Sex Offender Notification

[LesStrat]

I just received one for a man in the next block. The RS Code/Description is:

14:92- Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor


Mais, wha

[phil_104]

By definition :

Any action by an adult that allows or encourages illegal behavior by a person under the age of 18, or that places children in situations that expose them to illegal behavior. Contributing to the delinquency of a minor can be as simple as keeping a child home from school and thus, making the child a truant. It also can manifest itself in more serious behavior. For example, an adult who commits a crime in the presence of a child can be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, as can an adult who serves alcoholic beverages to anyone under the legal drinking age. Still more egregious is sexual exploitation, which could include having sexual relations with minors or engaging in the production or trafficking of Child Pornography.

[grumptruck]

I am not defending peedoes, perverts. Nor am I defending the fella that ping'd the pedo-ar.

However some offenders shouldn't be on that list. There are tons of attention whoring kids and parents out there that fabricate retarded crap for revenge or out of spite.

I know a couple of people who lied about their ages and two lives are ruined because their parents decided that having lying kids wasn't the issue but the "sexual predator" that assaulted them was. Raise your whore kids better and Chester won't jump after the whore 15 year old.

Any parent that would let their teenager date/go-out/hang out with a late teen/adult is asking for trouble anyways. There was only three things on my mind at that age. Video-games, eating gummy bears while playing games and scoring. Any parent that would let their child hang out with someone of the opposite sex at that age needs to their face smacked.

Edited.

[LesStrat]

By definition :

Any action by an adult that allows or encourages illegal behavior by a person under the age of 18, or that places children in situations that expose them to illegal behavior. Contributing to the delinquency of a minor can be as simple as keeping a child home from school and thus, making the child a truant. It also can manifest itself in more serious behavior. For example, an adult who commits a crime in the presence of a child can be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, as can an adult who serves alcoholic beverages to anyone under the legal drinking age. Still more egregious is sexual exploitation, which could include having sexual relations with minors or engaging in the production or trafficking of Child Pornography.

If the man had sex with a minor, why settle for the charge of contributing???

, that's mostly rhetorical. I'm wondering how the legislature managed to add this charge to the list of sex offender crimes.

[phil_104]

If the man had sex with a minor, why settle for the charge of contributing???

, that's mostly rhetorical. I'm wondering how the legislature managed to add this charge to the list of sex offender crimes.

Could be a variety of reasons. Not trying to sound alarmist or trying to speculate to much, but it all depends on the evidence, what what could stick in court. Reading a bit more on it, it sounds like it's the charge used for contributing in some way to a crime. Kinda like an accessory to the fact charge.

[Lucid_Lunatic]

I thought that someone had to be convicted of a sexual crime against a kid in order to be on the community notification list. I don't know how contributing got him there, unless he copped out to a deal, and even then, the ones I've heard of still had some type of sexual crime against them, not the same charge as letting a teen have a beer.

[LesStrat]

I've long contended that the sex offender registry is grossly misleading. I reported a couple of years ago noticing that 2/3 of the notifications posted at one of our schools were obviously the result of sex with an underage girlfriend. Although I do not support that action, it clearly should not be held to the same level of contempt as rape.

The threat levels are not equal.

The original intent of the sex offender registry was to prevent dangerous folks from invading the 'hood. The 18yo who got caught groping his 16yo gf/classmate is likely a low threat to society as a whole.

The 40yo who forcibly raped a 5yo IS a high threat.

Sorry, I simply cannot wrap my head around the concept of "contributing" equating to "sex offender". Something's fishy.

[phil_104]

I thought that someone had to be convicted of a sexual crime against a kid in order to be on the community notification list. I don't know how contributing got him there, unless he copped out to a deal, and even then, the ones I've heard of still had some type of sexual crime against them, not the same charge as letting a teen have a beer.

I'll go ahead and deduce that the crime must have been sexual in nature for him to be on that list. For example, if he distributed child pornography, he'd be on that list. He contributed in the sense that he made the material available, and the creating of the material exploited an underaged individual. He didn't do it himself, but he is involved in the situation. That 1 possible scenario.

If you have questions, I assume you can get more information from the local authorities.

[grumptruck]

I've long contended that the sex offender registry is grossly misleading. I reported a couple of years ago noticing that 2/3 of the notifications posted at one of our schools were obviously the result of sex with an underage girlfriend. Although I do not support that action, it clearly should not be held to the same level of contempt as rape.

The threat levels are not equal.

The original intent of the sex offender registry was to prevent dangerous folks from invading the 'hood. The 18yo who got caught groping his 16yo gf/classmate is likely a low threat to society as a whole.

The 40yo who forcibly raped a 5yo IS a high threat.

Sorry, I simply cannot wrap my head around the concept of "contributing" equating to "sex offender". Something's fishy.

I agree with you.

[FretFire]

I'll go ahead and deduce that the crime must have been sexual in nature for him to be on that list. For example, if he distributed child pornography, he'd be on that list. He contributed in the sense that he made the material available, and the creating of the material exploited an underaged individual. He didn't do it himself, but he is involved in the situation. That 1 possible scenario.

If you have questions, I assume you can get more information from the local authorities.

"Contributing to the delinquency of a minor" means "helping a minor break the law", usually by giving them a substance they are too young to legally have. I'm with LS, I don't see how the dots connect here unless he gave/sold pornographic material to a minor or something?

[phil_104]

"Contributing to the delinquency of a minor" means "helping a minor break the law", usually by giving them a substance they are too young to legally have. I'm with LS, I don't see how the dots connect here unless he gave/sold pornographic material to a minor or something?

Or if he distributed or was involved in the making of child pornography.

I still think if you are concerned, contact the local authorities for more information. It's the only way to get a straight story.

[Blue Calx]

My guess is that this guy supplied alcohol to an underage kid who then went out and had sexual relations (willingly or not) with a different adult. Perhaps in the course of explaining the whole situation to a judge, it was admitted that the kid was drunk, and the supplier was held indirectly responsible for the sexual deed having been committed.

My guess is as good as y'all's. You could always go invite the guy over for tea/debriefing.

[UberMetalDood]

Things would be a lot simpler if we just exterminated child molesters. Then we don't have to worry about them living in our neighborhoods.

[Blue Calx]

Things would be a lot simpler if we just exterminated child molesters. Then we don't have to worry about them living in our neighborhoods.

That's a great idea! That way, if I ever decide I want someone dead, all I'd have to do is just pay some kid to falsely accuse them of being a pediatrician.

"but... but I don't have any credentials. I'm not even board-certif..." BANG!

[garublador]

I think the implication that there are people out there who troll bus stops looking for kids that they can lure into their van and then force them to play video games instead of going to school, just to let them go later, is a bit weird. Or that they come up to kids in parks and offer to buy them beer with no strings attached. It sounds like most of those crimes are the types of things that you really only do to kids you already have access to, which I suppose is the point of the thread.

[UberMetalDood]

That's a great idea! That way, if I ever decide I want someone dead, all I'd have to do is just pay some kid to falsely accuse them of being a pediatrician.

"but... but I don't have any credentials. I'm not even board-certi..." BANG!

That's dumb. If someone is convicted of child molestation then what do you propose? Do you want to crowd the prison population with them so they can participate in futile rehabilitation programs only to possibly get released early so they can do it again? Tell us your solution for this kind of human garbage then.

[Blue Calx]

That's dumb. If someone is convicted of child molestation then what do you propose? Do you want to crowd the prison population with them so they can participate in futile rehabilitation programs only to possibly get released early so they can do it again? Tell us your solution for this kind of human garbage then.

I realized after posting that I don't have a solution, so I turned my post into a joke. But I still think it's too easy to be falsely accused.

[UberMetalDood]

I realized after posting that I don't have a solution, so I turned my post into a joke. But I still think it's too easy to be falsely accused.

Fair enough.

[stratobastard]

...... what the fuuuuc. Chris Columbus is your neighbor?

[dominus]

There were three in my old neighborhood on the list within a few blocks. Two of them were the "older boyfriend/younger girlfriend" types. They were late teens/early 20s when they got put on the list, the girls were under 16 (age of consent here) but over 13. Then there was the 50 year old guy that did something with someone under 12, and had the highest classification/rating. There were another dozen within a one mile radius and most of them were the highest rating. Glad I moved.

Where I live now there's 4 within a 1 mile radius (which is pretty much the whole town anyway). Two of them work here but live elsewhere and the other two live here. One of them is a woman, so maybe the 13-16 year old victim was a student, another one had the lowest rating for "sexual delinquency", which could be any number of minor offenses. Then there's two scumbags with the highest rating for victims under 13, and one of them was doing it to his relatives.