|
|
Forum: In the News
Thread (Discussion): [10News.com] Police officer ordered to register as sex offender
Message 163995
Introduction
Posted by admin
on Oct 09, 2005 05:49 PM | Also by admin
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: N/A |
Discuss the article Police officer ordered to register as sex offender, which appeared on 10News.com on October 09, 2005.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 164076 (In Reply to Message 163995)
Posted by steve
on Oct 10, 2005 04:08 PM | Also by steve
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Virginia,
Country: United States |
Navigatr1, any comments?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (163995)
Message 164112 (In Reply to Message 163995)
Posted by dp1
on Oct 11, 2005 12:55 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
When we register LE we keep their addresses confidential for obvious reasons. I'm sure CA would do the same.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (163995)
Message 164120 (In Reply to Message 164112)
Posted by artie
on Oct 11, 2005 02:12 AM | Also by artie
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Each LEO I looked up had the addresses posted.
One was even all over the newspapers recently in Davie. A nieghbor was making life hell for them.
So is an ex-officer less likely to offend than all of the other RSO's? Where is the protection for the children from these monsters?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164112)
Message 164122 (In Reply to Message 164112)
Posted by Renunciation
on Oct 11, 2005 03:21 AM | Also by Renunciation
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: Bahrain |
It is not that obvious to me.
Registries are public to allow the free lfow of information so the public "can protect itself" They are not meant to be punishment or a means for harassing the offender. Keeping their addresses confidential places the public, particularly children, at risk.
In many states it is against the law to use the public lists for harassing the offender or his/her family.
Former employment is moot, a new set of rules shall apply and former LEOs are protected because the public lists are not to be used to harm or harass the offenders. If they do use the lists to harass them, they can be charged with a crime.
A San Diego Cnty deputy was recently convicted of a sex offense. He was boinking a few teenie cop groupies in Riverside County. He took a plea, but he must register. However, I am not sure if he will make the state site or not. I am not allowed to view the CA website because I am an offender, but my wife told me that I am not listed, but those that are do not have their previous employment(er) listed.
Would this exclusion apply to federal intelligence agents NSA/CIA/DIA and FBI agents as well? If so, then people who worked in a military capacity in support of NSA and DIA missions might also be considered or automatically flagged for exclusion? I find it odd that those agencies would be communicating that well. I find even more surprising that ANY exclusion to being listed would exist in today's culture and 'tudes about sex crimes.
I wonder..... because I do not appear on my convicting state, nor my resident state and I came up clean on a background check when I was working for a PI doing Workmans Comp Fraud surveillence. I disclosed per my T&Cs and just to be honest. He ran a background and came back with zilch, nada, nothing... I said are you sure?????? He verified my SSN and full name, etc... all that came up was a bankruptcy and something else unrelated to sex crime.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164112)
Message 164126 (In Reply to Message 164076)
Posted by Navigatr1
on Oct 11, 2005 04:26 AM | Also by Navigatr1
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Yes, I saw this article and posted a snippet here
http://www.sexcriminals.com/forums/101/16429/164069.html
It was a followup to another article about Hensley. I don't know if his information will be made public on the registry too even though he is required to register as a sex offender.
--Navigatr1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164076)
Message 164146 (In Reply to Message 164120)
Posted by dp1
on Oct 11, 2005 08:32 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Each LEO I looked up had the addresses posted.
I'll stick my neck out here and say that it's probably because the Department of Corrections did not enter their address as confidntial...the rules are clear.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164120)
Message 164147 (In Reply to Message 164146)
Posted by dp1
on Oct 11, 2005 08:36 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Also, when he registers he needs to say something about the confidential address because he's a prior LEO. The people doing the registering don't know that.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164146)
Message 164164 (In Reply to Message 164146)
Posted by artie
on Oct 11, 2005 04:23 PM | Also by artie
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
the rules are clear.
Are they now? The intent of Megan's Law was chrystal clear too, until local and State Lawmakers got a hold on it.
In Broward County, there is only one confidential address, in Hollywood due to death threats and attempts (no matter how deserved) on his life.
But you can yahoo his address lol.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164146)
Message 164165 (In Reply to Message 164147)
Posted by artie
on Oct 11, 2005 04:24 PM | Also by artie
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
They were denied. as well they should. This is not a punishment, it is public information.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164147)
Message 164189 (In Reply to Message 164122)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 11, 2005 07:31 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Curious Ren. Do you have a kid living in the home? If you do, don't you suppose you have the same right to access the registry as anybody else to protect the child from sex offenders? Sure you have a wife. What if she leaves you and its just you and the child?
I'm still wondering why no sex offender with a family has contested this aspect of the law. Especially since every person has the right to know what information the government has on them and assure its accuracy.
BTW I access the California registry all the time, SO status aside. They can find me and bust me if they want. I'll welcome the lawsuit and the millions it will get me.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164122)
Message 164190 (In Reply to Message 163995)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 11, 2005 07:34 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Other links disturbed me more than his crimes. Two at the bottom of hte page.
LOS ANGELES -- Police discovered the body of a newborn early Monday in a box behind a popular restaurant, a few blocks from the University of Southern California.
PHOENIX -- The body of a baby girl was found in a trash can in a women's restroom at the airport, authorities said.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (163995)
Message 164193 (In Reply to Message 164189)
Posted by Renunciation
on Oct 11, 2005 08:29 PM | Also by Renunciation
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: Bahrain |
I do not live with my wife and daughter.
My convicting state specified her by name as being allowed to be alone with her AND allowed me to live in the home. However, I went back to my resident State, CA and in order to have my supervision accepted, I had to accept CA condistions which said alone with no one under 18 and cannot live at home.
It was a tough choice, but we operate a home-based business and I was more needed in CA, even if I could not live at home, my old home was my work address.
The CA PO's all came out and checked out my porch(home) and my work(wife's home) and approved the situation. They do home/work visits as well. They have tried to surprise me(us) and I am sure if one rule was being broken, they would violate me, rightfully so! My wife's appendix blew up last year, and she was laid up, and I needed to be there for her or have a backup. My PO happen to do a home visit. I had arranged for one of her friends to be here for three days, always ensuring I was never laone with the girl and sleeping over, to call me if I was needed. My PO saw the arrangement, talked to my wife, the friend and the girl, and seemed genuinely impressed that we had all ensured the rules were followed, even when we didnt know a visit was coming. There was an issue, he did not come alone, and his partner scared the heck out of the women and the girl, all three saying that he gave them the "willies" and that something was not right about him. They liked my PO, but his visit partner scared them.
We simply do not push the issues or the rules. My wife understands that if she were to ask me to just spend one night here with the girl here, that it would do several things. 1. Sets a REAL bad example to the girl. 2. Places custody of the girl at risk. 3. Harboring. I can stay at their house 18 hours a day, but if my head is to lay on a pillow to sleep, it will not be at their house unless the girl is staying someplace else, like at a friends or at camp.
I was planning to move "home" after my supervision, but the Gropinator signed the custody law, meaning anyone who lives with a sex offender is prohibited from having custody of their kid.
We discussed this at length and decided since we are already in "apart" mode, the few extra years would not be so painful. The biggest benefit to the new law is that I am uncertain how our daughter feels deep down and as she approaches the age of my victim, will she be concerned that I might view her as a potential victim. The new law essentially prevents this from being an issue. We will simply just live as we are now. We will maintain the probation rules until she turns 18.
We are very careful to NEVER discuss this in front of her. Kids have a tendency to take on their parents troubles as their own. I do not want her to EVER feel as though it is her fault we cannot all be together, for it isnt, it is miine.
So no, I cannot access the site and if you remember a previous post, my information was wrong and they went to the wrong house to verify me. They wanted to make a big deal out of it with me, until I showed them all my registration cards, which I had saved, and it showed my correct address on each one. They screwed up, and their law protects them from liability. My neighbor however was less than pleased, in fact I would say they were furious to the just shy of violence. He apparently toungue lashed the cops quite harshly, lol. So when they got to me, they were in a "mood" lol.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164189)
Message 164198 (In Reply to Message 163995)
Posted by mawmaw
on Oct 11, 2005 10:15 PM | Also by mawmaw
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
If he wants to DO like a sex criminal then he needs to register like a sex criminal ! A badge is NO excuse !
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (163995)
Message 164216 (In Reply to Message 164146)
Posted by artie
on Oct 12, 2005 03:01 AM | Also by artie
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
I'll stick my neck out here and say that it's probably because the Department of Corrections did not enter their address as confidntial...the rules are clear.
dp, where are these rules? I don't see them in statutes. Is it an FDLE rule? DOC?
It is rare not to have an address available down here. I only know of one, and you know I review almost every case.
Can you clarify please?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164146)
Message 164230 (In Reply to Message 164112)
Posted by oicu812
on Oct 12, 2005 05:32 AM | Also by oicu812
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
sorry dp1, that sounds like cronyism. cops take an oath which gives them certain powers, privelages and authority that the average citizen cannot enjoy. so why should the penalties and consequences not be greater to reflect the greater betrayal of trust?
sounds like some minimizing, failure to take responsibility and justifying to me. can it be that it is more of a shield to limit accountability for those in LE related fields, "just in case?"
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164112)
Message 164232 (In Reply to Message 164147)
Posted by oicu812
on Oct 12, 2005 05:37 AM | Also by oicu812
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
where are ya now, val? silent on this one? sucking up to LE 'cause you need their allegience?
dp1,
doesn't the community deserve the same protection against those who had a greater position of trust, yet chose to use it to sexually assault someone? maybe even greater protection?
i don't know, dp1, matbe we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164147)
Message 164234 (In Reply to Message 164193)
Posted by oicu812
on Oct 12, 2005 05:48 AM | Also by oicu812
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
nice.
you are doing a good job of understanding the difference between compliance and healthy practice. doing just a little more than is required goes a long way. keep it up!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164193)
Message 164235 (In Reply to Message 164190)
Posted by oicu812
on Oct 12, 2005 05:49 AM | Also by oicu812
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
ok. why?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164190)
Message 164322 (In Reply to Message 164234)
Posted by Renunciation
on Oct 12, 2005 05:23 PM | Also by Renunciation
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: Bahrain |
TY
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164234)
Thread
163995, admin, Oct 09, 2005 05:49 PM [Introduction]
164076, steve, Oct 10, 2005 04:08 PM
164126, Navigatr1, Oct 11, 2005 04:26 AM
164112, dp1, Oct 11, 2005 12:55 AM
164120, artie, Oct 11, 2005 02:12 AM
164146, dp1, Oct 11, 2005 08:32 AM
164147, dp1, Oct 11, 2005 08:36 AM
164165, artie, Oct 11, 2005 04:24 PM
164232, oicu812, Oct 12, 2005 05:37 AM
164164, artie, Oct 11, 2005 04:23 PM
164216, artie, Oct 12, 2005 03:01 AM
164122, Renunciation, Oct 11, 2005 03:21 AM
164189, orolan, Oct 11, 2005 07:31 PM
164193, Renunciation, Oct 11, 2005 08:29 PM
164234, oicu812, Oct 12, 2005 05:48 AM
164322, Renunciation, Oct 12, 2005 05:23 PM
164230, oicu812, Oct 12, 2005 05:32 AM
164190, orolan, Oct 11, 2005 07:34 PM
164235, oicu812, Oct 12, 2005 05:49 AM
164198, mawmaw, Oct 11, 2005 10:15 PM
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
