Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

 
Home | Sex Offender Registry | Megan's Law | Forums (Message Boards) | News Archive
AMBER Alert | Law Enforcement Agencies | Directory of Sites | Polls | Library | Glossary | More Resources                             Login | About Us

Forum: In the News

Thread (Discussion): [Los Angeles Times] Ruling widens sex offender list - M22G


In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 136729
Introduction


Posted by
admin on Jun 29, 2004 02:56 PM | Also by admin
Gender: N/A, Age Bracket: N/A, State: N/A, Country: N/A

Discuss the article Ruling widens sex offender list, by Maura Dolan, which appeared on Los Angeles Times on June 29, 2004.

Forum Home | Top of Thread
In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 136733 (In Reply to Message 136729)
Awesome


Posted by
dp1 on Jun 29, 2004 07:27 PM | Also by dp1
Gender: Female, Age Bracket: N/A, State: Florida, Country: United States

The state Supreme Court had ruled that requiring registration for such a relatively minor offense was cruel and unusual punishment, but Monday's ruling said that being required to register as a sex offender was not punishment at all, considering it instead a regulatory measure designed to assist law enforcement and to protect the public.


The ole expo facto trick didn't work, eh? There was never any doubt in my mind about this ruling. It makes no sense not to register SO's. Why would anyone in their right mind not want to know this information? Seems to me it would be hard to prove that registration was anything other than a regulatory measure. The punishment argument has no punch as far as I have seen. It basically boils down to SO's not wanting their dirty laundry aired and the rest of society needing to know this information.

Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (136729)
In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 136767 (In Reply to Message 136733)


Posted by
momto2girls on Jul 01, 2004 01:01 AM | Also by momto2girls
Gender: Female, Age Bracket: N/A, State: Wyoming, Country: United States

I know that when my daughters first offender was sentenced they told him that he was required to register for 50 years and submit DNA.

Is this a common practice with the 50 years and DNA? or was it just a thing here in Wyoming?

Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (136733)
In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 136770 (In Reply to Message 136767)
M22G


Posted by
dp1 on Jul 01, 2004 04:08 AM | Also by dp1
Gender: Female, Age Bracket: N/A, State: Florida, Country: United States

The length of time seems to vary from state to state. Each state seems to have different versions of Megan's Laws and different labels for sex offenders; i.e. predators, Agravated SO, Level 1, 2, or 3, etc...

Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (136767)

Thread


136729, admin, Jun 29, 2004 02:56 PM [Introduction]
      136733, dp1, Jun 29, 2004 07:27 PM [Awesome]
            136767, momto2girls, Jul 01, 2004 01:01 AM
                  136770, dp1, Jul 01, 2004 04:08 AM [M22G]

Forum Home | Top of Thread
Tell a Friend about this page.
Copyright 1998-2007 SexCriminals.com and Befriend | About Site | Credits | Contact Us