Ohio's new Sex-offener-registry'r'Us

[Liar]

Jolly good, a nessecary evil, or downright scary?



------------------------------------

Plan gains to publicly identify accused
Ohio panel backs registry proposal

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - An Ohio legislative panel yesterday rubber-stamped an unprecedented process that would allow sex offenders to be publicly identified and tracked even if they've never been charged with a crime.

No one in attendance voiced opposition to rules submitted by Attorney General Jim Petro's office to the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review, consisting of members of the Ohio House and Senate.

The committee's decision not to interfere with the rules puts Ohio in a position to become the first state to test a "civil registry."

The concept was offered by Roman Catholic bishops as an alternative to opening a one-time window for the filing of civil lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse that occurred as long as 35 years ago.

A recently enacted law allows county prosecutors, the state attorney general, or, as a last resort, alleged victims to ask judges to civilly declare someone to be a sex offender even when there has been no criminal verdict or successful lawsuit.

The rules spell out how the untried process would work. It would largely treat a person placed on the civil registry the same way a convicted sex offender is treated under Ohio's so-called Megan's Law.

The person's name, address, and photograph would be placed on a new Internet database and the person would be subjected to the same registration and community notification requirements and restrictions on where he could live.

A civilly declared offender, however, could petition the court to have the person's name removed from the new list after six years if there have been no new problems and the judge believes the person is unlikely to abuse again.

The attorney general's office said it continues to hold discussions with a group representing day care operators about one of the rules pertaining to what such facilities would do with information they might receive pertaining to someone on the registry if that person is living nearby.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Jolly good, a nessecary evil, or downright scary?



------------------------------------

Plan gains to publicly identify accused
Ohio panel backs registry proposal

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - An Ohio legislative panel yesterday rubber-stamped an unprecedented process that would allow sex offenders to be publicly identified and tracked even if they've never been charged with a crime.

No one in attendance voiced opposition to rules submitted by Attorney General Jim Petro's office to the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review, consisting of members of the Ohio House and Senate.

The committee's decision not to interfere with the rules puts Ohio in a position to become the first state to test a "civil registry."

The concept was offered by Roman Catholic bishops as an alternative to opening a one-time window for the filing of civil lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse that occurred as long as 35 years ago.

A recently enacted law allows county prosecutors, the state attorney general, or, as a last resort, alleged victims to ask judges to civilly declare someone to be a sex offender even when there has been no criminal verdict or successful lawsuit.

The rules spell out how the untried process would work. It would largely treat a person placed on the civil registry the same way a convicted sex offender is treated under Ohio's so-called Megan's Law.

The person's name, address, and photograph would be placed on a new Internet database and the person would be subjected to the same registration and community notification requirements and restrictions on where he could live.

A civilly declared offender, however, could petition the court to have the person's name removed from the new list after six years if there have been no new problems and the judge believes the person is unlikely to abuse again.

The attorney general's office said it continues to hold discussions with a group representing day care operators about one of the rules pertaining to what such facilities would do with information they might receive pertaining to someone on the registry if that person is living nearby.

Liar,
Does this mean 3/4 of the Lit Ohio members will have to register?

 

[R. Richard]

"COLUMBUS - An Ohio legislative panel yesterday rubber-stamped an unprecedented process that would allow sex offenders to be publicly identified and tracked even if they've never been charged with a crime."

How can someone be a "sex offender" if they've never been charged with a crime? The statement makes no sense.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

"COLUMBUS - An Ohio legislative panel yesterday rubber-stamped an unprecedented process that would allow sex offenders to be publicly identified and tracked even if they've never been charged with a crime."

How can someone be a "sex offender" if they've never been charged with a crime? The statement makes no sense.

Are you from Ohio? Have you ever seen a porn film? Have you ever lusted after your neighbor? REGISTER SUCKER!!!!

I agree. It's crazy.

 

[Liar]

"COLUMBUS - An Ohio legislative panel yesterday rubber-stamped an unprecedented process that would allow sex offenders to be publicly identified and tracked even if they've never been charged with a crime."

How can someone be a "sex offender" if they've never been charged with a crime? The statement makes no sense.

Article left out an "alledged", I suppose.

Basically, if A charges B with sex crime, and police and judge finds no evidence or not enough for trial or convicition, B can still be put on the perv list. With the same staus there are convicted offenders.

Sure, many real sexoffenders gofree because of lack of evidence. But this has abuse of the system by the disgruntled ex written all over it.

 

[S-Des]

Are you from Ohio? Have you ever seen a porn film? Have you ever lusted after your neighbor? REGISTER SUCKER!!!!

I agree. It's crazy.

And yet passed without a single 'nay' vote. It's pathetic. We all fear for our children, but politicians use the issue to make themselves look, "tough on crime." They keep passing more stringent rules and no one complains because you wouldn't want to, "help the sickos," would you? The problem is when you know people on a registry. In this state (and several of the surrounding), it's illegal for someone under 16 to have sex (used to be 17). That doesn't mean with an adult, that means illegal period.

In Wisconsin, there was a case where a 15 year old boy got his 14 year old girlfriend pregnant. Despite her parents initial anger, the kids convinced everyone that they would get married and both take care of the baby. After both sets of parents agreed, the boy was still prosecuted by the state's attorney's office. The boy (who would be in his early 20's now) is a convicted sex offender and if he moved near you (with his wife and child), all you'd know from a register is that. Does that really make anyone safer? How 'bout the damage to the wife and child when people find out he's a "pervert"? Of course she was involved too, but that's a whole different discussion.

The law is a sliding scale (so you are guilty of a more serious offense if you are older than your "victim"), but anyone in the states who has had sex under the age of 16 (even consensual touching), has committed a crime. You should be on the list...for the rest of your life. Makes you feel all warm and cozy, doesn't it?

 

[cloudy]

I knew there was a reason that Ohio wasn't on my list of places I wouldn't mind living.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Oh. My. God.

This makes me physically ill.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Article left out an "alledged", I suppose.

Basically, if A charges B with sex crime, and police and judge finds no evidence or not enough for trial or convicition, B can still be put on the perv list. With the same staus there are convicted offenders.

Sure, many real sexoffenders gofree because of lack of evidence. But this has abuse of the system by the disgruntled ex written all over it.

Here in the States there is a difference between criminal and civil suits. You could be found not guilty in a criminal court but found guilt in a civil court. Of course the rules of evidence are a lot more lax in the civil court.

Even though, it still sounds fishy to me. If I have not been found criminally guilty but found guilty in a civil suit why should I be placed on a registry for criminal?

 

[Liar]

Here in the States there is a difference between criminal and civil suits. You could be found not guilty in a criminal court but found guilt in a civil court. Of course the rules of evidence are a lot more lax in the civil court.

Even though, it still sounds fishy to me. If I have not been found criminally guilty but found guilty in a civil suit why should I be placed on a registry for criminal?

As I read it, you didn't even have to be found guilty in civil court to end up on the registry. To quote:

"...ask judges to civilly declare someone to be a sex offender even when there has been no criminal verdict or successful lawsuit."

 

[Selena_Kitt]

As I read it, you didn't even have to be found guilty in civil court to end up on the registry. To quote:

"...ask judges to civilly declare someone to be a sex offender even when there has been no criminal verdict or successful lawsuit."

see this is what I read, too... which means even if you are CLEARED in a civil court (where the burden of proof is not "beyond a reasonable doubt" but rather "preponderance of the evidence" which is much more lax) you can STILL be put on a this sex offenders list!??

It's going to be as easy to put someone on a sex offenders list in Ohio as it is to get a restraining order... maybe easier, sounds like...

 

[Guest]

 

[Zeb_Carter]

As I read it, you didn't even have to be found guilty in civil court to end up on the registry. To quote:

"...ask judges to civilly declare someone to be a sex offender even when there has been no criminal verdict or successful lawsuit."

Then that goes against all the laws on the books. If I haven't been convicted of anything how and why do I whind up on the registry.

There will be a case in the supreme court before you know it.

 

[cantdog]

Lots of unconstutional stuff gets passed into law. It was illegal to vote for Nader in 2000, in North Carolina. If you voted for him, they threw out not just the vote for president, but the whole ballot. Unconstitutional? Sure. But it wouldn't become a test case in court until the damage was done. Same with some of the 'profiling' cases. While they are still a law, you can use them. There's a time lag before a wacked out law can be struck down.

Jammies? State government would be fine, except that the Wrong Element (politicians) keeps applying fo the job.

 

[CharleyH]

Lots of unconstutional stuff gets passed into law. It was illegal to vote for Nader in 2000, in North Carolina. If you voted for him, they threw out not just the vote for president, but the whole ballot. Unconstitutional? Sure. But it wouldn't become a test case in court until the damage was done. Same with some of the 'profiling' cases. While they are still a law, you can use them. There's a time lag before a wacked out law can be struck down.

Jammies? State government would be fine, except that the Wrong Element (politicians) keeps applying fo the job.

Concur. Lots of horrid things get past the people. The sad part? We normally sit here talking instead of doing.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

At the risk of sounding inflammatory, it's shit like this that makes me view armed revolution as a useful alternative. The politicians are less and less the representatives of the people and more and more a bunch of crooks, petty tyrants, and demagogues.

All it would take is for me to piss off some dude in Ohio and...

 

[cantdog]

Concur. Lots of horrid things get past the people. The sad part? We normally sit here talking instead of doing.

Well, doing. Doing is a problem. Not least because the people involved in the system are, well, politicians, by definition. You would have to become one. Unless armed revolution is more your thing.

Really. It's not so hard. Go to the meetings of your particular chosen party. Volunteer to collate mailings and stuff envelopes. You'll find it's not hard work, and all of a sudden your voice is multiplied by many times, when you say something, especially if you've put in the time on the envelope and meeting gig. There are not that many people who do this stuff, and you could very quickly become a respected voice within your party without ever being noticed by the press or the people.

 

[Liar]

It was illegal to vote for Nader in 2000, in North Carolina.

Um... why? Now I'm endelessly curious.

The sad part? We normally sit here talking instead of doing.

Yeah, but the doing business is what we elect politiciand to take care of. In order to do, we'd have to become politicians ourselves. Oh the horror.

 

[cantdog]

They made a state law, Liar. It was something "both" mainstream parties could get behind, because it basically nullified any other party.

 

[Liar]

They made a state law, Liar. It was something "both" mainstream parties could get behind, because it basically nullified any other party.

Yeah. But what was the official argument for it? I can't just have been "because we wanna".

U can't vote Nader...because we say so?

Or

U can't vote Nader because [insert dumbass excuse for a reason here]?

 

[rgraham666]

How are we going to know who the enemy is if they aren't on a list somewhere?

 

[3113]

Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just have these alleged sex offenders embroider a nice red letter X on their clothes?

Or maybe that should be an armband. That would express more honestly what Ohio's doing....

Hm. If all it takes is an accusation...can we accuse every member of the Ohio government who passed this law? Get them all on the list for six years? Wouldn't that do a lot for their political careers.

 

[cantdog]

Nope, you accuse and some panel of judges someplace rules on it. Too bad. The mere accusation idea you have there, that one would be easy to beat.

 

[colddiesel]

Playing politics

If the essential element of any democracy is "freedom under the law" this is neither freedom, nor is it law.

 

[R. Richard]

Lots of unconstutional stuff gets passed into law. It was illegal to vote for Nader in 2000, in North Carolina. If you voted for him, they threw out not just the vote for president, but the whole ballot. Unconstitutional? Sure. But it wouldn't become a test case in court until the damage was done. Same with some of the 'profiling' cases. While they are still a law, you can use them. There's a time lag before a wacked out law can be struck down.

There really doesn't have to be a time lag. Way back when there was a case in Georgia where a black man was charged with something insane, and convicted because he was black. The Georgia Supreme Court upheld the conviction. Within 15 MINUTES the US Supreme Court overturned the Georgia ruling.