Va. sex offender sues to remain anonymous

[deadparrot]

MANASSAS, Va., Sept. 11 (UPI) -- A Virginia man convicted when he was 18 of having sex with his sister is suing the state to prevent them from posting him as a sexual offender on the Internet.

Identified as John Doe in court documents, the 31-year-old is an aquatics coach in the Washington area but that's all he wants known about him, The Washington Post reported Monday.

The man pleaded guilty to incest in February 1994 when his sister was 14, and the arrest warrant says his sister told police sexual acts had been going on for seven years.

Doe was sentenced to 90 days in jail, with all of it suspended if he stayed out of trouble and got counseling. In March 1995, Doe fulfilled his obligations and was released from probation, the newspaper said.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060911-091233-4825r

[noonwitch]

1. There must be a larger story of child abuse behind this

If he'd been having sex with his sister for 7 years when he was 18, then something really bizarre was going on in that house beyond their relationship. I'll bet there was a whole lot of sexual abuse going on in which he was a victim, too.

If he's lived a law-abiding life since then, I think he shouldn't be listed as a sex offender. If he was raised in a crazy home with no boundaries, he didn't have the same level of understanding of his actions at 18 that most of us did.

[Demeter]

2. Perhaps His Victim Might Have a Say In This

It would be seemly for her to petition if she felt his privacy was more important than his public shame.

[LeftyMom]

3. That's one thing I worry about with registries

Revealing his name and his crime means that anybody who knows her could now find out about the incest, even though she was a minor and a victim of a sex crime, both deserving of privacy protection. She's now in a position where she'd have to stand up for her abuser in order to protect her own identity, which I really don't think is a fair place for the state to put her in. Perhaps asking the victim(s) if they want the offender's identity and crime searchable should be a step in listing someone?

[Virginia Dare]

8. Unless I'm missing something...

the Virginia database (I've been on it before) doesn't reveal the exact nature of the crime, only what statute it falls under, so it would be difficult to discern who the victim was unless you had personal knowledge of the details of the crime.

I'm not necessarily defending it, and I have questions about its consitutionality.

[dsc]

19. Unless it is a huge family

incest narrows the field quite a lot.

[NashVegas]

4. I Would Hope So

But I would hope whatever that say might be would be her own, and not influenced by family pressures.

[michaelwb]

6. And remember

If he'd been having sex with his sister for 7 years when he was 18, then something really bizarre was going on in that house beyond their relationship. I'll bet there was a whole lot of sexual abuse going on in which he was a victim, too.

If he's lived a law-abiding life since then, I think he shouldn't be listed as a sex offender. If he was raised in a crazy home with no boundaries, he didn't have the same level of understanding of his actions at 18 that most of us did.

And remember that if it had been for seven years by the time he was 18. They were BOTH minors when it started and for most of the time it was happening. I'm not endorsing what happened in any event.

But they were both minors in what may have been a very disturbed home environment.

[Bandit]

5. I am completely mixed on this issue

I believe in the constitution and it says no double jeopardy. Once a person is found guilty and sentenced no matter what the crime, after the sentence is completed that person should be left alone. Unless the judge makes it a condition of the sentencing then that person should be left alone. I understand what they say about recidivism but they also say pot users advance to harder drugs using the same science. :shrug: Let's follow the Constitution while it still exists okay...

[Virginia Dare]

7. I have mixed emotions about it as well...

on the one hand it seems to me to be a violation of constitutional rights, on the other hand, I admit, I have been on the database and I know where two convicted sex offenders live in my neighborhood.

One is an older retired gentleman, whom you would never suspect of such a thing.

[primavera]

12. You still don't know of what thing to suspect him

Megan's Laws don't discriminate: all categories of sex offenders are treated equally, placing the serial rapist and the guy who exposes himself on subways on the same level. Maybe the older retired gentleman is on the registry because his bladder was weak and he relieved himself against a tree somewhere and got caught. Indecent exposure is a sex offense, too, you know.

[Virginia Dare]

15. This is true...

but I believe he was convicted of sexual battery, I don't think urinating against a tree would qualify under that statute.

Like I said, I have some issues with this law, but I admit, I did take a peek.

[rodeodance]

16. my gut reaction is that they have done their time. I am not sure punishin

g them for the rest of their lives is productive at all.

[primavera]

9. Recidivism rates are high for all crimes...

... not just for sex offenders. This is yet another instance of misleading statistics: yes, recidivism rates are high, but no moreso than for other forms of criminal behavior, so why single out sex offenders on the grounds that they have high recidivism? There may be legitimate reasons to treat sex offenders differently than other categories of criminals, but high recidivism fails to distinguish it from other types of criminal conduct, so it makes for a spurious justification.

[gully]

10. Because they directly prey on people, often children.

Go ahead steal my car, but leave my family the F alone. On edit, some S.O's can have charges dropped from the offical record in certain circumstances.

[primavera]

11. Then that may be a valid reason...

... to treat them differently than other categories of offenders. But that has nothing to do with relative recidivism rates, which are, as noted, frequently misleadingly represented to suggest that sex offenders are likelier to transgress in the future than are other types of criminals, an allegation which simply isn't supported by the facts.

Another issue involves how you define sexual offenders for purposes of registration requirements. Under most state laws, statutory rape is included in the list of qualifying offenses, by which definition, the 18 year old girl who has sex with her 17 year old boyfriend would be equally subject to lifelong registration along with serial rapists. Does that make sense to anyone? Yet, that's what the law says in most states.

[gully]

13. I think we have to factor in that a great many "sex" crimes go un-reported

I doubt that those numbers compare in other crimes.

Also you stated:

Under most state laws, statutory rape is included in the list of qualifying offenses, by which definition, the 18 year old girl who has sex with her 17 year old boyfriend would be equally subject to lifelong registration along with serial rapists. Does that make sense to anyone? Yet, that's what the law says in most states.

I don't believe this is true. Here are the laws in NY for example:

Rape in the first degree is defined as above, and the age of consent is eleven (11).

Rape in the second degree is not defined by consent. Rather, when one person is over 18 and the other is less than 14 years of age, the State defined any sexual intercourse between them as rape.

Rape in the third degree is similarly defined. Here, one person is over 21 and the other is less than 17 years of age.

Sexual Abuse is also defined in three degrees, according to the same system as rape. However, the difference is that penetration is not required. Rather, all that is required is "sexual contact" - touching of intimate or sexual parts, either directly or through clothing.

Therefore, sexual abuse in the first degree is roughly defined as sexual contact by force or threat of force, or when the individual is incapable of consenting due to mental deficiency, or when the individual is below age 11.

Note that there are degrees, and allowances made not only for age, but age difference.

[Solon]

14. Not all states have the exact same laws...

Many are extremely strict, as in, you can't legally have sex with ANYONE under 17-18, regardless of your own age. Also, while there are degrees in rape, and therefore punishment differences, the Megan's law registries are completely different, hell, even certain MISDEMEANORS can qualify, and sometimes do. To these registries, someone convicted of a 1st degree rape is on the SAME level playing field as someone convicted of indecent exposure for pissing on a tree.

[gully]

18. I disagree with categorizing a first degree rapist with a tree pisser.

And I disagree with categorizing someone who has consensual relations with a 16-17 year old as a rapist.

[lynne]

17. Judge Dismissed Lawsuit - Must register in 72 hrs. or face arrest -

While I'm torn on this issue, the fact that he is a swim coach - and likely works with children - makes me feel that the judge is correct in this ruling.

****************

- A Prince William Circuit judge dismissed a lawsuit Monday filed against the state by a convicted sex offender who wants to keep himself out of the state registry.

The 31-year-old man known only as “John Doe” in court documents pleaded guilty to incest with his then 14-year-old sister 12 years ago in 1994 and was sentenced to a suspended 90-day sentence pending good behavior.

The state’s online sex offender registry has been expanded to include all offenders, including nonviolent ones. By law, Doe is required to register or face arrest.

However, if Doe were to register as a sex offender, it would severely damage his ability to maintain or gain employment and his standing in the community, his attorney Melinda VanLowe argued Monday in court.

http://potomacnews.mgblogs.com/index.php/potomacnews/joh_doe_has_72_hours_to_register_as_a_sex_offender/

[zonkers]

20. Wonder if offenders have ever hooked up via the sites that their

identities and locations are posted. I'm sure it has happened. I looked up the offenders in my neighborhood. Some of them are very old men.