|
|
Forum: In the News
Thread (Discussion): [San Mateo County Times] 'I forgot' not a defense for sex offender's failing to register
Message 139327
Introduction
Posted by admin
on Sep 01, 2004 10:27 AM | Also by admin
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: N/A |
Discuss the article 'I forgot' not a defense for sex offender's failing to register, which appeared on San Mateo County Times on August 31, 2004.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 139328 (In Reply to Message 139327)
Posted by steve
on Sep 01, 2004 02:34 PM | Also by steve
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Virginia,
Country: United States |
"I forgot" isn't a good enough reason to keep a sex offender out of prison for failing to register with law enforcement officials, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday.
That's logical. "I forgot" or "I didn't know" would just about cover any law that was broken.
The decision means Donald Faye Barker, 54, who was convicted of raping or attempting to rape three elderly women in Redwood City in 1979, will have to serve his nine-year sentence for failing to inform authorities in 2000 of his address and vehicle registration, as sex offenders are required to do annually.
The sentence seems harsh to me, given the circumstances. He had been registered as required for several years until 2000. Then he was apparently contacted the next day, registered and was arrested. I think that those who willfully evade registration requirements, go into hiding, etc. should get harsh penalties, but penalties for situations like Barker's (at least as described in the article) should result in less severe penalties.
"We do not believe the Legislature intended that a defendant could successfully evade this duty by claiming 'I totally forgot about that,'" Justice Janice Brown wrote for the 6-1 majority.
Brown wrote that to overturn Barker's prison sentence would be to invite all sex offenders who fail to register make similar "I forgot" pleas.
For some reason, when I read the text above it's hard not to smile.
In case the other article is removed, here's a 2nd article about the decisions.
Forgetting is ruled no excuse Sex offenders who blank out face '3-strikes'
SFGate.com
August 31, 2004
By Bob Egelko
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (139327)
Message 139342 (In Reply to Message 139328)
Posted by orolan
on Sep 02, 2004 12:52 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Considering that he was a resident in a drug and alcohol treatment center at the time, and registered promptly on being reminded, the police never should have charged him, and the DA never should have prosecuted. If the man had such a substance-abuse problem that he had to enter a treatment facility, it's a wonder he even remembered he HAD a birthday, let alone that he had to renew his registration.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (139328)
Message 139344 (In Reply to Message 139342)
Posted by dp1
on Sep 02, 2004 02:37 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
His drug and alcohol treatment and location thereof is confidential information covered under the HIPAA laws. I have issues with releasing this entire story. So much for protecting people's medical information. If I was him I'd sue whoever released his treatment information. Sex offenders should be protected under HIPAA just like any other citizen in the U.S.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (139342)
Message 139363 (In Reply to Message 139344)
Posted by orolan
on Sep 02, 2004 05:09 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Sex offenders should be protected under HIPAA just like any other citizen in the U.S.
Yes, they should. But since society seems to think the venerable and revered Constitution doesn't apply to SO's, I doubt they give a you-know-what about our rights under HIPAA.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (139344)
Thread
139327, admin, Sep 01, 2004 10:27 AM [Introduction]
139328, steve, Sep 01, 2004 02:34 PM
139342, orolan, Sep 02, 2004 12:52 AM
139344, dp1, Sep 02, 2004 02:37 AM
139363, orolan, Sep 02, 2004 05:09 PM
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
