Juveniles and the sex offender registry

Authorities don't disclose the names of rape victims under 18 or juvenile delinquents. In fact, once you turn 18, your criminal record is wiped. That is unless you end up on the sex offender registry.

When Kids Are Accused of Sex Crimes

Putting juveniles especially prepubescent children on the registry is a violation of the 8th amendment which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

Every state has laws regarding a difference in age regarding statutory rape (generally, within 2-3 years of age). Even in cases of that age difference being exceeded, there are laws to keep such offenders off the registry except in extreme cases.

Masterhawk said:

Authorities don't disclose the names of rape victims under 18 or juvenile delinquents. In fact, once you turn 18, your criminal record is wiped. That is unless you end up on the sex offender registry.

When Kids Are Accused of Sex Crimes

Putting juveniles especially prepubescent children on the registry is a violation of the 8th amendment which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

Click to expand...

No they should not.

Then again, IMO there should be NO sex offender registry. :no:

When it comes to under-aged children there is always going to be sexual experimentation and curiosity. There will also exist juvenile love expressed sexually between close in age teens. Our youth should not be punished for this.

However, there will also be overly aggressive abusiveness too. These children should be placed in counseling if the acts do not warrant charges, but if the acts were truly criminal, they should be placed in juvenile psychiatric care for rehabilitation.

The first thing to do is determine the difference before over-reacting and labeling a person for life.

As for adults?

IMO adults who are determined by psychiatric evaluation to be sexual predators should be incarcerated in a penal psychiatric facility until a panel of mental health professionals determine they are safe to release. Then like any other mental patient, they should be monitored under supervision closely after release.

Meanwhile, those not determined a threat should be treated like any other felon, at least after a first felony offense. That means monitoring while on probation/parole, then free of ALL liberty restrictions thereafter. :twocents:

The evidence shows that sex offender registries do more harm than good, so no.

Depends on what they do to get in it, doesn't it? If a minor rapes someone, then hell yes. If it's consensual sex with someone underage, no.

Masterhawk said:

Authorities don't disclose the names of rape victims under 18 or juvenile delinquents. In fact, once you turn 18, your criminal record is wiped. That is unless you end up on the sex offender registry.

When Kids Are Accused of Sex Crimes

Putting juveniles especially prepubescent children on the registry is a violation of the 8th amendment which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

Click to expand...

What is cruel or unusual about remembering, what people did?

From the article - "In Charla Roberts’s living room, not far from Paris, Texas, I learned how, at the age of ten, Roberts had pulled down the pants of a male classmate at her public elementary school. She was prosecuted for “indecency with a child,” and added to the state’s online offender database for the next ten years. The terms of her probation barred her from leaving her mother’s house after six in the evening, leaving the county, or living in proximity to “minor children,” which ruled out most apartments. When I spoke to the victim, he was shocked to learn of Roberts’s fate. He described the playground offense as an act of “public humiliation, instead of a sexual act”—a hurtful prank, but hardly a sex crime."

There's got to be tons and tons of young kids who are put into the same category as adult predators, and adults likewise put in the same category as rapist for pissing in public or some such. There are even cases of kids taking nudes of themselves and charged with pedophilia! How these kids can be both victims due to their age and treated like mature adult criminals is beyond me, but it's damn sure not justice

joG said:

What is cruel or unusual about remembering, what people did?

Click to expand...

They can't get a job or even leave the house at night or leave the county at 22 for some prank they did at 10, that's what

I think there should be a sex offender registry, but it should not be publicly accessible. It should be used only by law enforcement and mental health resources to keep tabs on these people, but not be publicly accessible so that people can live their lives.

Of equal importance, is reforming what it means to be a "sex offender". People are getting that label for peeing in alleys, or for indecent exposure. The only people who should be sex offenders are rapists and child molestors. Everything else needs re-classification because like most government registries it has become bloated and oppressive.

joG said:

What is cruel or unusual about remembering, what people did?

Click to expand...

If people were thoughtful and reasonable and objectively assessed a person's inclusion, I'd be with you. They're not, so I'm not.

radcen said:

If people were thoughtful and reasonable and objectively assessed a person's inclusion, I'd be with you. They're not, so I'm not.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the (at the time of the offense) young girl in the article now has to explain to everyone the specifics of her "crime" so they know she's not a predator, not that it will help her get a job. There's no attempt by the system to even follow up with the victims. The (at the time) little kid she de-pantsed seemed outraged she was still being punished for it a decade later. When the victim wants the system to lay off but it still doesn't, it's time to shut it down

Typical politicians trying to score reelection by catering to parents' fears, not even bothering to ensure when they made the registry that non predators wouldn't wind up there

chromium said:

Yeah, the (at the time of the offense) young girl in the article now has to explain to everyone the specifics of her "crime" so they know she's not a predator, not that it will help her get a job. There's no attempt by the system to even follow up with the victims. The (at the time) little kid she de-pantsed seemed outraged she was still being punished for it a decade later. When the victim wants the system to lay off but it still doesn't, it's time to shut it down

Typical politicians trying to score reelection by catering to parents' fears, not even bothering to ensure when they made the registry that non predators wouldn't wind up there

Click to expand...

And that's the bottom line.

Now, to be fair, some of that is on us, too. No politician will recommend to even scale back the list to remove the 18 yr old guy with a 15 yr old gf with a dick for a dad, or the guy who got drunk at a frat party at age 20 and peed behind a bush (exposed himself :roll, because if they did they would be vilified by their opponent in the next election as being "soft on crime" and "soft on pedophiles", even though that's the farthest thing from the truth. No one will take the time to read and understand exactly what is being proposed. They'll just go with the fear, like you say.

chromium said:

They can't get a job or even leave the house at night or leave the county at 22 for some prank they did at 10, that's what

Click to expand...

As always the prank's severity is important to consider. But in general I am not sure at all that a rape or molestation should be forgotten. That might motivate parents to bring their kids up better.

radcen said:

If people were thoughtful and reasonable and objectively assessed a person's inclusion, I'd be with you. They're not, so I'm not.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, it is important to consider the societal impact of structuring society as a game with memory instead of one without memory. The two are totally different in many important aspects and require substantially different controls and policing.

radcen said:

And that's the bottom line.

Now, to be fair, some of that is on us, too. No politician will recommend to even scale back the list to remove the 18 yr old guy with a 15 yr old gf with a dick for a dad, or the guy who got drunk at a frat party at age 20 and peed behind a bush (exposed himself :roll, because if they did they would be vilified by their opponent in the next election as being "soft on crime" and "soft on pedophiles", even though that's the farthest thing from the truth. No one will take the time to read and understand exactly what is being proposed. They'll just go with the fear, like you say.

Click to expand...

It even infects the judicial branch directly, for example the alabama and texas supreme court, which is why unelected federal judges are the only hope of doing away with making the 'criminals' the victims