This is a bit messed up (sex offender where I work)

[johnnie]

There is a guy who works out in the production area of my company who has been here about 5 years or so.
I knew that he was once convicted of some sort of "Sexual Imposition" charge at one time and was a registered sex offender.
Well, I was doing checks on any name I could think of on the Clerk of Courts site (which is a favorite past time) and I decide to check into his name once more. There were a few more charges than I knew about so I went to the sex offenders page on the sheriffs site. I almost vomited when I saw what he did. The victim was a 9 year old girl that he knew. 9 fucking years old!
I wasn't happy that this guy did something wrong enough to end up on the offender's list, but I also realize that sometimes shit happens that looks worse than it really was. But now that I know this..I don't think I will be able to really talk to him too much from now on.
Am I being too judgmental?

On edit I changed the title because "Sex offender at work" sounded like it was a job.

One more edit for the counts he was charged with.
Statute Description
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.02 RAPE W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR SPECIFICATION
2907.05 GROSS SEXUAL IMPOSITION
2907.05 GROSS SEXUAL IMPOSITION
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.05 GROSS SEX IMPOSITION W/SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR
2907.09 PUBLIC INDECENCY
2907.09 PUBLIC INDECENCY
2907.09 PUBLIC INDECENCY
2907.09 PUBLIC INDECENCY
2907.09 PUBLIC INDECENCY

[La Lioness Priyanka]

1. no you are not

some people should be despised...

[demnan]

2. Had one in my company too

although when he was here no one knew about it. We didn't learn until this year and his victim was a five year old step daughter!

It's a wonder to me that these people are allowed to walk about. Don't feel obliged to talk to him.

[johnnie]

3. It is just bugging me

The one charge was "rape" and I don't know if this was a family member or what. What surprised me was that this wasn't a really long time ago. Don't these people belong put away?

[redqueen]

5. Yes, they do.

but unfortunately, we have INSANE drug laws that keep dealers in jail for unbelievable amounts of time. They're more of a threat, you see (in some twisted fuckwit's mind, anyway).

[johnnie]

7. Yeah

It's strange... I have known many people in my life that have been in prison and spent a lot more time. Most of them were drug related.
I also had a few that were theft, burglary and a couple of them charged with murder. The drug related ones spent more time in prison than this guy...it blows my mind.

[madison2000]

4. there was a teacher at the junior college where I worked

who went to a conference with three of his female students. They were 18 or 19. He insisted on coming in their hotel room at night to "tuck them in". Hands all over them, though no actual sex acts. The story got around and he was charged with sexual battery and he lost his job.

[EC]

15. was this guy's name Joel

by chance? Sounds just like a case here in Kenosha. And this guy is the son-in-law of a very, very rich and influential family...I knew his wife, a very nice person.

[madison2000]

57. that doesn't ring a bell- he taught in the marketing department

at a technical college in Janesville (Blackhawk) until this spring.

[EC]

90. no not the same guy

Joel was director of choir and The Golden Strings

[saltpoint]

6. A liberal Christian take:

Jesus welcomed those outside into his inner circle. Tax collectors, for example. The Buddha was said to include a murderer among his early followers.

If you don't want to talk to somebody at work, who's to question you, no matter the reason?

I wouldn't allow this reason to stand as a singular excuse to ignore someone.

There are some people at my office who are not registered offenders whose company I don't exactly look forward to, but I try to speak and be civil to them nevertheless. They do the same back. It works well enough.

[johnnie]

9. It's not that I wont talk to him

In fact about 2 minutes ago he just came up here and handed me some parts I was looking for. I will be civil to him and I know I will speak to him. I guess what I meant in my OP was that by talking to him and knowing that he raped a 9 year old girl might make me a bit uneasy because part of me will be disgusted with him and I would rather not feel that way.

[incapsulated]

12. Well...

Was there more than that one charge? People do get falsely accused, but I'm not going to blame you for feeling uneasy. Don't be so hard on yourself.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. No

Pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. I'd keep my distance from this guy.

[johnnie]

10. There is a woman here...

...who knew about this before I did. It's a long story on how we talked about it yesterday, but she knew the age of the victim. She has her younger daughter (about 14) come here once and a while and she builds some little switches for us for a little extra spending cash. The woman told me yesterday that she is very uneasy about her daughter being here when he is here. She builds the parts in the conference room and during break the guy goes in there to read. I understand her feelings about it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Just keep kids away from him

[Occulus]

24. it's too bad for the falsely accused that the registries exist

I have someone close to me who is on our state's registry, but... if you read the transcript of the victim's testimony (it was his stepson) you find the guy was in fact, according to the victim, asleep when the "assault" occurred. I mean, sleeping throughout.

The assault was, the kid climbed up on the couch with the guy, and whilst asleep the back of the guy's hand moved over on top of the kid, who was lying half on his side and half on his back next to him. The back of the guy's hand happened to come to rest on the kid's groin.

The kid testified that the guy's hand was in fact motionless and the guy remained asleep, but for some reason his lawyer persuaded him to accept a plea- a felony record and three years probation in exchange for assurances of being able to continue to see his daughter, who he was slated to lose due to an ongoing divorce (anyone see what kind of situation this was?). His lawyer was telling him he faced up to 35 years in Jackson State Pen., which we later discovered was untrue.

The case should have been dismissed, and furthermore the judge should never have accepted his plea. He has been unable to find work for about three years and is now on disability.

This is all documented, and I've pored over all the testimony. Unfortunately, due to time limits under MI law, he is unable to even sue his former attorney for damages or appeal on the grounds of having inadequate/incompetent council. Furthermore, there are no expungements available for sex offenses, so he's stuck with the registry- which he in January will have to pay a "one time fee" (yeah, one time, suuuure) for, by the way- for the next 23 years. This, by the way, equates to 23 years of under/unemployment.

And we wonder about recidivism rates.

[proud2BlibKansan]

78. That is messed up

who turned him in in the first place?

[bettyellen]

86. but that is the court systems fault, i'm sorry it happened it's awful but

there are also people on death row and in jail that are falsely accused also. getting rid of the list doesn't help them.
the solution is to fix the system, right?

[bettyellen]

13. don't be suprised he didn't do time... it's not easy to prosecute any rape

w/out the DNA and a credible victim. In a disturbingly large amount of cases, another adult will attempt to discredit the child, rationalising the damage is done already... they need the man around to pay bills, etc.
I had a friend who used to work with a lot of women who were in households of abuse. She got so disgusted how many women would sacrifice their kids or themselves to keep a roof over their heads. It becomes a matter of the state vs the family. And the state ain't going to help them much when the weekly paycheck gets hauled off to jail!

[johnnie]

14. He did time

I don't believe that it was a daughter or step daughter. He did 3 months.

[SoCalDem]

16. "...He did 3 months...".. The 9 yr old is doing "life"..

Bastard.:(

[jukes]

93. just a caveat

in divorce cases, men are often charged w/ molestation or domestic abuse to gain leverage in custody battles or out of pure malicious spite. with this guy's rap sheet & a 3 month sentence i'm suspicious of the circumstances. if all of these charges were made @ 1 time by 1 person, it sounds fishy.


i detest sexual predators, esp those that victimize children, but things are not ALWAYS what they seem & our justice system often isn't very just.

this guy may be a total asshole, don't get me wrong. i just don't agree w/ posting offenders' names. if a person is a danger to society he shd be locked down. allowing a person to roam through the public domain as a pariah only exacerbates the problem.

[bettyellen]

19. but for sexual imposition? probably a lesser charge than the crime

like when murders get manslaughter because it's easier to prove?
i mean they charge them with what they think might stick, not neccesarily the crime believed to have been commited.
imposition? what is that, like flashing? sounds like it doesn't include physical contact at all.
my friends older brother tried to rape her when they were kids, no one in the family would listen to her. she fought him off but believes her sister was victimized - her sister is a basket case now. she tries to get her mom to schedule their visits on different days, and they keep inviting him over and say we have a nice suprise! your brother is here! it's crazy how they insist on sweeping it under the rug. her family is fairly poor and the brother sweeps in with gifts and bosses them all around. he tries to arrange to have some alone time with his little niece every visit, it's like he's taunting the mom. it's very sick! she had to tell the daughter a lot to make sure the kid understands it is not okay to be alone with her own uncle. she only goes through this crap because she doesn't want to completely cut off contact with her mom.

[johnnie]

23. I posted his charges

[bettyellen]

25. my point being that: it is routine to charge someone with a lesser crime

than the one they are accused of by the victim. totally routine. this is because they would like to win the case, and sex crimes often fall into the he said she said hard to prove category.
imposition sounds like something with no physical contact at all. i could be wrong about that, of course. it sounds like a very minor charge.
often a person will plead to a lesser crime as well and spare the victims a trial.
i'm saying that you have no way of knowing what more there is to it with the info you have.

[Bronco69]

17. I would have to know all of the details of the case

before I could pass judgement. I agree, if he makes you feel uneasy then don't talk to him, but in your search did you find ALL of the details or just the ones the sheriff's department wanted you to know? There are a lot of people who are doing or have done jail time for a crime they didn't commit. Go to the court house and see if you can get more information about the case. I believe you said he did 3 months in jail? For rape? If he was actually guilty of rape I would think he would have done a lot more time than that. Maybe he was falsely accused and someone finally came clean and the sheriff's dept. didn't bother to update the file.

[thom1102]

18. I don't blame you for being cautious...

But some people do change. These Sex Offender Lists are problematic, on one hand, I would want to know if there was a danger to me and my family in my own neighborhood, on the other hand, if a person pays their debt to society and is trying to start their life fresh, it is a permanent scarlet letter that follows them through out their life. Now I don't know what this guy's story is, but for a minute let's just suppose that the guy had a substance abuse problem, and the incident that occured happened when his judgement was impaired, and since then he has gotten sober. That doesn't excuse what happened, but it certainly explains it, and the guy now has to live with the stigma of what he did for the rest of his life. The problem vexes me!

[bettyellen]

21. i don't excuse anybody for bing high when they did something... sorry...

booze is all around, and so are drugs. pedophiles often drink excessively. and rehabilitation doesn't work. it has the highest recidivism rate of all. it's sad, but there's a lot of data backing this up.
i would have to say, you do have to be wary no matter what.

[thom1102]

27. I believe that I said...

...That doesn't excuse what happened... And because it has the highest recidivism rate doesn't mean that everyone reverts back to commiting these kinds of sex crimes. Look, I was sexually abused when I was a kid, and I know the harm that these crimes do to the victim, all I am saying is that it is a lot messier than simply slapping their names on a list, and the implications can't simply be shrugged off. These people have commited awful crimes, on the most helpless of victims, but people make mistakes. Are they not permitted the opportunity to learn from their mistakes and to straighten their lives out? I don't think that I can accept that they aren't.

[bettyellen]

48. it's great that you want to believe people learn and move on...

and in non violent situations, i would agree 100%. Sexual violent predators and murderers, do they deserve a clean slate? i don't know that they do, really. Doesn't seem to fit the crime, as the impact lives on for the lifetime. During trial, the burden of proof lays heavily on the victim. Once convicted, I think it's the criminal's burden to have lost some faith and trust from society. To physically harm someone in such a serious way crosses the line into being pathalogical, and who do we trust to judge that this person has been cured of that?

[Liberal Veteran]

53. Then we should never let them out of prison at all then.

If a person is not allowed to pay their debt to society and start afresh, then you damn them to wearing a scarlet letter on their forehead that dooms any chances of a real life once they have paid their debt.

If we are going to do that and if they are such a threat, they should never be let out of prison at all.

You want people to continue pay even after they have already paid. That's wrong.

[bettyellen]

59. People live with the consequences of their actions all day long. So what?

It ain't a letter on the forehead, and you take every arguement to an Orwelian extreme that is just silly already-- no one had advocated computer chips, okay?
But newspaper coverage? Just how much of a lid on information about crime should we have? Should nobody no anything about charges beng made and cases going forward becasue it could hurt the criminals quality of life someday? Maybe they could reort it without ever using names? I don't think anything short of that would make you happy.

[Liberal Veteran]

61. I still think nosing around into people backgrounds is fucking nosy.

So sue me.

You don't have to like it, but I don't want to live in a country full of nosy Mrs. Kravitz's.

[bettyellen]

64. so you didn't answer at all as to how you'd like to limit the info?

just curious, because i don't see it as doable. Or even desirable. I think we can fight for a good justice system, and we can hope people use the info they have responsibly. Some people are more curious and /or paranoid than you, this will always be the case.

[Liberal Veteran]

67. I didn't say we had to limit info. I just believe in a civil society...

..that if you don't have a compelling reason (and curiosity is not a compelling reason) to go nosing around people's business, you shouldn't.

It doesn't matter to me that the records are public. Lots of things are public, but again, such as the affidavit I swore that my boyfriend and I are domestic partners.

We will have to disagree on this, but I rather doubt you go rummaging through the public records of everyone you encounter and if you don't, I have to ask you....why don't you? If there is no harm in it, why don't you?

[bettyellen]

72. Um, no I don't ... but I did check up on one person becasue I guessed

that I was being lied to. and there was a shocking amount more on record when he said it was one little thing. i was much more serious and violent than i could have ever imagined, and there was a whole other history of crazy loose cannon behavior i would have never guessed at either. in the end, it made clear a lot of my reservations were rooted in little signs i was ignoring because he had some good cover stories and was a pretty good con artist, a very charismatic person. but he was actually a pathological liar. i feel lucky to know. circumstances (that he orchestrated) almost landed him living with me, becasue i can be a big sucker! so i am grateful i was able to find out if not the whole truth as you might say, but a real part of his history he did not want to account for. it explained a lot of what at least subconciuosly was not adding up. i really would have given him the benefit of the doubt, but only because i had been so well deceived.

[Liberal Veteran]

77. In that case, you had a compelling reason.

Different story. If you felt you were being misled, that's fine.

That's not the story we were given here. In this case, there wasn't anything other than some curiosity.

We have gone from "someone who happens to work at the same place that I knew had a record so I decided to see what his crimes were" to "I suspected I was being lied to, so I decided to find out the truth before I got hurt".

There is a world of difference between those in my opinion.

[bettyellen]

82. i see what you mean, but we can't legislate this kind of stuff can we?

snoops and gossips walk among us, and yeah there is a lot of malicious behaviour that goes with that. people engage in this all the time without any records to back them up. in my family and in my workplace i've seen it directed at people many's a time, truth be damned. but i think i understand what you find so unpalatable about the snooping. we are a bloodthirsty society in some ways.

[thom1102]

91. But isn't that the purpose of the criminal justice system?

To provide criminals (even violent ones) a path towards rebuilding that societal faith and trust? A criminal is sent to jail to pay their debt to society, if they do their time and stay out of trouble, then they have the opportunity to reintegrate into society. If they get into more trouble in prison, then they do more time. It may not always work out the way it is supposed to, but does that mean that people who commit certain crimes are exempt from that same right to reintegrate into society? I think that sexual predators and murderers do deserve a clean slate as much as anyone else. I think that the path towards a new life should be more difficult, but I don't think that it should be taken away.

What you are advocating is that these people are disposable. They serve no purpose in society and because of their actions, or more to the point the actions of others who have committed like crimes, they don't deserve the chance to recover from their mistake. Like Liberal Vet said, then why bother letting them out of prison in the first place?

[HEyHEY]

20. eew creep creep

I woudln't talk to him

[Hello_Kitty]

22. That's tricky b/c you really don't know what actually happened

Occasionally people are falsely accused and convicted of crimes. I'm not saying that's what happened here but I'm just thinking of those poor folks who got shafted in that McMartin Preschool thing.

Other than that, if it's true judge away. Sexually abusing a child is truly the most sadistic and cruel act that a human being can perpetrate. To me it's worse than murder. It shows a complete and utter disregard for someone's life and future. Pedophiles murder a child's spirit.

[Florida_Geek]

63. the fact that the guy did only three months with a nine yo

tells me the case was very questioniable and the Judge felt so too.

[incapsulated]

26. Hmmm...

From the list of charges it sounds like this guy exposed himself in public to this girl.

That's why the three months.

But there isn't any explanation for the VIOLENT part. Maybe he grabbed at her, too?

I know, growing up in NYC in the 70's, this happened to me more than once. I was never touched by these creeps though, although my friend was, I was with her at at the time.

[bettyellen]

28. is that the total amount of counts? it includes rape as well?

[johnnie]

29. That's from the records on line as they are written

It does look like it was a family member because I just looked and part of his probation was that he wasn't allowed to live with any family members. He pleaded guilty of gross sexual imposition and I guess most of the other charges were dropped.
I don't know..all I meant by this OP was that it is a bit unsettling that this guy is here. I get really disturbed when people do anything to a child.

[incapsulated]

30. As I said..

No one is going to blame you for being uncomfortable around this guy. You are already civil in your interactions with him at work. You don't have to be friendly.

[bettyellen]

34. So do I, and it's really messed up when you read the experts- these sexual

urges are not "reprogrammable" it seems. Did you know some people allow themselves to be chemically castrated so as to walk free? It's really f*ked up, but think about trying to rewire your own desires?
ouch, it looks like a lot of charges were dropped! Looks like they made a deal for him to stay away from the family to save his ass.
I don't know what to say, I can understand your aversion to both him and to judging him.
Sex crimes in general are under reported and under prosecuted- with the exception of the day care scandals of the eighties. which was a freaking witch hunt.
my brother sees tons of this where they can't get the kid away from the family even. There's nothing more than what the victim says, and it's just not prosecutable.

[donheld]

31. If we all did those background checks on our co-workers

we'd probably all have offenders around us. Kinda makes ya nervous doesn't it. At least with this guy you know what's he's guilty of. There are no doubt many others we don't know about. We could all be working with one, two...

[HEyHEY]

32. You should get a job with Homeland Security

I thouroughly frightened now.

[johnnie]

33. I've known about this for a while

I just didn't know the age of the victim. I can live with most of the other things people have done. As I said above, I have a lot of friends who have been in prison for many other things, but crimes against children are the ones that bug me the most.
As people here are saying, maybe it wasn't as bad as it seems on the official records, but it still is there.

[Gyre]

35. I prosecute jackoffs like your co-worker

And regardless of the state you live it the burden of proof is "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt". Where I work, we have to prove sexual assault pretty much "Beyond All Doubt" (California).

My guess is that since X is convicted of MULTIPLE forcible rape counts, there wasn't any question whether he "did it". If "it" was just an unlucky circumstance and there wasn't much direct evidence, or the evidence that was there was conflicting, a single conviction would have resulted, not 10.

Just guessing and FWIW, but based on the number and types of convictions it would seem likely that X earned his "stripes" by victiming somebody who lived with him or that he had access to over a prolonged period of time.

You'd be wise to keep an eye on this likely predator.

Gyre

[johnnie]

37. I believe those were the charges

I don't know of all he was convicted of, but looking at it, it looked like he had done it multiple times. I'm not an attorney, but that is my guess.

[gardenista]

38. As a victim of a jackoff like your co-worker, I would like to add:

because of the burden of proof, it is also possible, (and in my own opinion, likely), that he did far more than what he was actually convicted for.

My case was lost against a predator like this because a massive amount of evidence was witheld from the jury. He got off, and is out there on the streets, looking for his next victim.

Keep your eyes open.

[bettyellen]

45. this is the reality of the situation in most cases... so be wary .

[NorthernSpy]

41. I think those were charges

My guess is that since X is convicted of MULTIPLE forcible rape counts, there wasn't any question whether he "did it". If "it" was just an unlucky circumstance and there wasn't much direct evidence, or the evidence that was there was conflicting, a single conviction would have resulted, not 10.

Just guessing and FWIW, but based on the number and types of convictions it would seem likely that X earned his "stripes" by victiming somebody who lived with him or that he had access to over a prolonged period of time.

Hm... as I understood it, the poster actually gave us a list of charges, not convictions. The conviction was for "sexual imposition", I believe.

If those had all been convictions, I seriously doubt he'd out of prison by now -- unless they were all convictions from 50 years ago, or something.

[KinkyDem]

36. I say this guy is no loger a threat

if he ever was. You know about him. He must be working to keep his nose clean or he'd be back in lock up.

No.

Stop woirrying yourself about this one, worry about the others in your office who have raped a woman but have never had charges pressed. If half of all women are raped at some point in their lives, then half of men have raped someone ... right?

[bettyellen]

42. not a threat to adults, but? WTF? ? Pedophiles have a compulsion, much

like addicts, and this child detailed many occurences of rape for there to be that many original charges. one count per act. think of the kid sitting there giving details as to that many incidents of abuse before you assume anything.

in general 1/2 of men are not sex offenders, because the same rapist often strikes again, so no, 1/2 the men in your office are probably not rapists.

from wilipedia:
International studies indicate a recidivism rate for pedophiles of 40-50 percent, as opposed to only 22 percent for all sexual offenders (Egg 2001). The probability is much higher for those attracted to boys, as compared to those attracted to girls.

i know that the stats are all over the place the more you dig, but pedophilia has been long acknowledge as a compulsion that can't be so easily remedied as you would hope.
unless this child was a tota liar, it's insulting what a small slap on the wrist he received.
it was probably a bargain the family felt they had to make to keep him away from the kid for good.

[Der Blaue Engel]

44. Huh-wha?

:wtf:

I don't know which of those sentences baffle me more. Are you being ironic?

a) pedophiles rarely stop at one
b) the system doesn't work; not being in "lock up" is irrelevant
c) please cite statistic "half of all women are raped"
d) that's just patently absurd. If (c) were true, it still would not make (d) true. Rapists are generally serial offenders and can easily handle more than their 1:1 ratio share of violating and destroying lives, youthful or otherwise.

Should the OP or other coworkers be worried about this person? Yes. At least to the extent of protecting other young females from unsupervised contact with him. No need to call him out publicly, but by all means, exercise some sensible caution.

[bettyellen]

50. thanks for saying that more intelligently than i could!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

71. Best sentence in the entire thread

"No need to call him out publicly, but by all means, exercise some sensible caution."

100% correct -- also because I can see the punishists acting to make the man lose his job, instead of just sensibly distrusting him.

Which of course would make all hell break loose and leave potential victims less safe.

[NorthernSpy]

46. but can he change his nature?

Trying to act contrary to ones nature without even one single slip-up would be pretty difficult, don't you think? I imagine that men in his position probably really do want to change -- at least, I reckon a lot of them do. But how realistic is it to expect that they'll succeed over the long haul?

No, I think that in times of stress, a person like this will be very vulnerable to his old temptation -- especially if everyone around him has sent him to Coventry and he doesn't know how else to console himself.

We have to jettison the expectation that such a person can change, as though he were just a mildly wayward young fellow who had swiped a watch or sold some 'shrooms, or something.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

69. Big fat NO

Because most rapists have raped more than one.

[Liberal Veteran]

39. Not too put too fine a point on it, but I think you violated his privacy.

Not to say that those were not public records, but did you have any compelling reason to look into it? You didn't break the law, but you were nosy.

I am not going to make excuses for what that person did or did not do. That is not my place and I wouldn't even know where to begin because I have no knowledge of the situation.

I can't give you advice on the situation other than say that maybe, just maybe you would have been better off not letting your curiosity get the better of you.

[bettyellen]

43. but would you feel the same way if you brought your 9 year old to

the office and this fella took an interest in her? would you be mad if someone tipped you off about it? or would you be grateful to know the score. we judge people on actions we see and hear about first and second hand all the time. we don't loan drunken people our cars, people with harleys and big scars date our teenage daughters etc.
i am not a parent, so the info is useless to me personally, but i don't begrudge someone looking at it either, we judge people on the info available, and i would say doing time for a crime against a 9 year old is significant.

[Liberal Veteran]

49. Maybe we should just all have a chip that everyone could scan..

...as you come into contact with them that gives you their entire criminal background?

Sorry, but I just don't approve of people nosing into other people's court records out of "curiosity".

You can what if and howsabout me till the end of time, but I am not so insecure I feel the need to do a criminal background check on everyone I encounter or work with.

People ARE entitled to their privacy. You don't know the circumstances or history of this case any more than I do and you are not in a position to pass judgement.

Quite honestly, most children are molested by a relative or close friends of the family rather than some casual aquaintance at work. Do YOU run down to the courthouse everytime you meet someone and run a background check on them?

Of course you don't.

[bettyellen]

54. a big leap to the computer chip? that's a pretty huge what if from you!

it ignores that some crimes are rooted in a deep pathology that shows no respect for other's lives. very different from crimes where money etc is the motive. some people are sick, and we can't or don't seem able to rehab them. And big cities afford a sort of privacy that small towns never do, a lot of what people are aware of is based on proximity, and that ain't fair either. But if you were living in a small town, you would have heard of this, and you might be wary. Is there something wrong with that? Or did this guy deserve a secret trial as well?
Obviously the justice system leaves a lot to be desired, but do you think conducting trials away from the press and hiding all the records would help? What is acceptable to be public knowledge as far as you are concerned, nothing?
I know someone who who drove drunk and killed people in three different states before the DMV was computerized, moved his whole family twice so he could dontinue driving. I loved him, but I'm glad that there are safeguards to protect us from the likes of him on the roads. He did not deserve to be driving every day, drunk as he did.

[Liberal Veteran]

65. Yeah, and then you tell someone what you found out and then...

..the next thing you know, that person is driven from their home or loses their job and you've destroyed any chance that person had to live his life in peace after paying his debt to society.

I hear stories all the time about this kind of thing. I must admit that I have mixed emotions about it, but the bottom line is I don't care for the notion of people going around nosing into other people's records without a more compelling reason than "I was curious".

[bettyellen]

75. i am not such a big gossip. but i understand what you mean.

but as far as debt paying, in this instance nine occurances of rape ending up as one count of what was that word? it wasn't even assault? that's a debt paid? please respect the fact that i do know a lot of what goes on in the court system and that this is not so unusual. Lawyers are happy to get any time at all for a first offender. The screw ups in the justice system are not just happening in Texas against the accused, sex crimes are awfully difficult to charge and to prosecute. This is why women don't bring charges more than 1/2 the time. The burden of proof is huge, as is the humiliation factor.
CLARIFICATION: It is not fair for you to judge or assume either that justice was served/ debt was paid, is it?

[Liberal Veteran]

81. This is a perfect example of what I mean.

We don't have the whole story here, yet you are already convinced with just the little bit of info that you have that you know this person is major scumbag who never paid his debt to society. You have a secondhand account of someone's interpretation of the record and little to no background on the entire story.

That's why this kind of thing bothers me. You have already decided that you know better than justice system what kind of person this is and whether he deserves society's forgiveness and another chance at life or not.

And you wonder why I feel delving around will he nil he through someone's criminal record without a compelling reason is a bad idea?

[bettyellen]

84. sorry, i just happen to know a lot about how broken the system

is when it comes to protecting women and children against sex crimes. i have three close friends with direct experience in different areas, police, law and social work and it's kind of horrifying to hear how often the system works against the victims, especially kids.
i know it's a sweeping statement, but so is most murders get manslaughter= reduced charges becasue intent is so difficult to prove. a lot of people who are not familiar with the justice system do not realize the charges are often less than what the crime was alleged to be. it's a game played in an attempt to get a result. but people think the charge or the conviction = the actual crime and that is most often not the case. whether you like it or not, it's usually something more serious. it depends on how easy it is to fulfill the burden of proof, not so easy. just educating people on how the system works, or sometimes doesn't ! never said i knew the facts on this one, just what occurs all too commonly in the courts.

[johnnie]

55. I was just looking

Records are there for a reason. When I was younger I was taught that one reason you should watch what you do because it will follow you around. It kept me from doing a lot of things.
I am in the middle of helping a woman I know find out some info on some man she met and we have found out that he has a record a mile long. He has a few stalking charges going back to 1996 and as recent as 2003. He also has a date violence charge and many other entries on his record.
As I was looking in to it I found some other things on people and just started typing names in.
I just work with this guy and I am civil to him, but I think that if the courts found it important enough to make him register as a sexual offender, then there is nothing wrong with me knowing it also.
People should have to learn that they are responsible for their actions and there are too many people who think that when a person does something that is wrong, it should be tucked away and no one should know. I am one of the people who think that you have to be held responsible when you commit a crime.

[bettyellen]

56. I agree completely, and you did your friend a big favor too!

I slowly out this guy I was seeing lied a great deal of little things. I started to feel a bit manipulated as he was really pushing to move in with me, and i had concerns/ doubts i couldn't quite explain. He was pretty manipulative, he always had a story to cover his tracks. I got concerned and found out he was hiding a lot!! A violent episode with an ex wife being one thing. A lot of fuck ups with the law for another, serious property damage and DUI's. It totally freaked me out and made me realize how many bigger lies i was told too.
Any one of those would have me dumping him. I need to be with someone who respects others is all.
Lesson I learned: people who so easily hurt other people are pathological and will gladly lie to you to have a chance to do it again. Fuck that. Let somebody else rehab him, i am not so easy to be around that he wouldn't think i was "asking for it" . Dodged a bullet for sure!

[Liberal Veteran]

62. In other words, you are just nosy.

Not a crime, but I don't particularly care for people who go nosing around in other people's business for no good reason.

[johnnie]

66. Oh well

People have not cared for me for less.
My friend who I did help out said she appreciated my help very much. She could have been the guy's next victim of domestic violence.

[bettyellen]

73. she had a good reason to look, i think you did her a great favor!

people who take advantage of others are going to spread disinformation about themselves and pretend to be good, your friend had a feeling because she was being deceived. good on you for helping her!

[Der Blaue Engel]

47. I see what you're saying, but I disagree

Public records are public for a reason. It can't be considered a violation of someone's privacy to review a public record about them.

I do take the sex offenders registry with a grain of salt, because I've seen some of the abuses of power that result in such convictions, but the fact remains that this person is a potential danger to any young women who may come into the situation unaware.

To give some perspective though, I am certainly biased. I feel guilty every day for not having reported the man who assaulted me when I was 8...not because I think it was my fault in any way, but because I know he did it before (to a friend) and almost certainly went on to do it to others. I wish there had been a public record for someone to look up at the time.

[Liberal Veteran]

52. I didn't say it was illegal. I said it was a violation of privacy.

Or perhaps common decency. Is it really necessary to go around nosing into everyone else's business and criminal records?

What real purpose does it serve?

I don't want to live in a society where everyone acts like they are Mrs. Kravitz, peeking in windows and public records to see if someone might have a dirty little secret.

Do you?

[Der Blaue Engel]

58. I didn't say you said it was illegal

I just disagree that this instance equates to a violation of privacy.

The OP had prior knowledge of this person's criminal history, happened to be looking at the public records for someone else, and decided to check on this guy.

That's a far cry from "everyone go get a chip."

No, I don't want to live in a society where everyone is a Mrs. Kravitz, but if there are Mrs. Kravitzes out there, it's certainly their right to look at public records.

Violating someone's privacy is sneaking into their e-mail or rifling through their trash, or installing a monitoring device in their home, or publishing their private records on the Internet. The poster did none of those things.

Like I said, I do see your point. But in this instance I disagree, and I don't believe it amounts to your assertion that this was a violation of privacy tantamount to prying into everyone's private business.

The larger question is whether the existence of the sex offenders list itself constitutes a violation of one's privacy. That's another issue, and one where I would be more conflicted in my opinion.

[Liberal Veteran]

60. There is lots of "public" information that you can find out...

...that would be considered rude and "nosy".

I have no criminal record, but this is akin to the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" attitude of our government. I don't like it and I won't pretend I do.

[Der Blaue Engel]

68. No, I don't like that attitude of our government either

I'm not asking you to pretend anything.

:)

[Liberal Veteran]

74. Let me see if I can express why I feel so strongly about this....

At least WHY I feel the way I do, even if you disagree.

I feel that people have an expectation that you are going be judged as who they are RIGHT NOW. Not on what you might glean from a public record that may or may not hold the entire story.

That's why I brought up the notion of the chip. Imagine the chaos and suspicion that would ensue if EVERYONE went rummaging around in the public records of their casual aquaintances and co-workers and even family and friends. If you can defend someone running down to the courthouse to peruse the files of someone for no compelling reason, why not just make it so everyone knows everyone's public record at first meeting? It wouldn't make for a civil or plesant world in my estimation.

I believe that when one pays their debt to society, they have earned the right to not be treated as still a criminal. If we don't do that, we are setting them up to fail.

And we start dealing with crimes like this particular one, we start to invite people to move beyond simply avoiding them and instead making their life that much more difficult to put back on the right track.

It's one thing if for instance you were hiring this person to care for your children. That would be a compelling reason to look into the background of that person. Idle curiosity, however? I cannot accept that. There are too many people out there who aren't willing to let the justice system do it's job appropriately and think they must ADD punishment to what the courts have already decided.

Even here, with as little real information as we have, there are some who have already decided that he is scum and probably dangerous. That's worrisome.

Where does it stop? At what point do we say, "This man has done his time, and his past is not my business"?

[johnnie]

79. I want to say here

The other people at work knew of this well before I did. I wasn't told the age of the little girl until I looked. This man is still under court's order as a registered sex offender, so in my opinion he is still "doing his time". They set up these websites for people to look and see who committed their crime and what their punishment was or is.
As I stated in an earlier post, there is a woman who has her young daughter at work once and a while. She works in a room where the guy sits during his breaks (alone usually). Do you not think it might be of interest to this woman to know that her daughter is that close to a man who has been convicted of a sex crime against a young girl? The sex offender's website is set up for the public to see who committed these crimes.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with some of the things you are saying, but I disagree where it comes to not knowing about the people you are close to about 8 hours a day 5 days a week. Some crimes just don't get erased after you do some time in jail, there are sometimes other parts of your sentence.

[bettyellen]

80. but if he were hiring a babysitter then it's okay?

i completely understand your sentiment about everybody doing this casually to everyone, and am not really fond of snoops myself.
but i have to confess i did it once myself, and was very glad i did, becasue boy was i being deceived. and whether he "desserved a fresh start" or not regarding his other actions, he was still currently a patholgical liar.

[Lady Effingbroke]

40. I also worked with a sex offender.

Convicted of molesting his 5 year old granddaughter - he is listed on the Texas registered sex offender web site. He also attacked me at work (and was subsequently fired).

There are some sick people out there!

[jellybelly]

51. If I knew there was a sex offender

living in my neighborhood, or working at my job...I would move...and quit. I don't have kids, but being near these 'people' would scare me too much.

[solinvictus]

70. This type..

seems to be the sort that would kidnap, molest, and murder a child. Keep your eyes open.

[strobetoad]

76. How did you initially learn he had a record? n/t

[johnnie]

83. Somebody else found it about 3 years ago

I was told because I was in the middle of a conversation with some of my coworkers. As I said, I just knew he had one but didn't really know all of what it was about.
I just typed in his name the other day and then saw the whole thing.

[WMliberal]

85. hey, this sounds like more fun than googling people!

Is it all online at your city's clerk's office?

[johnnie]

87. A lot of them are

County Clerks.

[WMliberal]

89. my city isn't

:cry:


This could've been better than a high school reunion!

[MrSlayer]

88. Why is this scumbag not in jail?

How is it that assholes like this aren't locked away forever? There is no more heinous crime than raping a child. I would do far worse than simply not talking to this piece of shit anymore.

[kodi]

92. did the guy serve his time for the crime? society has already punished him

folks like you have way too much time on your hands in your efforts to appear morally superior to the rest of the world. making this guy's life harder than it is must make you feel so smug and proud of yourself.

oh that's right, excuse me mother teresa, you want to know if sex perverts are walking around you. ever go to a church? then most likely one of your minister's was one.

[johnnie]

94. Wow

I thought this thread was dead.
As I have said, he is still registered as a sexual predator. That means he is still fulfilling part of his sentence that the courts decided, not me.
I take it you didn't read this whole thread. *I* am not making his life any harder. I was told of this from other people in the company. I just didn't know the victim was a child and that is what my post was about. I didn't mention his name here, and I said that I still will talk to him. Can you explain to me how I am making this guy's life harder?
I don't understand how anybody can defend a child molester, that must make you feel smug and proud of yourself.

[kodi]

95. your remarks are pure unadulterated horse shit

you admitted to a rather pecular interest in looking up names from the county clerk's office for fun. as if that in and of itself is not a pretty good indication that i am dealing with an abnormal mind.

you added to your profoundly goofy remarks by defending your snooping and paranoia with an attempt to transform my support of person's right to privacy in this case into some sort of whole hearted support for sex crimes.

again. pure and bizarre horsehit. get a life.

didn't anyone ever tell you to mind your own fucking business?

[johnnie]

96. I don't get it

This person is listed as a sex offender. It isn't like I broke in to his house and went through his drawers.
Maybe you need to drop a few tabs, listen to some Dead and relax a bit. You seem a bit high strung.