| Top Posters Since October 2003 |
|---|
dp1 | 4000+ | orolan | 4000+ | Navigatr1 | 2500+ | Silvert... | 2500+ | 1dadof5 | 2500+ | Valerie | 2000+ | steve | 1500+ | victori... | 1000+ | myoung | 1000+ | rabbitr... | 750+ | HPierce | 750+ | poetsdr... | 750+ | Renunci... | 750+ | lj | 750+ | fallenone | 500+ | DoTheCr... | 500+ | marta | 500+ | momhelp... | 500+ | prozac | 500+ | rebel51 | 500+ | PVulcan | 250+ | anti | 250+ | rodsmith | 250+ | LockEmUp | 250+ | Quest | 250+ | artie | 250+ | KK | 250+ | LostTime | 250+ | TGoodman | 250+ | amberleaf | 250+ | deadmom... | 250+ | brennus | 100+ | scarlett | 100+ | mousein... | 100+ | thepar | 100+ | assumpt... | 100+ | lildrafire | 100+ | JakeLF | 100+ | MrTruth | 100+ | june5 | 100+ |
| Newest Users |
|---|
| Registered within the last 72 hours. | | boobookitty | | lauraleee | | mommy123 | | rukbat14 |
|
|
Forum: In the News
Thread (Discussion): [Palm Beach Post] Post sex offender data online to clarify individual risk
Switch to Flat View
Message 158865 (In Reply to Message 158815)
Information needs to be correct!
Posted by ann018
on Aug 16, 2005 05:37 AM | Also by ann018
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
I would agree if they would ensure the information is correct. My son's is incorrect and has been since everything was finalized 8 months ago. We are trying to get it corrected; the judge has signed the order. However, the FDLE has yet to make any correction. The worst part is if a background check is completed on my son, it looks even worse than the registry. He was involved in a non-contact crime, in his home, no one else…just the computer. If I were as unaware today, as I was 19 months ago I would believe my son molested someone (registry states L&L Battery). It only gets worse though. When we ran a background check so he would know what an employer would see...it states sex offense against child-fondling-lewd lascivious act presence child und 16 yoa solicitation. He never spoke, saw or touched anyone, much less someone under the age of 18. He is guilty of having a raunchy conversation with someone he thought was the father of 14 year old (a detective), sending 1 transmission containing 2 pictures of child porn and possessing a total of 15 pictures that when the forensics was complete added up to 29 females they believed to be under the age of 18.
What he did was wrong; he has owned his mistake and is paying the price. He has been through 2 psychological evaluations (one after he began counseling right after his arrest and one ordered as part of his sentencing). Both show he has not pedophilia, is highly unlikely to re-offend and is not a risk to anyone. However, if I were only reading the registry or the background check I would believe he had molested someone under the age of 16. When you have the two words sex offender associated with your name your life is going to be tough enough - I see no need for the FDLE to inflate the information. They are very quick to put the information up, but very slow to correct!
| See an abbreviation or acronym, but don't know what it stands for? Consult
the Glossary. |
Switch to Flat View
Message 158815
Posted by orolan
on Aug 15, 2005 04:58 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Thread
158598, admin, Aug 13, 2005 02:54 PM [Introduction]
158762, dp1, Aug 15, 2005 05:12 AM
158786, Navigatr1, Aug 15, 2005 03:02 PM
158815, orolan, Aug 15, 2005 04:58 PM
158865, ann018, Aug 16, 2005 05:37 AM [Information needs to be correct!]
158914, orolan, Aug 16, 2005 04:12 PM
158953, ann018, Aug 17, 2005 02:08 AM
158986, dp1, Aug 17, 2005 02:16 PM [Ann]
159073, dp1, Aug 18, 2005 05:32 AM [Ann]
159998, dp1, Aug 28, 2005 11:19 PM [Great News]
158925, dp1, Aug 16, 2005 04:25 PM
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
