with a registered sex offender" invites the response "this law is necessary because your housemate hurt somebody badly and statistically is at risk to do so again."

[Occulus]

154. there wasn't a victim. he was set up by his stepson and ex-wife.

The "victim" testified he, the "offender", was asleep when the "offense" occurred.

He was convicted for something he did in his sleep. It should have been thown out of court, but it wasn't.

I have the kid's testimony on paper. He actually did testify to that.

[IdaBriggs]

189. I'm a cynic. I suggest your housemate appeal.

I know its expensive, but that is the value of a good reputation. Getting set-up by the ex-wife and his step-son sounds like a plausible thing, but frankly, I wouldn't take any chances. Yes, that is unfair, but if I were you, this man would NEVER be alone around any child that I cared about. Since I don't want to live that way, this man wouldn't be in my house. You are choosing to take his word on something that isn't even a discussion point in my life, so honestly, I don't feel sorry for you and the risk you run by having him in your home.

Here is the bottom line: Either he is INNOCENT of the charges, and EVIL PEOPLE accused him of something for the simple fact that they are EVIL, and the appeals process didn't exonerate him because everyone in the judicial system was crooked (or he ran out of money, and didn't think it really mattered), OR maybe something happened, and he doesn't want you to know about it (because you would most likely scorn him, like a sensible human being does).

Talk to the kid. Its possible there was some confusion in the testimony; I personally find it highly unlikely that "nothing" happened, and that your local judiciary system + local police department wasted all that taxpayer money prosecuting him for no good reason when they are usually overworked and understaffed as it is. Then again, as I said, I'm a cynic, so take what I say with a grain of salt. Maybe you have special "I know he's not lying to me" powers, so ....

[Occulus]

291. I don't need to talk to the kid; I have his testimony.

Either he, the kid, is guilty of perjury, or the judge did not do her job.

The statute has run out. He has no recourse.

There was no confusion whatever in his testimony; the lawyer questioning him made a point to be as clear as humanly possible about the fact that the "offender" was asleep at the time of the offense. Asked the question at least two different ways, too.

This was immediately after the MI sex offender registry had passed. There were four sex offense cases on the docket that day beside his; ALL ended in convictions.

They needed examples, and he was one of them.

on edit: I've lived with this guy for five years now, and I've never once seen even so much of a hint of anything between him and children except FEAR. On his part, not their.

He's bloody scared of all underage people now, and for very good reason. What I live with is an adult who fears and distrusts... children. He won't harm one, ever.

[IdaBriggs]

326. I hope you are right, but honestly,

(and please don't take this as an attack), in the "real world" I would have nothing to do with you or your housemate. You've read the testimony, and seem to believe your guy was made a victim of some politics. I live in Michigan, and as I've explained, my experience with Michigan law is that there has to be an unbelievably large amount of evidence before someone can be convicted. I bluntly will not take the chance that your guy is really an innocent victim of someone else's malice, especially because your guy has a vested interested in not being honest. I am also extremely familiar with people who choose not to believe "victims" because of a vested interest in their own personal relationships. You might be in that rare 2% of false allegations, but frankly, I'm not willing to take the chance. And if you someday find out your guy is lying to you (maybe because the victim eventually confronts you or blows up your house or sues you folks for everything you have once he turns eighteen), I hope you are courteous enough to apologize for being mistaken.

[lateo]

198. 5 letter word that starts with "T" and ends in "L"

Can you guess it?

[TryingToWarnYou]

87. Pardon us...

I live with one. My address is on the registry. I have a squeaky clean criminal record.

Thats YOUR problem. I suggest you move.

A fanatic whacko doesn't know me from him, from behind. The real intent of these laws is to push these people onto the fringes of society, where they will be forced by circumstance to commit another crime- of any kind- and be locked away for longer and longer- all because "they can't be cured".

The purpose of these laws are to inform the public of the risk that a sexual predator lives in their area. I refer you to the recent spate of child molestors that have recently graduated to murderer as a point of reference. I guess we arent supposed to hold these people accountable for their actions because they are "ill"? How exactly has society forced these people to commit other sexual offenses?

Thanks to the people who think that, I could be a target. All because I live with one. If we lived in FloriDuh, I'd have to put a bumper sticker on the back of my brand new car because he drives it too.

I doubt your safety is at risk. Its not your picture on a website. Consider relocation. Its too bad that you dont have to sticker your car. I wonder what your roomie does when he is out and about...

I'm infuriated at these laws and their defenders. They put innocent people close to the offenders at risk.

Wow..the irony of your statement is incredible.

Your kids AREN'T worth my safety. Period.

Im not a parent, but if I was, I would tell you to kiss my ass. Where the hell do you get off saying that? So a childs safety is not as important as your elective, voluntary living conditions? YOU ARE CHOOSING TO LIVE WITH A CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER. The children that are at risk dont have a say in where they live and why should everyone else have to upend their lives because your roomie has a problem? The hell with him and you.

[IdaBriggs]

116. Yeah! Three Cheers! Woo Hoo! Brilliantly Put! Yeah!!! nt

[Megahurtz]

177. Ew!

:puke:

You live with one and back him 100%???

Good one.

Well you certainly aren't worth my kids safety either.

[DoNotRefill]

206. The safety of my kid is worth your life...

if you do something to directly endanger my kid in violation of the law. It's called "self-defense" and "defense of others", and it is entirely within the scope of the law.

You made a CHOICE, to live with a registered sex offender. Your choices are to either suck it up and live with your decision or move.

If you choose to live on the San Andreas faultline or in a floodplain after being warned of the danger, why should we be concerned when you get hit with an earthquake or a flood? It's the same deal if you moved into a known and notorious crack house, and then get upset that the neighbors don't like you because you live in a crack house. YOUR DECISIONS put you there, and you need to accept RESPONSIBILTY for your actions.

[NashVegas]

228. I Don't, Necessarily

First, let me say I have the greatest sympathy for your situation. It sucks.

I don't have kids, and that's largely due to events surrounding and following the two dirty old men that were in my life between the ages of 6-9.

If parents could get comfortable talking to their children about sex, about boundaries and the concept of body-ownership, these registries would become less and less necessary. Just maybe the cycle could be interrupted.

I cannot help the suspicion that those whose children are most at risk - those who neglect their kids - are probably the least likely to check the registries, themselves.

But I have no problem with these dicks being pushed to the fringes. Between their actions, and society's reaction to childhood / teen sexuality, they've imprisoned a lot of kids.

[Eloriel]

267. Tell ya what, pal

Your kids AREN'T worth my safety. Period.

That's one of the most shockingly callous, self-absorbed and self-serving things I've eer seen on DU.

I have a clue for you. Speaking for society, yes our kids ARE worth your safety. I don't know what your sex offender partner did (and don't much care), but it is precisely BECAUSE our kids are worth protecting from predators that your involvement with said sex offender makes your life difficult as well.

[Mondon]

309. well said. eom

[bin.dare]

6. only for the purpose of clarification ...

... the article refers to "high profile arrests of sex offenders" and then immediately connects to a law for supervision of "some child sex offenders". I am sure Onsttott is a bad guy, but he was not convicted as a child sex offender:
"Onstott was convicted of sexual battery in 1995 for assaulting a female acquaintance in her home. He served six years in prison and two years on probation on that charge, a sheriff's spokesman said."
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/17/florida.girl/

[mongo]

150. shhh.... No one wants to know the truth here....

The just want to vent their rage, mostly because they were abused/assulted themselves and need an outlet to displace their anger.

Anyone ever put on a "list" by the government is a dangerous individual and no punishemnt is ever enough for their crime. :sarcasm:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. The trouble with these databases is that they don't distinguish

the annoying but harmless types (guys who expose themselves) from the dangerous ones (sadistic rapists).

[Eloriel]

286. Please go find some offenders who only exposed themselves -- link

Sex Offender Registry for each state
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/states.htm
Another list:
http://www.virtualgumshoe.com/gator146.htm

I certainly didn't look at ALL sex offenders in ALL the states, but these lists do NOT look like trivial lists at all.

Further, if you'll look upthread at my "facts" post -- there's a quote in there that there's no way of knowing whether someone who has been targeting adults will also target children and vice versa (so limiting sex offenders to children victimizers only doesn't work).

[Maestro]

8. I'm not sure how I feel

I detest anyone who would molest a child, but if he had served his time and was trying to go "straight," the signs and harrassment were uncalled for. A tragic situation all the way around.

[Occulus]

13. the signs and bumperstickers are FloriDuh law AFAIK n/t

[melnjones]

16. seriously?

i hope that afaik is some acronym that means you are joking, because I can't imagine being required by law to use a bumper sticker if you're a sex offender. Please correct me if i'm wrong, which i probably am.

[Art_from_Ark]

29. "AFAIK"= "As far as I know"

[Maestro]

34. Wow!

I can understand them registering so that people know where they are, but bumper stickers and signs as well? Their punishment never ends I guess even if they do correct their behavior. No wonder he committed suicide. I think I would too. They might as well just brand his forehead.

[bunkerbuster1]

50. This is the desired outcome.

This is the point. This is what our "justice system" hopes will happen.

(no, it is not what I want, I'm just facing facts.)

[jukes]

51. Maestro

we're not discussing those "who wd molest a child"m. sex offenders of ANY type are publicly registered, but their "crime" is not. the public is SO outraged, they always think that the register is one/same.

if a 20 year old "boy" is charged and convicted for statuary rape of a 16 YO "Minor", he appears on the register, and for ever after is associated w/ pedophelia. if two men are arrested and convicted because a homophobic cop is upset w/ their "lewd & lascivious behavior", they're sex-offenders for life, even if all they did was kiss/fondle each other in public; something hetero's get away w/ all the time. yet the public will see them as
"child molesters" because their names are on a sex-registry.


this is insane, it is NOT going to work toward protecting minors; it's a puritanical mob-hunt for revenge.

[CBHagman]

113. You bring up some excellent points.

I had heard of the cases where a teenaged boy, after reaching the age of 18, being forever tagged as a sex offender because he had sex with his teenaged (but underaged) girlfriend when they were both underage and then after he came of age. I think we can all agree that this was not what was intended by sex offender laws and registries. If an 18-year-old is involved with a 13-year-old, I'm against that, but I do not take such a view of two high school students whose relationship began when they were both underage.

From what I understand about the Clovis Claxton case, he did not actually touch the child but had exposed himself to her. At least that was the description I recall from Keith Olbermann's interview of a guest on Countdown. If the description of the case is accurate, then the label "CHILD RAPIST" is absolutely untrue. The guy should be supervised but not targeted for being run out of a town on a rail, and he should never have been driven to suicide. We're all hysterical in the wake of the most recent heinous crimes.

[Maestro]

125. Thanks.

I see. It is a bad way to do business, but logic is not one thing that governments, state, local or federal, are known for. There certainly needs to be a better explanation of what the lewd behavior was. And I agree it is a puritanical mob-hunt.

[Eloriel]

289. You're flat wrong -- these lists are NOT trivial -- or, put another way

I challenge you to go find evidence of trivial "sex offenses" on any of these sex offender lists:

Sex Offender Registry for each state
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/states.htm
Another list:
http://www.virtualgumshoe.com/gator146.htm

I've poked around a bit at the FBI list's and I don't see trivial.

I will also say (for the 3rd time) what I posted above in a post marked something about "facts" that there's no way of knowing whether or not someone who has been targeting adults will not target children and vice versa, so limiting it to just "child molestors" or pedophiles isn't good enough to protect children.

Let's all please also remember a couple of key facts:

* THERE IS NO CURE FOR PEDOPHILIA.

* All child molesters are serial child molestors, just as all rapists are serial rapists, AND

* Most child molesters (and rapists) are rarely caught, fewer still are tried, and fewer still convicted. So for the most part, if you get actual convictions, you've really got something.

Do innocent people get convicted? Not often. Not often ANYwhere in our justice system (tho it does, of course, happen), but no more often with sex offenses and possibly even considerably less often.

* False reports of child molestation (and rape) are no more frequent than false reports for other crimes -- less than 2%. (That's always the first "defense" by male-sympathasizers: she's making it up!! It's also the first defense against children's claims as well. They almost never do -- so rarely that IMO it's not worth considering UNLESS you get info that is suspect and points to the possibility.)

[TryingToWarnYou]

95. The signs and whatnot are for protection of potential victims and warnings

to the public that a known sex offender lives in the area. Im sorry if you feel that Mr. Sex Offender has it too tough, but the needs of the victims outweigh his needs every time.

[jukes]

137. if that were true

we wdnt have a "bill of rights".


all too often the "offender" is a victim. we just all get outraged and forget that when the colorful label "sex" precedes the word "offender".

[TryingToWarnYou]

284. Im sorry, can you explain yourself?

How is the offender a victim? (Im not talking about their past..Im asking how they are a victim when they are offending)

When someone, victim or not, commits a criminal act against another, they cease being a victim and become the offender. We constantly whine about the lack of personal responsibility with neocons, well, heres a great opportunity for some of these offenders to exercise some.

[mongo]

155. The last sexual offender notice I recieved in the mail

was for the crime of sodomy. Does the whole neighborhood need to know about him?

Sodomy isn't even illegal under Ohio law. He must have been convicted under a penal code (for a crime committed in jail), or military code.

In any case, if the sex wasn't consentual, I'm sure he'd been charged with a more serious offense.

[TryingToWarnYou]

285. I would have to see the Ohio penal code.

Lets just say for shits and grins that he sodomized a woman, child etc. In Ohio, it may be a higher offense than say, rape. Typically, they will charge the person with the highest offense in case the charge is reduced, it has somewhere to go other than a dismissal.

And yes, if Sodomy is a penal code offense and he forcibly sodomized someone, then YEAH I would say that your neighborhood needs to know about him unless of course you dont think warning people about a risk to the community is important.

What is with people defending these guys here????????????

[mongo]

315. Sodomy is not illegal under ohio code

so he must have committed the offense in jail or the military. And if he had non-consensual sex with someone, he would have been charged with a more serious crime, such as rape, sexual battery, or at least gross sexual imposition.

What is with people defending these guys here????????????

If by these guys you mean child predators, then NO I'm not defending them. But the original story in this post is about a mentally and physically handicapped individual who has the developmental age of a 12yo. And I'm merely pointing out that these lists go far beyond identifying dangerous sexual offenders.

[Occulus]

292. I'm more concerned about the INNOCENT people living with them, actually.

I have committed NO crime, but MY address is on the registry.

Explain to me why that is right.

[DoNotRefill]

313. Ummm...because you live with a sex offender?

You made a choice of where to live, and who to live with. Now you have to accept the consequences for your decisions.

[Megahurtz]

330. Uh..Duh....Uhh...

:dunce: Because maybe the sex offender's address is YOUR ADDRESS because YOU LIVE WITH HIM! Hello!!!:hi:

HOLY SHIT!!!:banghead:

[democraticrevolution]

9. There is something wrong....

While he was a registered sex offender. I'm not sure if he was a child rapist however. If he was then I feel that he should have not been allowed back into the public unless under house arrest, since pedophiles cannot be cured.

I'll also say that making signs to go after him does not serve any purpose and the public who did that, should know that this was not the right way to approach this.

[melnjones]

17. I'd have to disagree...

"If he was then I feel that he should have not been allowed back into the public unless under house arrest, since pedophiles cannot be cured."

Yes, I'm well aware of the research that says pedophiles can't be cured. However, even given this knowledge, are you suggesting that they be imprisoned permanently? I think that would actually discourage people from reporting child abuse. Who wants to see their own family members permanently incarcerated?

[jukes]

65. WHAT IF

your "pedophile" was ACCUSED of child-molestation by a vindictive spouse in a custody case. happens all the time. "evidence" cd be "recovered memory" by the child, and people were convicted on this sort of evidence in the 80s & 90s, before it was understood that most "recovered memory" is actually projection from the therapist.

wd that pedophile be incurable? shd he spend the rest of his life in an institution? shd he be hounded and ahrassed by his neighbors for the rest of his life?

[Megahurtz]

186. BULLSHIT!!!

I am always suspicious of people who vehemently defend sex offenders.

TRAUMATIC AMNESIA is described in the DSM-IIIR as psychogenic amnesia and has been known to mental health professionals for over 100 years.

Click on this link and scroll down to MEMORY REPRESSION:

http://home.mchsi.com/~ftio/ra-stats.htm

It was not "understood" during the 80's and 90's that most recovered memory was actual projection from a therapist.

So what's your vested interest in this this???

Why do you so vehemently defend sex offenders???

[Eloriel]

290. Thank you, MEgahurz -- and NO! False Accusations don't happen

all the time -- as I posted above, slightly under 2% of ALL allegations are false. IMO, That is not often enough to consider a set of allegations as spurious UNLESS some of the information begins to point in that direction.

I totally agree with MegaHurz: Why do you so vehemently defend sex offenders???

You're in the process of fingering yourself -- or if that's not what you want, you might consider backing off the pro-offender defense in favor of being more reasonable and more protective of the children.

[mongo]

316. Nice witch hunt you have going here

So now, if someone asserts that a physically and mentally handicapped person with an effective age of a 12yo shouldn't be on a dangerous sexual offender list, or that these lists go too much farther than just identifying dangerous sexual offenders, then you're a child molestor too?

[Zynx]

10. He molested a nine year old girl - no sympathy.

[surrey405]

18. have some sense...

if someone commits a crime...we punish them accordingly...when lawfully they are free...we should have no fear of them...just look at how many people registered do it again...it is so much in the news that we think its is too much...but in reality it is probably a small percentage...its the law...i feel sorry for that guy...maybe he did not wish to commit such a crime again...but people made him commit another crime to himself...suicide...people who speak like you

[bling bling]

20. Nobody made him kill himself.

He was put in an embarrassing situation by another citizen. He could have called the police and had the sign removed. Time would have gone by, the humiliation would have passed.

Maybe people shouldn't molest children, and then one day when they're out of jail they won't have to worry about embarrasing signs in their neighborhood.

[soup]

44. He did call. He called the sheriff's office.

They had him committed.

>>After seeing the signs, Claxton, 38, told the sheriff's office that he felt "extremely scared and feels that people in the neighborhood are now out to possibly hurt him."

When he threatened suicide, he was involuntarily committed to the mental health hospital Tuesday and released the next day.<<

[Mad_Dem_X]

53. "Maybe people shouldn't molest children" - EXACTLY

I can't believe what I'm reading on this thread. The majority seem to be more sympathetic to the sex offender than his victim(s).
:wtf:

[jukes]

68. NO

we're discussing a FALLIBLE system that has been manipulated into lumping numerous crimes into an emotionally-charged category so that we can be triggered into ostracising all persons so=labelled.

NOBODY here has defended ANY child-molester. some of us just want an humane and empiric view of the affects of this mass-labeling.

and now WE'VE been labelled as protecting child-molesters JUST BECAUSE we want you to pause & think.

[jukes]

57. bling bling

NOT a child molester. you underscore my point: we're being whipt up into lynch-mob frenzy.

nobody made him kill himself; he was just tortured by the FALSE outrage of people that wd brand him until he cdnt endure their inhumanity.

"sexual battery" is a catchall term that cd be no more malicious as getting drunk and grabbing some girl's tit. DEF inappropriate, but because he was on a register you AUTOMATICALLY assume he was a pedophile and heap scorn on him here. what treatment wd you mete out if you were his neighbor?

wd you badger him until he chose suicide over despair?

[DoNotRefill]

124. So, do you see grabbing a 9 year olds "tit" as being...

REMOTELY appropriate behavior?

If he had been registered incorrectly, there'd have been a LOT more sympathy for him. But that's not the case. The case is that he sexually assaulted a 9 year old girl, and took a plea-bargain to the lesser charge of child molestation. That involves ADMITTING what he did. His parents are still in denial. You do NOT get charged with even the lesser charge of child molestation for simply exposing yourself. There MUST be inappropriate physical contact.

[jukes]

138. absolutely not

& please don't fill my mouth for me!

there can, though, be extenuating circumstances. like "braindamage."

in this case nobody's tits were grabbed. a penis was displayed. and before you "rush to judgement", let me disarm your swift logic by stating that i consider that to be a VERY bad thing. but i ALSO think that putting a braindamaged manchild's name on some amorphous and ill-defined list so that he can be the victim of vigilante hounding spurred by an UNRELATED incident across the continent by vindictive neighbors until he's driven to suicide to be a VERY BAD THING,

now, if you can find yourself enough fodder to build a strawman in that statement, en garde!

[DoNotRefill]

176. People don't accept a 27 month sentence (which is what he served)....

for displaying a penis.

[jukes]

140. BTW

i am not aware of the legal elements of the crime of "child molestation" in the state of Washington.

in several states, exposing oneself to a child IS an element of the legal charge, "child molestation". because exposing yourself to a child is a VERY BAD THING.

unless you happen to be a lawyer, recognized by the bar of WA, and have read the particular transcript in question, you're just making assumptions.

and if you think this cripple deserved to be persecuted into suicide based on the facts disclosed in the article, in my humble opinion, you're the one in denial.

[DoNotRefill]

178. Here it is:

"RCW 9A.44.083
Child molestation in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of child molestation in the first degree when the person has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with another who is less than twelve years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least thirty-six months older than the victim."

See the "sexual contact" in the Code? That's NOT exposing yourself. That's touching. And it's not touching as in "he put his hand on her shoulder". That's the "Bad Touch". Just exposing yourself to a child under 12 would NOT satisfy the criminal requirements of this statute. A statute, I might add, that he pled guilty to as part of a plea agreement.

You say he was persecuted into committing suicide. Well, I hate to tell you this, but felony convictions are a matter of public record. All that happened to him was that his public criminal record was disseminated, which is quite legal. HE decided to commit suicide. His death can be laid exclusively at his feet, and nobody else's, unless you are contending that somebody force-fed him those pills..

[LisaL]

32. No, it's not a small percentage. Recidivism rate is very high

in rapists/pedophiles. We should have no fear of them just because they spend a few years in prison? LOL. They haven't change just because they spend a few years in prison.
:eyes:

[Evergreen Emerald]

40. seriously?

"Have some sense?" It is rare that a sex offender is caught after their first offense. Sex offenses are not like theives or purse snatchers. You suggest that once they leave prison "we should have no fear of them." You suggest sticking our collective heads in the sand and ignoring the reality of the drive of sex offenders. You suggest that we put our children at risk.

The sex offenders are not lawfully free once they leave prison. They are monitored (probation). And they must register. Small consequence for the protection of our children. In weighing the inconvience / shame that the sex offenders suffer versus protecting women and children--I think it is a balancing act. I tilt in favor of the victims.

[Zynx]

41. "when lawfully they are free...we should have no fear of them"?! WHAT?!

Are you serious?!

[IdaBriggs]

55. I'm 100% with you. nt

[siliconefreak]

14. this is what hatred will do

Unfortunately, I think the majority of people - even on this board - would be happy to hear that the guy is dead. That fact saddens and infuriates me, but I believe it's true.

I can't understand what drives people to be so hateful.

[surrey405]

19. let me see if i can answer that...

for you...we hate others because we envy them...what we are...they are not...what they are...we are not...envy is still in all of us...we hate because we envy...human society as one cannot exist...many problems arise...united as one...bunch of bull...i am not sure how to explain this more...but maybe someday i will be able to.

[Mondon]

310. I don't think the hate for pedophiles is driven by envy.

[Evergreen Emerald]

36. Do you have children?

I do understand.

[IdaBriggs]

60. I'm happy this guy is dead.

Let me explain how I learned to be HATEFUL:

I sat at the bedside of a twelve year old who had attempted suicide because of being raped. She was later institutionalized for three months BECAUSE SHE WAS RAPED.

I talked with a four year old who was a flower girl in a siblings wedding who had a gun put in her mouth after she was molested as the "family friend" who did it to her threatened her into keeping "their" little secret about the multiple molestations.

I learned about a dear friends problems with grandpa's raping her because she was CUTTING herself; the scars were a visible reminder of the problems she was having coping with the guy she had to keep being "nice" to -- even though she later found out she was neither the first (her mother and aunts shared that honor), or the only one in her generation. Wasn't she special?

Do I need to go on? Statistically, one out of three women have been molested as children; for men, its one out of seven. Why don't you go have a chat with some of your friends, and find out how their stories? I think you might be in for an education.

[Toucano]

70. There was no rape in this case.

Would you so happily put to death a twelve year old who exposed himself to a nine year old?

That's essentially what happened here.

If the facts were different, I'd be more inclined to agree with you.

[IdaBriggs]

80. The original post is about a 20 year old man who molested a 9 year old.

From the story: "Claxton was convicted in Washington state in 1991 of molesting a 9-year-old girl. He was 20 at the time, but his mother said he was developmentally much younger due to a brain injury."

I don't care what his mental development was -- a 20 year old man molested a 9 year old girl. Trust me when I say its a miracle he was convicted.

I also get the difference between a twelve year old exposing himself to a nine year old (if that is all that happened), and a 20 year old molesting a 9 year old. I'm not sure where that story came from, though, and if someone was feeding it to me, I'd definitely double check their veracity.

[Toucano]

93. The original post isn't the whole story

It seldom is, right?

http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/LOCAL/204220346/1078/news&template=printart

"His parents have been his caregivers his entire life. And when they couldn't be there with him, they hired a baby-sitter. He exposed himself to the baby-sitter's daughter. At age 20, his mother said her son was at the mental age of 12."

You don't care what his developmental state was? Are you also in favor of executing the mentally retarded?

I think your reaction to this story is a little misplaced, and that's understandable because you're dragging in unrelated experiences to which your reaction is totally reasonable.

But to argue that tragedy compounding tragedy is a good thing is surprising at least. The human being who killed himself was not a sexual predator.

[Mondon]

325. Any source confirm the parents' account?

They aren't exactly unbiased...

[IdaBriggs]

329. We disagree. The definition provided elsewhere in this thread

of the law (as well as information about plea bargaining in Washington, etc.) tells me that some form of physical molestation took place, as opposed to a quick "flash". The human being who killed himself did behave in a predatory fashion against a nine year old; whether that was because he was unable to behave appropriately while having normal sexual urges and the physical capacity of a grown man or just because he was a standard garden variety pervert is not something I really care about. Also, he was judged capable of being in a normal prison population (as opposed to a mental health facility), so I am definitely inclined to believe Mommy may not be a completely honest human being.

I will completely concede that this is a topic that I choose to be "not nice" about. In fact, I am downright passionate about my support for victims of sexual abuse, and completely non-supportive and unsympathetic to those who perpetrate and/or enable. That still leaves me okay with his self-inflicted death.

[soup]

97. The article referred to comes from the Gainesville Sun.

Here's a link to the article, if you care to read it:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/LOCAL/204220346/1078/today

MSNBC ran an article, too - and for some reason, the 'related' articles point to those on the deaths of the two girls in Florida. Who's doing the feeding there?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7590901/

[jukes]

71. you've learned to hate...

can you learn NOT to?

this guy did NOT torture this 12 YO. his name was on a register. so you personalize it and hate him? i don't see that as particularly liberal; what i percieve is someone acting out their own frustration; in essence, making a victim of THIS man because of self-induced prejudice.

[IdaBriggs]

76. You act as if HATE is a bad thing.

Its not. Hating injustice and those who perpetrate crimes against innocents is a GOOD thing. I believe the correct term is "righteous wrath." (If you read the Bible, Jesus had a good dose of it himself when he went to the temple, so, I consider myself in good company.)

The man in the original post was a sex offender who had molested a nine year old when he was twenty. No one publicly knows if he has done anything in the years since, but we do know that he SEVERELY DAMAGED a NINE YEAR OLD GIRL with life long consequences for both her and a lot of other people, from her immediate family to her future one. In your world, hating that might not be a good thing. In my world, it is.

I share my personal experiences (and if you read through this thread, you will discover I am much better educated on this topic than I want to be), to show that I have a clue, and am not talking out of my ass because I am very much aware of the consequences of the actions of these predators. What you call "self-induced prejudice" I call "educated and knowledgeable."

"Liberal" does not mean playing kissy face with criminals. I am thrilled this guy is dead, even though I am sorry his family is in pain. I think the world is better off without him. And, yes, I am aware of the difference between the actions of children doing normal children things, and twenty year old men raping nine year olds.

[jukes]

i'd rather 10 murderers go free

then have 1 innocent man executed.

if you expect justice in life, you're sure to be disappointed.

there are other victim's out there, too. i was not sexually moilested as a child. my mother was the product of the magdelene schools and detested men and was asexual by the time she began attacking me. beaten, tied up for 8 hours at a time w/o being allowed to go to the bathroom, fed chili pods and dish-soap by the cupfull, forced to read aloud until my voice failed, locked in closets....
it went on for YEARS. i have actual scars.

my mother is dead. i shed no tears when she died, but i don't hate her. & i don't want all woman suspected of spanking their children burnt at the stake.

as REASONABLE people we need to get rid of a SYSTEM that unreasoningly stigmatizes people in one grand lump. this system will noy stop child-abuse. it DOES destroy the lives of some innocent, and some mildly-guilty people, WITHOUT achieving any civilized end.

i AM a liberal, and a retired cop. believe this, i did NOT play kissy-face w/ any criminals in my 20 years of law enforcement. i've got some scars from those years, too.

hate IS a bad thing if it makes us act-out emotionally rather than judge rationally.

YOU DON"T KNOW that a 9 YO girl was damaged for life, but you enjoy assuming it. you know what he was charged w/, what he was convicted of, but have no other FACTUAL knowledge of this case. but you're GLAD he's dead. maybe he just showed her his wee-wee. ugly, distateful, but hardly "damaging for life". and, you have no idea of his mental condition at the time, other than reported "brain-damage"l or wether it was correctable. still, you're THRILLED he's dead. i just bet you are!

i'm afraid this is always going to be more about you, than about the specific crime. sorry, IB, but you'll never get the satisfaction you crave.

[IdaBriggs]

91. A dead sexual predator is a good sexual predator.

Yes, I do know that a 9 year old girl was damaged for life because he was convicted of MOLESTING her. If you aren't aware of the damage that does, I suggest you start reading about it. (It also means he didn't just show her his wee-wee, which is a usually referred to as "exposing himself" as opposed to "molested.")

I repeat -- I don't care about his mental condition. If he wasn't safe around other people -- and sexually molesting small children is kind of a clue -- then he shouldn't have been around them. If he wasn't responsible for himself, then who was? Find that person, and let's punish them instead, okay?

You are incorrect; I have a lot of satisfaction from the original post. I hope more people use this technique, and more predators, faced with the consequences of their actions, stop wasting air and kill themselves. Yeah! Yippee! A few crocodile tears from the sad, yet relieved family, and more innocent people can live happy lives, while their victims don't have to live in terror of reliving their experiences when they run across the perpetrator at the corner market.

Its funny how you assume it was nothing bad, and I assume it was life altering. I've given the statistics of my personal family experience, have read / studied the topic of childhood sexual abuse extensively, and volunteered as a counselor on a suicide prevention hotline for three and a half years, so, I am confident that I have what can best be described as an "educated and informed" opinion. If you want to pretend I have some hidden agenda, let me hasten to reassure you that I don't -- my agenda is very much out in the open, and I will repeat it again: Sexual predators and their enablers are NOT my friends; I support the survivors instead. Unfortunately, the two are mutually exclusive.

[Toucano]

100. Please define "sexual predator" n/t

[IdaBriggs]

195. This thread is getting so long, I missed your post!

Sorry about that!

I think I will stick to the easy way of defining sexual predator -- the one used by the court systems. There are some pretty obvious things one can say without referencing the legal code -- like anyone over eighteen sexually involved with anyone fifteen or under being a problem (with the clear understanding that I "get" the gray area of 16 and 17, and/or the "let me lie about my age" crowd), and also things like anyone who uses force or the threat of physical force to sexual rape and/or molest someone being a sexual predator, but its harder to identify the sleezebags who like to expose themselves to other people. What do you do with those folks? They seem harmless, but annoying. (On a personal note, I worked at a fast food restaurant in my teen years, and we had a guy go through the drive thru asking for napkins. It seemed a tad odd, but whatever; when I turned around to hand him the napkins, it turned out he needed them because he was jacking himself off, and wanted me to see him doing it. I chose to play blind, handed him the napkins, and stepped away to have a laughing fit. I guess my "lack of a reaction" emboldened him, because he came back through, and knocked on the window again -- perhaps needing more? I sent the (male) manager to the window, and the guy quickly took off. I wasn't traumatized, but I didn't enjoy being pulled into his sex life. What do you do with an idiot like that?)

Experts say that rape isn't about sex; its about power over other people. That's pretty messed up, but realistically, there are folks who enjoy bondage, S&M, etc., and as long as they play their games with consenting adults, I don't want to hear about it. Its when folks start doing it with either children or non-consenting adults that my blood starts to boil. Physical assault is bad; sexually based crimes are THE WORST and those who perpetrate them aren't people I want breathing anywhere near me or mine. I'm a mean, mean person -- and I'm okay with that! :)

[jukes]

103. i pretend nothing

and agree that your agenda is crystal-clear and not at all hidden. it is an agenda, non-the-less. no less than any witch-hunt. and as deadly as a klan-lynching.

so, as a volunteer on that suicide hotline, wd your "thrill" at his demise have induced you to counsel his suicide? it's clear that your emotional involvement & fixation wd have prevented you properly performing your duties in this case; at least to the extent of sounding terribly insincere as you counseled him to hold onto life, if not so far as to increase the vilification and hounding that led to his death. and cd you have contolled your self-aggrandizing & proudly proclaimed "hate"?


i have visions of the peasants' pitchforks, and i weep for the deluded doctor's sad creation! monster he is, but haples victim as well!

[IdaBriggs]

117. I volunteered in my early twenties; it was years before I learned --

that we are all better off with some people dead. If he had called saying "I molested a nine year old and want to kill myself with shame," I would have had to hand him off to another counselor, because my personal integrity would have been in conflict with the requirements of the position of trust that I was in. That is one of the nice things about being a volunteer -- once you know your limits, you can stick to them, where as a paid professional would have been required by her professional ethics to help keep the sicko in the world. :)

I also think its funny that you put sexual predators in a special class of their own. I don't care what color they are (in reference to your klan-lynching comment); if you are a sexual predator, I'm okay with you not breathing the same air as the rest of us.

Juke, as eloquent as you want to be, there is NOTHING you can say that will convince me that the folks who commit these heinous acts are as worthy of my sympathy and support as the victims. Call it the conservation of outrage: there is only so much energy available for helping my fellow humans, and I choose to use it on those who try to BUILD their community as opposed to destroying their fellow inhabitants.

[jukes]

131. not trying to convince you

anymore than i'd try to convince a bigot that racial-prejudice is inhumane. some people CAN't be cured, right?

your arguments make a VERY colorful backdrop for a discussion of rationality and may well have steered some thoughtful people into a real consideration of the injustice inherant in this system of lists.

all juries shd see the horror of mobjustice before they deliberate.

[Mondon]

311. Comparing pedophiles to racial minorities isn't a very good argument. eom

[jukes]

160. thank yahweh, IdaBriggs

you're no longer presuming to "counsel" people. i shudder at the damage you've possibly done.

it is not at all reassuring that you've learned "that we are all better off with some people dead." although there's certainly SOME minimal truth in that statement, i really don't want you to be in charge of who lives and who dies.

Re: my "klan" comment. bigotry is bigotry; it's sophomoric to equate that necessarily w/ skin pigmentation. you apparently believe that any1 whose name appears on a certain list shd die. clearly you are "prejudging" the validity of these human lives based solely on your skewed value system, which leaves no room for error or degree. that will work as "bigoted" for me.

my allusion was to the absoluteness of your vision, comparing it, not to bigotry, but to the dealiness of a lynching by a group whose affectiveness in dealing death is well evidenced by the extant photographs of their handiwork. not at all a contrived or conceited allusion, but a bit too subtle for you apparently.

[jukes]

129. and a dead "injun" is a good "Injun"?

let's give ANYONE accused of a morals violation a blanket laden w/smallpox! we can put them on reservations if caught viewing pornagraphy in a puritan zone!

or maybe pay a bounty for their scalps.

[Mondon]

312. neither is comparing them to native americans. eom

[mongo]

164. You are so wrong.

From the article:

They said their son was convicted in Washington in 1991. Claxton was 20 when he alledgedly molested a 9-year-old girl. "It was more of a 'you show me and I'll show you,' " Jane Claxton said.

She said her son had become developmentally disabled after he was diagnosed with encephalitis and meningitis. He had a serious brain injury and permanent nerve damage that created problems with his bladder, kidneys and legs.

http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/LOCAL/204220346/1078/today

Washington revised code:

RCW 9A.44.083
Child molestation in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of child molestation in the first degree when the person has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with another who is less than twelve years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least thirty-six months older than the victim.

(2) Child molestation in the first degree is a class A felony.

RCW 9A.44.010
Definitions.

As used in this chapter:

(2) "Sexual contact" means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person done for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of either party or a third party.

So, this could be as innocent as playing Dr. - since the 20yo is developmentally damaged -and has the EFEECTIVE AGE OF A 12yo.

I want to keep child predators off the streets as much as you do, but these lists go far beyond that. The last "sexual offender" notification I recieved in the mail was for the crime of sodomy. Should we go burn a cross in his yard too?

Your misplaced anger clouds your views.

[IdaBriggs]

188. I base my comments on the original post which is about a PREDATOR.

Twenty year old men playing "you show me yours and I'll show you mine" with 9 year old children isn't good, and the definition of "molested" involves touching (not "exposing").

My anger towards sexual predators is NOT misplaced; you don't have to like it, but thats the way it is. I'm okay with him being dead, and there isn't much you can say that is going to convince me that the world isn't better off with this guy out of it. Now, if you find me the victim (and not the perpetrator's mommy) who will testify that it wasn't that big of a deal, and she thought it was fun, and it really hasn't affected her life at all, then maybe I'll reconsider my position. Until then, I'm going to make some common sense assumptions:

Adults molesting children ARE BAD.

Pedophiles ARE BAD.

One time is too many, and Dead Predators are best for everyone.

I'm mean, and harsh, and nasty about this topic. If you read any of my other posts, maybe you'll understand why. My sympathy is 100% reserved for the victims of these perverts, and I am not silly enough to mistake this as anything other than A CRIME despite the one hundred and one excuses brigade. :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

245. Another important part of the article

"Claxton's parents said their son was no threat. For several years, he had been using special leg braces. Lately, he was using a wheelchair."

[IdaBriggs]

331. Unfortunately, that does not mean he wasn't a threat.

The parents perception of his ability to damage others is frankly beyond words suspect; one of the members of my family who is in the ranks of the sexually abused had her perpetrator convince her to "help him take care of himself" while he was in a wheelchair and she was under ten. The mistaken belief that he was "helpless" was part of what enabled him to gain access to the child; he was also involved in a sexual relationship with the child's mother, so....:(

[Eloriel]

295. 12 years old is way old for "playing doctor," so already you've

got a problem with your defense of this guy even at his "adjusted" age. Actually, 9 years is a little old for it too.

[Eloriel]

294. If she was molested, she WAS damaged for life

It doesn't give me a lot of confidence in our law enforcement agencies to learn that a policeman with 20 years experience doesn't "get it" and in fact has no CLUE about child sexual abuse/molestation.

[Eloriel]

293. No, -- unfair, untrue

ONE person has expressed no unhappiness that they guy is dead. Most of the rest of us have been neutral on the subject in our posts. As for me, I'm very sad for him, which goes back all the way to when HE was a child and was sexually molested (I'm 99.9999% sure of), but I stand on the side of protecting the children so we can STOP THE CYCLE OF ABUSE.

Pedophiles and child molesters are made not born.

We have to STOP the cycle of abuse.

[OneBlueSky]

22. the leap from "controlling" sex offenders to similarly controlling . . .

all "sexual deviants" (i.e. all gays and lesbians) is a short one indeed . . .

as is the subsequent leap to controlling ALL "deviants" -- sexual, religious, AND political . . .

think about it . . .

[DoNotRefill]

120. There's more than a little difference...

between punishing people who engage in consentual sexual acts with adult partners, and punishing people who fuck children under ten years old. One is acceptable behavior, and one isn't.

This guy took a plea bargain for child molestation. That means either that the charges were reduced, or there was a sentencing deal in place.

[OneBlueSky]

151. and not all sex abuse charges are what they seem to be . . .

so painting all "abusers" with the same brush is dangerous indeed . . . do we brand for life the 18-year-old who had consensual sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend? . . . or boyfriend? . . .

[DoNotRefill]

180. don't you see a minor difference....

between an 18 year old having sex with a 16 year old, and a 20 year old having sex with a 9 year old? Under Washington State Law, an 18 year old having sex with a 16 year old wouldn't be child molestation, due to the difference between their ages not being great enough. And that's what this guy pled guilty to according to his mother...

[CoffeeCat]

24. Our society is so horrendously messed up when it comes to sexual abuse...

Where to begin? It's difficult to know--because this country has not faced that we have an epidemic level of child sexual abuse happening. Our current solutions to sexual abuse--such as sex-offender registries--do not address the sexual-abuse crisis we face.

Numerous studies/research have concluded that ONE IN FOUR FEMALES, AND ONE IN SEVEN MALES IS SEXUALLY ABUSED BEFORE THE AGE OF 18---AND THE MAJORITY OF THE PERPETRATORS ARE CLOSE ADULT RELATIVES (FATHERS, STEPFATHERS, GRANDFATHERS, UNCLES).

No one wants to deal with this!

Sex-offender registries distort the reality of sexual abuse, by suggesting that the perpetrators are "out there" somewhere. Most sexual abuse is perpetrated by FAMILY MEMBERS, not strangers. Most sexual abuse victims will not be abused by a stranger down the street or a serial pedophile living nearby. Yes, those cases happen--but they represent a minority of sexual abuse cases.

I've met hundreds of sexual-abuse survivors. I'm a survivor myself. In support groups--the real life stories bear out the statistics. Most survivors (about 80 percent) NEVER TELL. They don't tell, because the abuser is a primary caregiver. They're too scared, ashamed and dependent on the abuser for love, support, food, clothing and safety. Victims often lack the words to describe the abuse. They've often been terrorized into silence by perps--who are skilled manipulators.

Society's problem is not the John Couey's of the world; it's the accountants, carpenters, insurance salesmen, teachers, doctors--and the guy next door--who is molesting his daughter, or his grandchild. We all want to point the finger at the big bad scruffy monster down the street who has served time. We don't want to face that sexual abusers are our co-workers, neighbors and sometimes even our friends, brothers and husbands.

If we want to end the sexual abuse of children in this country--we must be willing to face these uncomfortable facts and come out of denial. Otherwise, children will continue to hide these crimes. How can we expect small children to to reveal truths that society refuses to acknowledge?

I finally found the courage to confront one of my perpetrators--when I reached age 38. Because my mother didn't want to face that she was married to a child molester--she didn't believe me and she cut me off. Three of my siblings cut me off. Other extended relatives distanced themselves from me. It is much more comfortable for people to believe that the accuser is misguided or a "troublemaker" (as my perp defined me), than to believe that the guy at Thanksgiving dinner--is a child molester. Even as a 38-year old woman--it was a gut wrenching experience to tell. Imagine how intimidated a child would feel...

We have to believe children when they tell, and help them to recognize what sexual abuse is--so they CAN tell. We have to teach them--from day one--that their bodies are their own and that no one touches their private area.

Some victims--who never tell--or who aren't believed--harbor enough rage, sorrow, despair, frustration and self loathing to sink a ship. It's this suffering that creates more perpetrators--who then cultivate more victims. It's a vicious cycle. It won't stop because a tiny minority of serial pedophiles are listed on public registries. The death penalty for sex crimes won't solve the problem either (they're calling for this solution in my state).

The cycle will stop when we empower children, believe the children and face the truth about what is going on under our own roofs and in our own neighborhoods.

[d.l.Green]

81. Thank you for sharing. From reading all the posts in this thread

I'm getting the idea that most don't want to face up to the responsibility of dealing with a complex problem. There are no simple answers here. It seems like even victims who are posting aren't willing to think this out beyond revenge.

I was not a victim myself, but growing up in a very Catholic atmosphere, little insignificant deviances were dealt with in mentally debilitating ways. I can't imagine if any of those things were as significant as sexual assault. Being able to talk about this in appropriate ways to children is the start to the solution. But even age appropriate sex education is yet another issue the religious right defines as wrong. And who are the victims? Not these wacko adults but the children...

[melnjones]

134. Very well stated...

I'm editing out my response...as I think about it, I don't think anyone will understand what I'm saying, so maybe I'll try again later.

[jukes]

149. TwoSparkles

the most inciteful & productive post in this thread!

i wd like to add the little-acknowledged fact that child-abusers are most often the grown up survivors of child-abuse, themselves. it's a self-feeding cycle.

thanks so much for sharing your experience & wisdom w/ us!

[Megahurtz]

190. Well Mr. Sarcasm,

:wtf: are you???

:sarcasm:

[frustrated_lefty]

259. My shrink and my wife are pretty convinced

I was abused in that way as a kid. It's hard to talk about without disoscciating. I suspect you're on the money with regard to kids. They have to be coaxed into talking.

So, we coax them. They're scared

It's hard to establish rapport

[SKKY]

28. Better him than another little girl getting raped. No sympathy here.

[soup]

38. Who did he rape? n/t

[progressivebydesign]

276. According to the article HE DID NOT RAPE ANYONE. n/t

[Mondon]

336. According to his PARENTS he did not molest anyone; according to HIM he did

see the guilty plea

[Evergreen Emerald]

37. Our society struggles with the balance

Protection of the innocent women and children against predators versus freedom and due process

Our society is struggling with issue: what DO we do with sex offenders when we know that sex offenses are not like thefts? Lock up for ever? Or let them out in our society to prey on our women and children?

Less restrictive alternatives to throwing away the key:
* monitoring for an extended period. Once they leave prison, they are not done with their sentence--they are monitored by department of corrections (sometimes for the rest of their lives)
* sex offender registration and for those most likely to reoffend the registration includes flyers as well as posting in the news paper.

Some of the comments on here astound me. Many here just want those who commit an offense to walk away anonymously to prey again. These crimes are not like thefts. These criminals rarely assault only once.

Sex offenders KNOW the consequences of their actions. There are no "after the fact" surprises. They have chosen to offend and to suffer those consequences. Is it fair to the sex offenders? Yes. Sorry, my sympathy favors the victims and the children in our society.

[DoNotRefill]

126. Our solution....

is to keep an eye on known sex offenders in the area, and everybody we allow near our little girl. I have a sex offender living next door to me (multiple counts of aggrevated child rape, which means he's REALLY not a nice person) and he knows not to come near us, upon a very real chance of very serious repercussions just as soon as the law allows it. Consequently, he doesn't have contact with us, we don't have contact with him, and everybody goes about their business.

[imacoolbreeze]

42. Good... I hope he burns in hell.

That's one down at least...

[soup]

46. Lovely sentiment.

Maybe if this article had been the one posted, there could be a smidgeon of compassion shown here. I'm not going to post a snippet, the article deserves to be read in its entirity. I hope you take the time to click on the link and read it.

Although I doubt the person who took it upon themselves to illegally alter and display the flyers - as well as placing them in everyone in the neighborhood's mailboxes - will be caught (or prosecuted), they potentially face a year in jail. and justice for all.
cite: http://www.local6.com/news/4405099/detail.html

As someone upthread said, one of the problems with these databases is that they are a catch-all. Yes, they serve a purpose of awareness. I've got kids, I've got grandkids. I'm concerned for their safety and have checked the list. But in this particular case, and in the hands of some overzealous vigilante, it caused the death of someone who in all likelyhood would have lived the rest of his natural life never harming anyone.

flame away.

[Toucano]

47. Thank you.

I appreciate that perspective.

[soup]

59. With the horrible murders of the 2 little girls

in Florida recently, I can understand the emotions the poster felt. If the monsters that committed those heinous crimes were found dead in their cells, I'd share the 'may they rot in hell' sentiment.

The problem is, even though monsters are a frightening reality, the label doesn't fit all. Yes, what he did was wrong, but I don't think he deserved that particular label or to die because of it.

Thanks for your response, Toucano. Hesitated before responding - was sitting here thinking maybe I should just let it go and shouldn't hit 'post'. Oh, well. It's out there now. Thanks again, I truly appreciate it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

56. I do not have compassion for him

He knew the consequences of his actions before he decided to get his rocks off by raping an innocent person who will have life-long issues because of his actions.

The fact that he killed himself reinforces his lack of character. Blame the victim / blame society / kill himself because of them. Whatever.

[soup]

61. Please take the time to read the article.

Then we'll talk, ok?

[Mikimouse]

72. Hiya soup...Do you think that most people will actually read.

the posted article? It is far easier to simply brand the individual and be done with it. after all, those silly things we call truth and circumstances should not deter our committment to knee-jerk revenge, right? Too many facts, too many shades of gray, too much to consider in making judgments; you know how it is. BTW, I did read the article yoyu posted and it does clear up quite a bit, but, oh well, let the hate filled rhetoric continue. Thanks for posting the article!:sarcasm:
(the sarcasm smiley applies to only the parts of the post preceding my observations about the article you posted)

[soup]

83. Hope people read it.

That's all we can do.

The very understandable anger that surrounds this topic may be stronger than a desire to do a little research in this one particular case, though. and isn't that what it boils down to? each individual case?

Believe me when I say there are some I'd gladly pluck our macaw for - and all I'd need would be someone to provide the tar. This just doesn't happen to be one of those.

Thank you for taking the time to read it. and your spot-on response.

[Mikimouse]

86. My pleasure...I currently teach two courses in crim.justice..

at a southern university, and have taught college courses at two of the state prisons in Texas, so I am keenly aware of the oxymoron of crim. justice. I am also the father of two (now thankfully grown) daughters, so these types of issues interest me greatly.

[Evergreen Emerald]

238. I did--thank you very much

We are not going to agree...My compassion is saved for victims of child molestation.

[Toucano]

64. You suffer from a lack of facts.

There's a readily available cure if you wish to use it.

[FlaGranny]

58. Thanks for the link.

That story is an excellent illustration of why every crime should not be treated in exactly the same way. There are always different circumstances.

[soup]

67. The whole thing just saddens me.

He did something wrong. He served his time. He was registered for 2 years at that address. Suddenly someone takes it upon themselves to plaster the neighborhood with flyers calling him a child rapist. Now he's dead and people cheer.

[lcbart]

128. I'm disgusted.

By the generalizations and exaggerations posted here - supposedly by compassionate,progressive liberals.

READ THE ARTICLE - This guy raped NO ONE.

I have a friend who is a 'Sex Offender' because he had sex at age 19 with a 15 yr old girl who told him she was 18.

Was he stupid ? Yes.

Was he irresponsible ? Yes.

Is he a sex offender (at least in my mind) - No.

I have three daughters and a granddaughter and would protect them with the last drop of my blood. But this vigilantism. I can't condone or accept that.

[Eloriel]

297. I won't flame you, but the problem is you can't know that and

the statistics are tremendously against your cheery speculation re his future history:

someone who in all likelyhood would have lived the rest of his natural life never harming anyone.

There's just no basis for that kind of optimism. HE ALREAYD SERIOUSLY HARMED A CHILD and believe me, that child will live with the consequences of that single encounter (if it was just once) for the rest of her life. There's NO REASON to assume he would never do it again. None. These things are NOT "once only" transgressions. Pedophiles and child molestors CANNOT BE CURED with our current psychological tools.

Get it? They'll ALL do it again if they can. They can't help themselves, and neither can we help them. We can only isolate them and/or make everyone in the neighborhood aware of their presence so they can be supervigilant. OR lock them up forever, which no one here is advocating.

[soup]

304. Well, he's dead. So we'll never know.

I do not condone or defend his offense. But I did question cheering his death. I also question jumping immediately to the conclusion 'they're all the same' without considering there could be exceptions to the rule.

More information would be helpful - like the transcript from his trial and maybe access to his medical files - but lacking that, and based only on what information I've read concerning this one person, I stand by what I said.

Are we going to label the 11 year old sex offender as a helpless case, too? Do blanket statements and statistics apply to teenagers and even pre-teens? You said "They'll ALL do it again if they can. They can't help themselves, and neither can we help them." That's a grim future to carve for the 53 juveniles that are about to be added to the Orange County sex offender list, including an 11 year old.
http://www.wesh.com/news/4404405/detail.html

The bottom line from the article cited below reads:

>>The county sheriff's office is investigating the distribution and posting of the fliers. They were downloaded from the FDLE website, which is legal, but the addition of the words ''child rapist'' constitutes tampering, according to sheriff spokesman Sue Livoti, and it is a misdemeanor.

Harris, for his part, said he would only strengthen his push to have warning signs posted in neighborhoods where sexual offenders lived.

''Real simple. There's been a suicide that occurred when we had 530 sex offenders in Marion County,'' said Harris. ``There are still 529.''<<

County commissioner Harris scares me one whole hell of a lot more than Clovis Claxton.

--

>>Claxton was developmentally disabled and wheelchair-bound after being struck in childhood by meningitis and encephalitis. His parents cared for him, and he lived in an apartment adjoining their neatly kept house in a forested enclave of southern Ocala.

In 1991, when his family was living in Washington state, Claxton was charged with first-degree child molestation over an incident involving a caregiver's 9-year-old daughter. He was 24 at the time but, according to the Marion County Sheriff's Office, had the mental capacity of a 10- or 12-year-old. He served 27 months in prison.<<
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/11467947.htm

[IdaBriggs]

63. I'm with you. nt

[superconnected]

43. I'm not pro child molesters but I am pro human beings

He probably had parents, and loved ones. He had an illness- a perversion that tops societys list of hate and gives them some kind of social license to demand blood.

Who ever he raped/molested is something I'm taking in account too.

I'm not into death for vengence and won't sink to that here.

If bush didn't cut the jails and prisons so much(I witnessed this when working for the city of seattle) we probably wouldn't have so many sex offenders on the loose.

I believe a lot of the problem here is societys fault (being from our elected leaders who have never adequately addressed the issue).
Not from the perverts. I don't believe the perverts can stop themselves.

There will always be people who are ill, or engage in crap that hurts others. While the people call for blood, there will be no viable answers. Societies like in Saudi Arabia kill sex offenders routinely and still seem to come up with more.

I don't want to live in a society that does that, even when they are thinning the pervert population. Seems to me they are increasing the belief-in-justified-murder population.

Throwing sex offenders pictures and addresses up is a possibly death sentence in this country. What ever happened to listing there is one in the neighborhood(without specifics), and warning people to watch out for them?

[Benson]

49. Point: If you don't want Convicted child molesters living next door,

Then increase the sentence!
Some guys serve just 6 years for child rape.
Sex offenses are one crime I would support getting a life sentence.
The kids are protected, everyone is happy.

[haele]

74. If you read the article -

At the time of his crime, the guy was a youth (20) suffering from a brain injury and due to Washington state laws we don't know what degree of molestation occurred - it might have been minor - simple "flashing" (which I've seen people - men and women - with brain injuries do during fits of contrariness in public, no matter what their age) to aggravated - a full fledged thwarted attempt at rape, but from my second hand experience of the WA state database, it's very hard to know.
A step-nephew of mine is on the WA state sex offenders database there for a stupid drive-by mooning at a rival school event while drunk when he was almost 18 - because there were children under 16 in the crowd, it was considered child molestation.
His database entry does not distinguish minor or aggravated, and he has to carry his arrest documentation around with him constantly to show to potential employers and renters - and law enforcement to prove he isn't an actual, physical threat to children.
If all you saw was his database entry, you would say he have been locked away for life? You would hound him, put up fliers in his neighborhood? He's still an asshole - but he doesn't get drunk like that anymore.

Heck, in California, a 14 year old boy - or girl can be charged with felony statutory rape for consensual sexual activity with a boyfriend or girlfriend of equivalent or slightly lesser age - should the other child choose to make a scene when they break up. It's already happened in a Jr. High School around our area this year.
So, if my husband really wanted to, other than sitting him down and just intimidating him a bit, he could charge our 13 year old girl's just turned 14 years old "boyfriend" with at least sexual molestation for getting to second base ("canoodling") with her - or his mother can charge her with the same crime next year if she wanted to keep her little boy "pure" and they're still together. Talk about ruining a child's life.

Sexual offense databases are too often not completely reliable measurements of danger to children or women in the neighborhood. Being criminally stupid or having a PDA observed by a prude who complains about it is now potentially on the same level of heinousness as inflicting activity based on sociopathic or damaged emotional hardwiring on another person.

Haele

[soup]

89. Ah, teenagers -

and drunk ones, to boot.

Apologies for laughing at the stunt which resulted in a lifelong stigma for your step-nephew.

It also made me think about the groups of people who lined up to moon **Bush. Should they be on the list as well?

and points out that lumping all cases under one heading is not the way to go about this. One size clearly does not fit all.

on edit: sorry. how many times can the word 'also' be used in a post before it's considered overused?

[mistertrickster]

78. Sorry, no sympathy here. Some people are just too fucked up for

our society to accomodate. Given the very reasonable fear that this sex offender may attack again--a lot of them do, and then they kill the child to cover the crime--the citizenry has every right to protect themselves (within the law, of course).

Liberal does not mean soft-headed. Innocent children deserve to be protected against sociopaths.

[LiberallyInclined]

132. ummm...did you read the article?

Clovis Claxton, 38, had spinal meningitis as a child, so he never really matured, his parents said. They said 18 years ago in Washington state, he exposed himself to a little girl. They said he's never been a threat since, and they believe the fliers in his neighborhood drove him to his death.

"He's not a predator. He's never re-offended. He couldn't catch anybody," said his father, Chuck Claxton.

He said his son was mentally and physically disabled, requiring a wheelchair most of the time. The sheriff's office hasn't officially ruled Clovis Claxton's death a suicide, but his parents believe he used pills and alcohol to end his life because he'd been depressed since the fliers were posted on Monday.

thank god society is now a little safer, huh..? :eyes:

apparently liberal can mean soft-headed once in a while...

[LostinVA]

79. Just a real life example

I'm burying new house in VA, and as a matter of course went onto the sexual offender registry. There are no offenders within my neighbor, although there are several a few miles away. Okay. So, I check my parents' and sister's neighborhoods in NC and OK. They're all safe. So, THEN I check my grandparents' little village in NJ -- approx. 700 people. Okay, there's one scary dude living about 500 yards from her house. A guy in his 30's, who had held a knife to his 10-year-old NIECE'S throat while he raped her. He served a few years.

Okay, so my mom calls my grandmom and tells her. She's shocked. Why? Because this guy just moved into this town about three months ago, and had tricked out his yard with "bait" -- a pool, games, etc., and was actively inviting kids over to play to "keep them off the street." Hey, everyone in town thought this was really nice of him, you know? Especially since this guy was so active in his church and was dating a nice woman. Uh huh. Riiiiight. My uncle called up the cops, who were starting an investigation into it.

Yeah, I know -- people should have looked on the registry. But, many experts say this isn't a behavior that can be cured -- they are like that. I don't think this guy was "saved" and is suddenly free of wanting to rape little kids. Sorry. They know what they're doing.

[Red State Rebel]

82. I'm still serving my life sentence thanks to a molester

My heart doesn't bleed for any of those scum sucking jerks. They deserve whatever they get.

[LostinVA]

90. I'm on your side, Rebel -- that's what I meant in my post

The guy gets out of prison after a violent rape of a child, gets his hair cut, dates a woman, goes to church to prove how he's :cured"... but yet puts bait out for kids. Unbelievable.

[American Tragedy]

168. He only got A FEW YEARS for that????

I've heard of kids being punished worse just for choosing to inhale marijuana smoke into their own lungs.

What the fuck is wrong with the justice system? If I were the judge, that filthy bastard wouldn't ever see daylight again except on a very tight leash, "saved" or not.

[LostinVA]

249. Yup -- amazing, isn't it?

[dhinojosa]

84. No sympathy for the rapist : AND : I condemn the actions of the neighbors

Alright we have:

1. Two florida girls (assuming from article sexually assaulted) and killed. So no sympathy.

2. He was released from a psychiatric hospital under supervision, so there were safeguards until #3 took place.

3. The neighbors should've gone for this politically through the city counsel, the mayor, the media, and the sheriff and would've won the case. This mob rule is all too scary, because it was condoned, and now sets precedent to other mob actions.

[Toucano]

98. There is no RAPIST in this case.

A big part of our turmoil over this issue is we don't have an adequate lexicon.

The original article says nothing about rape, yet a lot of us assume rape is involved.

http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/LOCAL/204220346/1078/news&template=printart

"His parents have been his caregivers his entire life. And when they couldn't be there with him, they hired a baby-sitter. He exposed himself to the baby-sitter's daughter. At age 20, his mother said her son was at the mental age of 12."

[dhinojosa]

101. Yikes, sorry

Suffering from "was I reading posts or the article?" when I wrote my rant.

[Toucano]

106. No problem.

Like I said, I think a big part of our turmoil is the vagueness of the language tools we have.

Molester, rapist, abuser, predator, gross imposition (whatever the hell that was supposed to mean), and now sex offender. Some of the problem is due to the desire to treat these crimes with euphanisms when bluntness would be more helpful.

[DoNotRefill]

207. The only problem with your synopsis...

is that indecent exposure, which is what is described, doesn't legally qualify in Washington State as child molestation by a long shot. He took a plea-bargain to a lesser crime.

[Toucano]

244. You don't know that.

The legal definition of molestation you cite was amended since this crime was committed. The word has a general definition that can include indecent exposure, sometimes referred to as "gross imposition".

Here's how your precious plea bargain really works.

He's guilty of indecent exposure. Thanks to the upcoming elections, the prosecutor is keen to seem "tough on crime". They threaten to charge the accused with Child Rape and promise to seek the maximum penalty unless he agrees to plea guilty to Child Molestation with a sentence of three years.

Having no means to prove his innocence, and with his family in a hurry to put the incident behind them, he accepts the lesser charge and considers himself lucky.

It doesn't mean he was guilty of that crime, nor does it mean (as you suggest) he was guilty of a greater crime.

Then, along comes the unconstitutional registration law (if you want to side with Scalia and Clarence Thomas, go right ahead). His family is subjected to reactionary vigilantes' harassment and the man kills himself because he can't cope with it.

All because a mentally 12 year old showed his willy to a 9 year old.

[DoNotRefill]

254. OK, fine. Cite the "non-amended" code that you're basing your argument on

That should be pretty easy for you to do.

What experience in the legal profession do you have other than watching "Law and Order" reruns?

You keep saying that he just exposed himself. What do you base that on? The media statement of the mother? How many mothers are willing to come out and say "Yeah, my baby raped the shit out of that little girl, so what? He's still a good boy"??? 98% PLUS of the parents I see at work (in the judicial field) claim that their child is innocent, that the charges are false, et cetera, even when the crime was CAUGHT ON TAPE and the suspect is clearly identifiable on the tape and there is both eyewitness identification and DNA evidence conclusively linking him to the crime.

And what, exactly is "vigilante"-ish about posting signs in the neighborhood? Doesn't vigilanteism, by definition, involve an illegal act of summary justice at the hands of the vigilante? Or did that definition "change" too?

[Toucano]

263. It's not a big enough point to bother with.

I'm simply pointing out that it changed. These things don't generally change to become looser definitions, but more precise. It isn't central to my argument, but more of an observation. Legislatures relied on vague euphemisms for a long time in matters related to sex.

I conceded earlier (quite politely, you might recall) that I may be relying too much on the mother's statement. I've already given you that.

But you refuse to yield on your "he fucked a 9-year old" statement that you have NO evidence to support other than the fact that it was a plea agreement.

Defendants are berated to plea up every single day in this country to the great detriment of the integrity of the system.

If you won't concede that you don't know for sure either or provide a police report, we'll just have to use the only witness statement we have. That would be the mother's. :P

Your apparent need to attempt to insult me is completely unnecessary.

[DoNotRefill]

270. Well, it matters to me. The 1994 amendment...

pertained to intent, when the statute was changed to include directing two underaged children to engage in behavior for the sexual gratification of the third party.

"The legislature hereby reaffirms its desire to protect the children of Washington from sexual abuse and further reaffirms its condemnation of child sexual abuse that takes the form of causing one child to engage in sexual contact with another child for the sexual gratification of the one causing such activities to take place."

How, exactly, does that apply in this case? Are you saying that there was a third person involved?

I'm not trying to insult you. I just don't think you have a very good understanding of either the law or the nuts and bolts of the criminal justice system. And a very common comment that I've heard in years past was "but Law and Order said X..." or "But I saw on Law and Order how you can X...". Law and Order ain't reality, folks...

[catnhatnh]

232. We ranted about the suicider,

and a few took gratuitous shots at his mom....but no one here said word one about the "BABYSITTER", who apparently watched neither the brain-damaged twenty year old she was paid to watch, nor her own nine year old daughter. If you would find the "unindicted co-conspirator" in this tragi-farce she would be it. Now let's talk about taking responsibility for your actions...

[Toucano]

247. I was tempted to because it was so obviously a factor.

But I didn't want to compound an already tragic situation with guilt for something that can't be undone.

I appreciate you seeing that and putting it out there, I guess. Maybe others can learn how better to protect their children.

In the days of no internet provided registration lists, my mother protected me with reason and caution, not fear and hatred. I had a cousin who was mentally limited and about 30 years old. I remember being told not to be afraid of him, but to never be alone with him or let him touch me. She knew that his body still generated the biological compulsion for sex, but his mind wouldn't stop him from harming me. He had never harmed anyone, but still she knew to be cautious.

[msmcghee]

94. As usual this topic brings out very strong emotions . .

. . on both sides.

Not to take one myself . . I'll add a few more pieces to the enigma.

I suspect that actual acts of child molestation (where a child is forced, threatened or intimidate by anyone - or even just encouraged by an adult) to participate - varies between cultures.

Our Judeo-Christian culture places extreme barriers to expressions of male sexuality. A married man whose sex life is no longer exciting must become an adulterer or a John (or for some, perhaps a child molester) to find relief outside of leaving his wife. Male sexuality is mostly driven by testosterone. Cultures that have jealous Gods must take control of male sexuality (an extremely powerful evolutionary urge) or admit that their control over mankind is not complete.

Of course, those males who reach the pinnacle of power status, such as presidents and priests, seem to believe that their reward is immunity from the rules that apply to lesser males.

So, regulation of male sexuality becomes part of a complex power structure - a morality play that includes major doses of religion and politics.

Putting those who get caught in prison for life will not reduce child molestation - if that is the purpose and not just revenge (which I can understand). As someone pointed out above, it will probably only cause more blaming the victim (for sending Grandpa to prison).

Change will come only when jealous Gods no longer control our society and males who need sexual outlets can find them guilt-free within the boundaries of their culture.

[jwcomer]

123. I'm not convinced but its a good start.

Interesting thesis. I think you are approaching the issue rationally. The problem is biological and cultural. However, consider Japan where men regularly seek prostitutes without guilt; doesn't stop them from selling girls' panties in vending machines. I'm not sure that eliminating the jealous god is a complete solution. Though it might be a good start.

[msmcghee]

139. I'd like to know more . .

Does child sex abuse occur in Japan as commonly as it does here?

You are not saying that buying girls panties is sexual abuse, are you? I've never heard of this. Is it common?

I don't understand - but I'd like to.

[jwcomer]

210. So would I

Good questions,

I don't have specific data on child sex abuse in Japan, but I suspect Google is our friend here.

I take the panties (supposedly used) in vending machines as a sign that pedoeroticism is relatively common in Japan (or at least more open.) The panties in the vending machine was always a bit of fetishism that I assumed to be urban lore, but friends who have visited Japan attest that it is true, or was a decade ago. It is my understanding that it is not uncommon for teenage girls to 'date' men in exchange for money and gifts. Most articles written on the subject seem to suggest that this is a form of consensual prostitution that middle class teens feel is necessary in order to acquire brand name items. I suspect that this is only part of the story and that there is probably a longer history of such behavior in Japan.

It only now occurs to me that the existence of open outlets for such impulses might reduce the likelihood of acts of abuse. If that is true then perhaps vending machines on our street corners is what we need so that people can express their darker fantasies in a safe and no-violent fashion. I do not think this is something that Americans are prepared to consider. If the opposite is true, then it suggest that pedophilia is a much deeper problem than cultural/religious repression of sexual gratification. In that case the only solution might be to breed it out of existence through selective castration or lots of bullets (as some in this forum have suggested.) This I could see Americans considering.

[msmcghee]

231. I found this paper on child sexual abuse . .

It doesn't get into national comparisons (yet) but I'm about 1/3 through it and it provides a good background on the child sexual abuse in general. Thought you might like to read it too. Let me know if you find any national rate of child sexual abuse comparisons. I'm sure there must be something out there.

Ooops, forgot the link:

http://www.aifs.gov.au/nch/issues5.html

[American Tragedy]

169. Um, what??? How does that fit into this?

Pedophilia and sex offenses are not just explosive manifestations of typical sexually frustrated heterosexual men who are being 'repressed'. It emerges from very specific urges and aggressive tendencies. Logically, it seems to me that capturing and imprisoning the individuals who forcefully impose these drives against innocent people WOULD reduce child molestation, at least from those persons.


And if you cannot remain monogamous, perhaps you are simply not suited to a binding relationship. People had better be honest about their orientation in that respect, though, before marrying, because a relationship between one person who requires monogamy and one who demands polyamory is not sustainable. That is an irreconciliable difference.

[NashVegas]

234. I Think You Should Re-Think Your Theory

We are swimming in images of male sexuality. We love the gun, we love the Washington Monument.

If anything I think it's rather the opposite: our society has a difficult time accepting and coping with female sexuality. To the "dirty old man," the little girl is a far less intimidating score than his age-equal. Even with young boys, it's the same.

Kids don't know what sexuality is, they may have seen the pictures or the Skinemax movies and it looks like fun, but there's a difference between sex and sexuality.

The pedophile is *controlling* another person's sexuality; it's the child's lack of comprehension of sexuality that enables them.

In avoiding adult relationships, they are refusing to surrender, at least in part - as it would be between equals, control of their own sexuality.

[slackmaster]

105. If you can't trust someone not to re-offend, keep him or her under control

I have a real problem with this Megan's Law stigmatization.

An individual offender either can be trusted in society, or can not. Those who are not trustworthy should be kept under some kind of supervision. Not necessarily incarceration - maybe house arrest like Martha Stewart so their movements are tracked. But this scarlet letter thing has to go.

[Renew Deal]

107. One more scumbag off the streets.

I thought it at first. I thought about it some more and I am sticking to it.

Flame away

[Toucano]

141. He was never "on the streets".

"His parents have been his caregivers his entire life. And when they couldn't be there with him, they hired a baby-sitter. He exposed himself to the baby-sitter's daughter. At age 20, his mother said her son was at the mental age of 12.

He was allowed to enter into a negotiated plea and and served 27 months in jail.

Claxton's parents said their son was no threat. For several years, he had been using special leg braces. Lately, he was using a wheelchair."

[Renew Deal]

148. He was free

But if saying "One more scumbag off the planet" clarifies it, then lets go with that.

[Toucano]

156. Yeah. The "freedom is on the march" of a wheel chaired predator

He hadn't done anything bad in 18 years, but it was on the verge of dragging a little girl off to the woods in his wheel chair and raping and murdering her.

Losing our humanity to "protect" our children is the same as losing our freedom to protect our "security". Maybe he even had biological and radiological weapons, so a pre-emptive strike was beneficial?

This man was not a predator, and hounding him to death protected no one.

[Renew Deal]

205. Part of his punishment is being on the registry.

Feel free to disagree. I have an idea, go through the sex offender list and tell me which you would invite over, let your kids play with, like to have as a neighbor. I am sure it will be a long list.

http://www3.fdle.state.fl.us/sexual_predators/search.asp

http://www3.fdle.state.fl.us/sexual_predators/OffenderFlyer.asp?keys=44281

[Toucano]

229. That's really inappropriate.

You should be ashamed of that post. I'll ask you to refrain from making the discussion personal.

No one suggested ANYONE had to "invite him over" to play with their kids.

He was living with his parents supervision, completely harmlessly. He had harmed no children in the 18 years since the incident.

Reactionary vigilante-ism killed this man who was IN A WHEEL CHAIR and NO THREAT TO ANYONE!

Also, the registry didn't exist when his crime was committed. Establishing additional "punishment" after someone has served their time amounts to an ex post facto law, which I think you'll find is unconstitutional. "Guess what, we've decided to punish you some more after you've done your time. Why? It's politically popular and we've got an election to win."

My children are protected, by the way, because I PARENT them. I don't need to have the state issue a scarlet letter to sex offenders to protect my children nor the false sense of security it creates.

[DoNotRefill]

235. Really? How long have they been registering sex offenders...

and how many times have the courts struck it down as an ex post facto law?

If you were a serious student of the law, you'd understand that the criminal act is for failing to register for the registry if you've been convicted of certain crimes. That started being illegal AFTER the sex registry laws were passed. If you registered, there was no crime committed. It's no more an ex post facto law than charging taxes on property owned before the tax law was passed.

"He was living with his parents supervision, completely harmlessly. He had harmed no children in the 18 years since the incident."

He could no longer effectively chase them. He certainly was capable of luring them, and luring is the method of choice for serial child molesters, since it attracts far less attention than snatching them does. You say he had harmed no children. What is your evidence for that? His mother's word? The same mother who said that all he did was expose himself, when that is not enough to satisfy the elements of the crime he pled guilty to?

[Toucano]

237. Registries were created in the 1990's

The Supreme court upheld the registries in a 6-3 decision because they are considered NON-PUNITIVE.

Bleachers7 argued that it was additional punishment. It isn't, legally, additional punishment.

The dissenting opinions? Hmmm. I wonder...

"In a dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that "however plain it may be that a former sex offender currently poses no threat of recidivism, he will remain subject to long-term monitoring and inescapable humiliation." Also opposing the court's ruling were Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/05/scotus.sex.offenders.ap/

[Renew Deal]

248. I never said it was additional punishment

I said it was part of the punishment.

[Toucano]

253. Well the members of the court you agree with,

The Requist, Scalia, Thomas bunch said it's not punitive. In part or in addition, non-punitive means neither.

[Renew Deal]

246. It's appropriate and honest.

Nothing personal, but you need to think about what it really means. Obviously you didn't until I mentioned it.

I understand your argument about ex post facto law, but if it's illegal it would be thrown out in court and that hasn't happened.

Would you prefer that a sex offender lived next door or not?

[Toucano]

252. Obviously my eye!

My family has nothing to do with this case, and it is wrong for you to resort to bringing my family into the discussion because your ability to think about the topic ends at "What would I do?"

I don't get to choose who lives next door to me. This is the United States of America. My preference has no bearing. It certainly doesn't give me right or justification to harass someone to death with lies. Those flyers didn't make anyone safer, you realize. Just like the terror alert level makes no one safer.

"...if it's illegal, it would be thrown out in court..." Oh, yeah. Like unconstitutional laws never stay on the books. Especially with a conservative dominated court like we have today.

Remember Plessy v. Ferguson? That decision was still wrong, even if it took the court years to overturn it.

And just what group is going to petition the court to stand up for the rights of convicted sex offenders? It's not gonna' happen, but that doesn't make it right.

[DoNotRefill]

257. You don't get to choose who lives next door to you? REALLY?

"I don't get to choose who lives next door to me. This is the United States of America. My preference has no bearing."

How do you figure that? You absolutely, POSITIVELY can choose who lives next door to you. You can't make THEM move, but you sure as shit can move YOURSELF. It's called "voting with your feet".

"Those flyers didn't make anyone safer, you realize."

Really? When I found out that my neighbor was convicted of multiple counts of aggrevated child rape, it caused me to be much more careful with my dealings with him. It sure as hell GUARANTEED that I wouldn't ask him to babysit for me... So yeah, the sex offender registry DID make me more safe. And a dead child molester has an absolutely ZERO percent recidivism rate, so the kids in his neighborhood are safer now too than they were when he was in it.

[Toucano]

269. "Voting with your feet"?

Who's "voting"?

What you describe is choosing who you live next to, not choosing who lives next to you.

I'm glad you feel more safe considering only 7% of juvenile victims are assaulted by a stranger.



[DoNotRefill]

271. If you don't like your neighbor....

you're free to move someplace where you LIKE your neighbors. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, can compel you to live next to somebody you loathe. And if you're REALLY paranoid, you can move out to West Bumfuck, and not HAVE any neighbors.

I don't have to worry about family and acquaintances having inappropriate contact with my child. Why? It's multi-faceted. First of all, we screen our acquaintances very, very carefully. "Background checks" doesn't do our vetting process justice. Secondly, people who know my wife and I have no doubt of what the outcome would be if they sexually assaulted our daughter. It wouldn't be pretty. Fear is a great motivator towards proper behavior...

[Eloriel]

299. But living next door they stop being strangers and become NEIGHBORS

who are NOT in that "only 7%" of predators which are strangers and become part of the 93% who are family or family friends.

[Renew Deal]

258. It doesn't matter

It doesn't matter if you have any family or not. You get my point. Just admit that you would not invite this person into your house. You would like to know if they are next door. You wouldn't let your kids go to his house if you knew he was there.

I never advocated harassing this guy.

"And just what group is going to petition the court to stand up for the rights of convicted sex offenders?"

Why don't you if you are so passionate about it.

[Occulus]

296. Not for the guy I live with, no

it was added after his conviction.

This is an ex post facto law... get it? It's unconstitutional for that reason and that reason alone.

Oh, and if the sex offender was convicted of pissing on a bush at the part at 3AM, I wouldn't have any problem living next door to him. The real probem is, the rgistries do not detail the specifics of each case; they only list the charge. Thus, everyone who sees the list must assume the absolute worst the law allows for when looking at each entry.

This, I believe, is intentional. It is part of a myriad set of rules and laws designed specifically to keep all criminals as they are, and to never truly allow them to redeem themselves if they truly make the attempt.

Who benefits from that?

Who builds the prisons these people go back to after they offend again? I'm not just talking about sex offenders alone any more; I'm talking about all convicted criminals, and how each set acts as a single cog in a great machine designed to hold their faces in the societal dirt and keep them there.

We are far too punitive in this country, and I think that may be where a great deal of our social violence and sniping- literal and metaphorical- come from. The treatment of convicted sex offenders via complete social stigmatization and 'registries' for their crimes (and their crimes alone, I must point out) is only the most egregious case of what our society does to all criminals.

The prison industry is truly an industry, ladies and gentlemen. As an industry, it requires a market to survive. If one were to look back at laws designed to strip convicted criminals of certain opportunies in their lives, would we see a funding pattern favoring corporate backers of prisons? Perhaps, perhaps not, but one thing is certain: they benefit by people entering them.

It's something of a truism that once you are "in" the system, you never get out. I've had an interesting life, knowing and associating with people who have (almost all) been convicted of something at some point. I have had the supreme good luck (mostly due to very good sense) to never have any contact with The Law, and I've come to an understanding of what people such as they go through.

Something as simple as a drug conviction can deny you employment. It could even deny you housing, only they won't come right out and just tell you that. Still, deep inside, you know that's why they won't let you rent there, or work there. But a sex offense and an entry on your state's registry?

You may as well.... kill yourself.

Everyone knows you'll only end up back in jail.

(recent real-life example: a friend was recently passenger in a car being driven by someone who was legally drunk. He himself wasn't driving because he was even more so than the driver.

The driver got into a minor accident and fled the scene. My friend, noticing the car was still somewhat on the road, got into the driver's seat and moved the car off the road. As he was turning the engine off, a cop pulled up.

He was arrested for drunk driving and causing an accident . This was his third strike; he's behind bars for the next several years.

I guess he should have stayed in the passenger seat and not taken the car off the road, but what if it got hit? He was in a no-win situation. And WHY? Because of the three-strike law. Remember- he wasn't actually driving when the accident happened.)

[DoNotRefill]

307. If you lie down with dogs, you shouldn't be surprised to get fleas.

If it's so unconstitutional, then why has it never been struck down in ANY court?

You complain that society stigmatizes criminals. They chose to break the law, didn't they? Well, such choices have consequences.

You tell us of your friend who had two previous DUI convictions. By getting behind the wheel while plastered, he committed his third (felony) DUI. I'm not basing that on anything the cop said, I'm basing that exclusively on what YOU said, that he was more than legally drunk, he got behind the wheel, and he tried to move the car. He made his decisions, they were BAD decisions, and now he's paying the price. What's so sad is that they could have left the car at wherever they got drunk and simply taken a cab home, and been mostly within the law doing so.

If you want to be pissed, be pissed at the person who ran away.

[Eloriel]

298. Au contraire -- if he molested someone else, and he plea bargained

that, the he was by definition a predator.

We also know, and it's been pointed out repeatedly, that these things are NOT single occurrances, that pedophiles and child molestors CANNOT BE CURED.

Now, the problem is, given these FACTS, how do you protect innocent children (and in so doing help STOP the cycle of abuse tha creates even more predators out of today's victims??)? I'll give you it's a difficult and thorny problem -- but it's even MORE difficult and far thornier when people like yourself minimize and trivialize and treat it dismissively.

I am not one celebrating his death, I can assure you, but saying "houndhing him to death protected no one" isn't exactly accurate, given the FACTS about these things.

[realFedUp]

111. He wasn't a rapist and he didn't molest a girl

Gads, I thought most people on this site
were at least informed. And does this have
anything to do with the DUer from Florida
who posted a call for help on a sexual
predator in her neighborhood?

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7592135

Neighbor's Fliers May Have Led To Offender's Death

OCALA, Fla. - Neighborhood activism against a local sex offender may have contributed to his apparent suicide.

A registered sex offender who served his time reportedly killed himself Wednesday after his neighbors posted fliers with his face and the words "Child Rapist" all over his Marion County neighborhood.

One of the fliers was found next to his body, WESH 2 News reported.

Clovis Claxton, 38, had spinal meningitis as a child, so he never really matured, his parents said. They said 18 years ago in Washington state, he exposed himself to a little girl. They said he's never been a threat since, and they believe the fliers in his neighborhood drove him to his death.

"He's not a predator. He's never re-offended. He couldn't catch anybody," said his father, Chuck Claxton.

He said his son was mentally and physically disabled, requiring a wheelchair most of the time. The sheriff's office hasn't officially ruled Clovis Claxton's death a suicide, but his parents believe he used pills and alcohol to end his life because he'd been depressed since the fliers were posted on Monday.

continued

[DoNotRefill]

251. That's odd....you say he didn't molest anybody?

then why did he plead guilty to Child Molestation-1, which involves molesting somebody? Why did he admit to molesting the girl in open court? Remember, no admission of guilt, no plea bargain. Are you saying he purjured himself and served 27 months in prison because he was bored and wanted to get away from his parents? We're not even talking about an accidental bumping, it MUST be for sexual gratification for it to count. That's an element of the crime.

[progressivebydesign]

275. He exposed himself.. that is passive, actually.

I think around 4 different men exposed themselves at some time to me, a total stranger under 18, as I was growing up. I didn't consider myself molested. Disgusted? absolutely.

[DoNotRefill]

278. did you read the specifics of the charge he pled guilty to?

Simply exposing himself would never pass muster for a plea bargain to Child Molesting in the First Degree, which is what he pled guilty to according to the Florida sex offender website. (which as of around 9 PM this evening still had him included in it, with his status as "reported deceased.") Why? Because a necessary element of the crime wouldn't have been committed. Consequently, we're faced with three alternatives. First and far most likely, the mother is misrepresenting what happened. Secondly, and less likely, he perjured himself during his plea bargain. Or thirdly, he pled guilty to a more severe crime than he actually committed. That's pretty damned unlikely.

[realFedUp]

277. I haven't read the trial transcript...have you?

I am just quoting from the article that
said he exposed himself to a young girl
and that's what he went to jail for.
Exposing yourself is not exactly molesting.
I'd think young kids are exposed to far
more just through e-mail spam these days.

[DoNotRefill]

280. Nope, but I've done enough research to find out what he pled guilty to...

which was Child Molestation in the First Degree, and to find out what the required elements to sustain a conviction for such a charge are.

You CAN NOT be convicted of Child Molestation in the First Degree, EVEN IN A PLEA BARGAIN, without confessing in court to EACH AND EVERY ELEMENT OF THE CRIME. That means that he DID confess in court and under oath to sexually touching that girl. Given that, his mother's statement becomes less than credible.

[frictionlessO]

121. He Killed himself b/c he DIDN"T rape anyone!!!

Read all the articles provided in this thread. The man was a 20 yr old with a brain injury under the supervison of a BABYSITTER (i.e. he was obviously mentally impaired), he EXPOSED himself to the babysitters child.

So by all the posts Ive read that are so happy about this and how we should do this to everyone on the "lists", am I now to assume that all of you think anyone who is mentally impaired and does something like this should die???

Many DU'ers here really blew it by not reading up on this case thoroughly.

[redqueen]

133. Many people don't read articles or all the info before reacting.

It's very frustrating.

[frictionlessO]

152. Hi Queen!

Long time no see, have a hug :hug: and some:donut: ...

Well ya know, I can understand people not getting through long confusing complex articles and still voicing a strong opinion in a post. This was pretty freaking easy even if you only read half of the posts, let alone the actual releases.

Im just tripped out because I know that most of those being so strongly voiced here with positive views of this mans suicide wouldn't actually feel so strongly about it if they read a bit more... or maybe thats just wishful thinking?:shrug: Its hard to tell on this issue.

But n'yeah glad to see you anyways!:hi:

[soup]

136. Or, take it one step further,

and blanket the neighborhood with flyers for actual 11 year old offenders. Crank up the printer... grab the staplegun... hit the streets...

Names, Pictures Of Juvenile Sex Offenders To Be Posted Online
Names, Zip Codes But No Addresses Will Be Posted

POSTED: 7:01 pm EDT April 21, 2005
UPDATED: 7:22 pm EDT April 21, 2005

ORLANDO, Fla. -- As early as next week, the Orange County Sheriff's Department will be the first in Florida to start putting information about juvenile sex offenders on its Web site.

The youngest offender is 11 years old, WESH 2 News reported.

The sheriff's department said it is responding to community interest, especially from parents who want to know who their children's fellwo students are.

All 53 of the young offenders who will be posted on the Web site have been found guilty by a juvenile court judge of crimes as serious as rape.
http://www.wesh.com/news/4404405/detail.html

--

Names, pictures, and zip codes. Thank heavens someone drew the line at actual addresses. Nobody would Ever be able to figure out That info. :eyes:

[frictionlessO]

157. OMFG!!! That is Horrid! Ridiculous and wrong!!!

As kids become aware of these lists or parents share their findings... my gods. There will be very little good that comes out of this for kids one side or the other. Once children find out little Joey three seats down from them did something bad (Im sure their parents will inform them) then little Joey will continue to get worse and worse as his community brings out the pitchforks for him.

I hesistate to actually think that children couldn't be helped and be able to modify their behaviour, or does everyone think they should be locked away and our killed as well?? No hope and all...

And yes you're right on about the address remark as well.

[yodermon]

170. Wow! Basically, a menu for ADULT pedophiles!

The identity *and picture* of an 11 year old sex offender is simply a beacon in the night for adult sex offenders looking for easy prey.

But of course, as the logic of this thread would dictate, an 11 year old rapist would deserve whatever they get in terms of vigilante justice. And let the punishment fit the crime.

:eyes:

[Mondon]

324. Any source for those facts

other than the interview with the parents?

[redqueen]

130. Do away with registries.

Truly dangerous sex offenders should be locked up for life.

This guy was not one of those. Without the registry, he wouldn't have been harassed.
'

[RetroLounge]

135. OMG! Am I on DU or Freeperville?

Did you people even read the article? And I mean PLURAL you.

This guy did NOT rape anyone!

Your hate is disgusting, and I hope YOU get help for your anger and hatred.

RL

[Renew Deal]

147. So the 9 year old wanted it?

Are you suggesting it was consensual? Have you read the article? "Claxton was convicted in Washington state in 1991 of molesting a 9-year-old girl."

[Toucano]

159. What does "molesting" mean? Legally speaking.

He exposed himself to a 9 year old girl while he had the mental capacity of a 12 year old. That deserves a death sentence?

[Renew Deal]

202. lol

A death sentence. Please show me where I said that. Here is another article if it's not clear enough for you.

"Clovis Ivan Claxton, 38, who was convicted of sexually assaulting child in Washington in 1991, had lived at 3230 SE. 45 Street in Ocala for about two years."

http://www.local6.com/news/4405099/detail.html

Now you show where in that article it says he "exposed himself" to a 9 year old.

[DoNotRefill]

209. Molesting involves SEXUAL CONTACT.

I posted the code elsewhere in this thread. If he just exposed himself, he wouldn't have pled guilty to molestation. He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain to having SEXUAL contact with the girl...we're not talking about a platonic hug, or a friendly pat on the shoulder, we're talking about illegal and wholly inappropriate contact between sex organs of a 20 year old man and a NINE YEAR OLD GIRL.

[Renew Deal]

219. Some people need help with the definition of child molester.

Here is the non legal definition.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1419639&mesg_id=1422021&page=

And Florida's legal definition.

5) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS molestATION.--

(a) A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.

(b) An offender 18 years of age or older who commits lewd or lascivious molestation against a victim less than 12 years of age commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(c)1. An offender less than 18 years of age who commits lewd or lascivious molestation against a victim less than 12 years of age; or

2. An offender 18 years of age or older who commits lewd or lascivious molestation against a victim 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age

commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(d) An offender less than 18 years of age who commits lewd or lascivious molestation against a victim 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=molest&URL=CH0800/Sec04.HTM

[Toucano]

226. Some people refuse to read the fucking story.

Or they'd realize the crime didn't occur in FLORIDA, smarty pants!

[Renew Deal]

256. I wonder who those people are.

Maybe those people should show me where in the article it says he only "exposed" himself.

And here is the Washington law just to be thorough.

RCW 9A.44.083
Child molestation in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of child molestation in the first degree when the person has, or knowingly causes another person under the age of eighteen to have, sexual contact with another who is less than twelve years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least thirty-six months older than the victim.

(2) Child molestation in the first degree is a class A felony.


<1994 c 271 § 303; 1990 c 3 § 902; 1988 c 145 § 5.>

http://www.mrsc.org/mc/rcw/RCW%20%20%209A%20TITLE/RCW%20%20%209A.%2044%20%20CHAPTER/RCW%20%20%209A.%2044%20.083.htm

[DoNotRefill]

260. Yup...when talking about the legal system, don't use the pertinent...

legal definitions, use the colloquial definitions, or the legal definitions from a different state (which are invalid in the state that the crime occurred in and the trial was conducted). Super! :)

[Toucano]

225. That is patently false.

The record number of people in prison in today's America is the direct result of negotiated plea bargains, as was the case here.

EVERY SINGLE DAY someone pleas guilty to a charge that they are not guilty of because they lack the resources to properly defend themselves and are threatened with greater punishment, separation from their family, and hardship. So don't even begin to say what people will and won't plead guilty to. That's just absurd.

The fact that his parents were friends with the victims mother may also have contributed to a strong desire to avoid a trial.

But in due respect to you, I don't have access to the court records to see what he was actually accused of doing, but I never suggested he merely gave someone a platonic hug. I will concede that I may be giving too much weight to his mother's description of the crime.

For the record, from the WA code (it should be noted that these codes and definitions have undergone revision since the crime occurred in 1987):

(2) "Sexual contact" means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person done for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of either party or a third party.

That's not necessarily contact between sex organs. It's also a different crime from child rape, which involves the legal definition sexual intercourse.

(1) "Sexual intercourse" (a) has its ordinary meaning and occurs upon any penetration, however slight, and

(b) Also means any penetration of the vagina or anus however slight, by an object, when committed on one person by another, whether such persons are of the same or opposite sex, except when such penetration is accomplished for medically recognized treatment or diagnostic purposes, and

(c) Also means any act of sexual contact between persons involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another whether such persons are of the same or opposite sex.

[DoNotRefill]

230. Ah, yes. Everybody who enters in a plea bargain is innocent...

just as everybody who is convicted in court has also been railroaded by the system. At least this guy wasn't a minority, or you'd likely be saying that his confession in open court (which is part and parcel of ALL plea bargains) was actually obtained by racist cops, prosecutors, judges, et cetera.

"The fact that his parents were friends with the victims mother may also have contributed to a strong desire to avoid a trial."

Somehow, I think the fact that he fucked the babysitter's nine year old daughter was more of a detriment to the continued friendship than his being tried for the crime would have been, don't you???

"That's not necessarily contact between sex organs."

So, wait...you're saying you can commit sexual contact when no sex organs are touched? Let me guess...your argument is that toenails are actually "intimate areas", right? Is it LEGALLY POSSIBLE, under the definition you listed, for somebody to be convicted of child molestation for JUST exposing themselves to the child? Of course not, since one of the prongs is sexual contact.

You DO realize that plea bargains are a give and take scenario, don't you? In return for pleading guilty, they allow you to plead guilty to a lesser included offense, right?

[Toucano]

236. The crisis created by reliance on the plea bargain system

is well documented. If you cared a nit about the integrity of the American justice system, you'd already be well versed in the facts.


I won't permit your incessant claim that he fucked his victim to go unchallenged. Do you have the court records? The police report from 1987?

So, wait...you're saying you can commit sexual contact when no sex organs are touched? Let me guess...your argument is that toenails are actually "intimate areas", right? Is it LEGALLY POSSIBLE, under the definition you listed, for somebody to be convicted of child molestation for JUST exposing themselves to the child? Of course not, since one of the prongs is sexual contact.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying if he FUCKED his victim, as you keep claiming, he would have been charged with CHILD RAPE. If he inserted a digit or touched her sex organs with his mouth, he would have been charged with CHILD RAPE.

The definition of "sexual contact" provides for inclusion of touching intimate parts of the body with non-intimate parts of the body, such as a hand. If as his parents claim, it was exposure and he had his victim's non-intimate body touch his sex organs, it would fit the defintion of molestation you provided. But that isn't rape. The flyer called him a "rapist".

[DoNotRefill]

242. And you don't seem to understand....

that plea bargains are a TWO-SIDED AFFAIR. Each side MUST give something, or there's no point in taking the plea bargain.

We have certain "facts" as reported by the mother. Those facts are that he actually served 27 months in prison, and was convicted in a plea bargain of child molestation. When you make a plea bargain, you don't bargain UP if you're the defendant, you bargain DOWN. So a charge of child rape is likely to be reduced to a charge of first class child molestation in exchange for a guilty plea, but a charge of indecent exposure will NEVER be pled to a charge of first class child molestation, because it is NOT a lesser included offense, it's a far more SEVERE offense.

[RetroLounge]

184. Have you read the article?

You should be asking yourself the same question.

He EXPOSED himself. No touching. No rape. He had the mental capacity of a 12 yr old.

What part of that brings the Death Penalty in your book?

RL

[Renew Deal]

201. Where in that article does it say that he "exposed" himself?

Here is a quote from another article. "Clovis Ivan Claxton, 38, who was convicted of sexually assaulting child in Washington in 1991, had lived at 3230 SE. 45 Street in Ocala for about two years."

http://www.local6.com/news/4405099/detail.html

I never advocated the death penalty and you know it. I am just suggesting that the world is a little better off today than it was yesterdy. Of course it's sad for his mom (family), but the state didn't kill him.

[RetroLounge]

213. Your glee is visible.

sad...

RL

[Renew Deal]

216. I am not gleeful

This is sad for the people involved, especially the 9 year old (who is 27 now).

[RetroLounge]

222. Yeah, I'm sure that exposure scarred her for life.

:eyes:

RL

[Renew Deal]

266. Now that's crude.

Did you knew that the affects of molestation have life long affects on a person. There are trust issues, intimacy issues, psychological issues. How could you possibly call me sanctimonious and say something like that?

[RetroLounge]

214. Now read the entire thread and get back to me

when you can get over your hatred.

RL

[Renew Deal]

217. You said: "Have you read the article?"

I have. I am still waiting for you to show me where in the article it says he exposed himself. I even posted another article and his registry entry and there is nothing there about exposing himself. Feel free to show me where it says that in that article. Did you even bother to read it?

[RetroLounge]

221. Now read a bit more

http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050422/LOCAL/204220346/1078/news&template=printart

"His parents have been his caregivers his entire life. And when they couldn't be there with him, they hired a baby-sitter. He exposed himself to the baby-sitter's daughter. At age 20, his mother said her son was at the mental age of 12."

A crime, of which he served his time. Not a crime worth wishing him dead or being gleeful that he is. I'm sure you would proud to be one of his neighbors with the flyers.

Sanctimonious crap is fun to watch. Please continue.

RL

[Renew Deal]

265. That was not the article posted.

Will you admit that you didn't read the original article now? Also, what his mom says doesn't jive with the charge on the sex offenders site. So who is wrong, the sex offender site or his mom?

You keep saying things that are not true (putting words in my mouth). I never wished him dead and I am not "gleeful that he is dead." You said that, not me.

[carolinayellowdog]

162. Those who are proud of their lack of empathy belong at FR

and wherever they express those feelings here, I become more aware that Americans in general have become steadily less empathetic and more bloodthirsty, since the * gang took over.

[RetroLounge]

183. Sad, yes, even so-called DEMS

RL

[Renew Deal]

204. Hate to break it to you.

But even Democrats don't like child molesters as their neighbors. That doesn't mean that everyone has to agree. Feel free to live with them if you like.

[RetroLounge]

212. Define child molester?

You should read before spouting.

:eyes:

RL

[Renew Deal]

218. Dictionary.com says

1 entry found for child molester.
child molester

n : a man who has sex (usually sodomy) with a boy as the passive partner

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=child%20molester

OK, that doesn't define it perfectly. How about "molest."

Main Entry: mo·lest
Pronunciation: m&-'lest
Function: transitive verb
1 : to annoy, disturb, or persecute esp. with hostile intent or injurious effect
2 : to make annoying sexual advances to; specifically : to force physical and usually sexual contact on (as a child) —

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=molest

[TryingToWarnYou]

288. Youre fighting a losing battle..this guy is just going to defend them.

Let him live in fantasy land where no child is ever molested, no woman is ever raped or sodomized etc. Ignorance is bliss and he is the happiest person on Earth.

[TryingToWarnYou]

287. If we have to define what a child molester is, something is wrong with YOU

not us.

BTW, lets hear your definition of what a child molester is.

[IdaBriggs]

192. I am very proud of my lack of empathy for this guy (based on the

original post). Bush didn't make me less empathetic on this topic -- my exposure to the victims of molestation and rape did that. I have said it in an earlier post -- in my family alone, we have over 90% child molestation rate for 15 women with DIFFERENT perpetrators and a 0% conviction rate. In fact, I think the only one I know of who got jail time was the guy who put the gun in the mouth of the 4-year old, but since she was just a flower girl at my brother's wedding, she isn't included in my family stats....

[chascarrillo]

233. Why don't you base it on the actual facts of the case?

C'mon, admitting that you're wrong is not a weakness.

[IdaBriggs]

332. Based on the actual facts of the case, I'm glad the guy is dead.

I hope more sexual predators choose to follow his example. I'm a mean, mean woman with a ZERO tolerance policy for predators. :)

[Puglover]

335. Putting a smiley face after expressing your glee

that another human being is dead I think says buckets about you.
The reason I think the lists are bogus is Im all for much harsher jail sentences. If someone is dangerous enough to be branded by being put on a sex offender list they should'nt be out in public to begin with.

[Name removed]

203. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[siliconefreak]

142. I wrote to the Sheriff

I emailed the Sheriff last night. Here is my note to him, and the response I received this morning.

------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sheriff Dean -

I was very saddened to read about the suicide of Clovis Claxton. Although there were apparently signs posted in the neighborhood about him, I am proud of the fact that you discouraged them. Thank you for being a voice of reason. Hatred and hysteria have no place in a civilized society.

I've emailed Commissioner Harris to express my deep disappointment in him. He's told the news media that he is "undeterred in his quest" to post notices regarding sex offenders. Let's hope that he is unsuccessful in his "quest".

Best regards,

Mark R******
San Francisco, CA

------------------------------------------------------

and the response I received:

Thank you for taking the time to send your message. The e-mail was printed and given to Sheriff Dean. He was touched that someone so far away would take the time to respond.

Capt. Dennis Strow

------------------------------------------------------

I'm impressed that the Captain passed my message along to the Sheriff, and that he took a moment to respond to me. I was afraid he would see "San Francisco" and roll his eyes.

[TK421]

146. The pen is truly mightier than the sword!

OK-that was in poor taste....:D

[American Tragedy]

165. Sex crime registries MUST be very very thorough if they're to be effective

I don't know about the rest of yall, but on our site it provides mugshots and lists the names, addresses, dates of birth, physical descriptions, and THE SPECIFIC OFFENSE AND COUNTS, i.e. molestation of a child under the age of 12, first degree rape, sexual assault, whatever. Thus, one is able to easily distinguish the truly dangerous criminals, which apparently do comprise the majority of the registry. I haven't found a single one who was convicted strictly of indecent exposure or anything like that.

I fail to understand why individuals guilty of numerous counts of child rape are released into public at all, though. If these individuals are so dangerous with such a great rate of recidivism, why the hell are they let out to live in residential areas?

Incidentally, harrassment of listed criminals is also a punishable offense here.

[JPZenger]

167. Back When Dennis Miller Was Funny ...

Back in the days when Dennis Miller was funny, he did a routine about child molesters. He said that if feel an uncontrollable urge to molest little kids "why don't you just lean into the strike zone and take one for the team."

[NVMojo]

174. fecking sick, all of it...

[Massachusetts]

175. And just how many

of these good people that put out the signs will be singing "Amazing Grace' this coming Sunday morning? Praise GEE SUS!!!


Note: I do NOT condone sex offenders of any kind, but just like other criminals (white collar and blue), and hypocrites, they are out there and you have to deal with them adhering to the rules of OUR society.

[MrSlayer]

191. Self inflicted justice serves as well as any.

No sympathy coming from me at all. If you wish to avoid such "humiliation" do not molest children or expose yourself to them or anything of the sort. I hate and despise child predators. Good riddance.

[Megahurtz]

193. Oh Well....

:nopity::shrug::nopity:

[siliconefreak]

194. someday we'll be more civilized

Killing solves none of our problems. It's truly a simple-minded method of solving the problems of society.

[DoNotRefill]

211. Who killed who here?

the Government didn't kill anybody....his neighbors didn't kill anybody....he killed himself because a charge that he had been convicted of and which was a matter of public record became known.

Ever hear the saying "And the truth shall set you free"?

[siliconefreak]

220. I was responding to #191

His post suggests that it's a good thing to see someone commit suicide.

[frustrated_lefty]

250. I'm willing to consider the possibility that a child-rapist is deranged,

out of control, in a place which cripples them, and endangers those around them.

I think the individuals who are so afflicted might rather die by their own hand than re-envision what they've done.

I can feel a tiny bit of sorrow for these people. It must suck to wake up and realize what you've done. And, in fairness, most of these people wake to realize they've done to others what was done to them. It's a nasty cycle, just full of sadness for all involved.

That said, child molesters should be put down. Perhaps peacefully, with a kiss upon the brow, but you have to acknowledge something went wrong with this turn of the karmic wheel and you let them try to fix their own sickness.

[progressivebydesign]

274. He was NOT a child rapist, according the the article..

.. he exposed himself to a child when he was younger. The man was mentally and physically disabled and in a wheelchair.

While I have zero tolerance for sexual criminals, you have to read the story to understand who was wrong in all this. Here's a hint.. the neighbors. They sound like people too ignorant to find out the story on the guy before they went off on him.

[DoNotRefill]

279. Did you read the code on what he confessed to?

sexual contact of genitals or "intimate" areas is a required prong.


You keep saying that he only exposed himself. I've quoted the code, and the official Florida website that listed what he was convicted of.

Why do you take the word of the criminal's mother over the statutory language that I've provided you with?

[frustrated_lefty]

301. Well, I make mistakes on this forum.

When they're pointed out to me, I apologize. In this case, the article reads: "Claxton's death follows the high-profile arrests of sex offenders in the separate killings of two Florida girls less than seven weeks apart. State lawmakers have responded by passing a bill to require lifetime supervision of some child sex offenders."

Perhaps the man is/was innocent.

If someone touched one of my children, I would start looking for the most likely source. I'm sorry if this seems like prophiling to you, or something else unfair. These are MY kids. I'll do anything I can to keep them safe, even if it is unfair. I apologize if that strikes you wrong. My job is to keep them safe.

[Mondon]

323. You are relying on his parents for those facts

not an unbiased source.

[noonwitch]

303. Sex offenders are frequently suicidal or self-destructive

Many are seriously damaged individuals. I wouldn't blame it on the signs.

[CWebster]

314. Would Jesus recognize the humanity of a child molester?

They say there is no cure so is it like a disease that a child molester experiences? And if it is something that can be controlled but not cured, is it the child molester's fault?

Would Jesus understand?

[Megahurtz]

321. "Would Jesus understand"?

Matthew 18:6 in the Bible says:

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him if a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

Hmmmm..........I think Jesus understands.

[Name removed]

318. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[6000eliot]

319. Put them in jail forever or put them to death

but don't pretend that it is just to punish people beyond their time served. There is no justice for anyone if there is no justice for everyone.

[HuckleB]

328. I am disturbed by the tone of this thread.

And, having noted a number of DU threads where many posters excuse "hot" female rapists, I wonder if the same response would be noted if the suicide was that of a "hot" female rapist, and not an apparently developmentally disabled/brain damaged man, 18-years removed from his offense.

I have no sympathy for sex offenders. I have worked with those they abuse for far too long. However, I am incredibly unsettled by the witch hunt aura of this story. This feels like a modern-day Salem more than a community trying to protect its children. And many of the posts on this thread have only served to add to that aura.

[Megahurtz]

333. I don't think that many women

are able to rape anyone with their orifices, so the word "female rapist" is not quite the proper term.

Of course I'm not excusing the women you are referring to for what they did.

But simply put, you are WAY outnumbered here on the gender issue, hence the tone of this thread.

[6000eliot]

334. Hear hear!

You said what I wanted to say much more eloquently than I did.

[Kathryn7]

337. He may have commited suicide because he can't live with what he has done.

He may have had a conscience that would not let him rest.

[Moderator]

338. locking

Discussion has ceased to be productive.