Convicted Sex Offender Arrested After Asking Parents To Babysit Children

[The Straight Story]

Convicted Sex Offender Arrested After Asking Parents To Babysit Children
Neighbors Say Man Acting Suspiciously


TITUSVILLE, Fla. -- Titusville police arrested a registered sex offender after reports that he had been acting suspicious around neighborhood children, going so far as asking parents if he could baby-sit their children.

Buck Clark, 43, was arrested on charges of failure for sex offender to re-register address, unlawful place of residency for a sex offender convicted of a sex crime against a child under 16, battery and trespass, Local 6 News partner Florida Today reported.

He also is accused of violating a Brevard County ordinance preventing sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school, day care, park or playground.

Clark had allegedly lived at 810 Sycamore St., Apt. 2, illegally, an address near several youth activity facilities, Florida Today reported.

Clark’s neighbors complained to police that he has approached children without consent from parents, including a 1-year-old that he picked up and started playing with.

http://www.local6.com/news/15837704/detail.html

[CoffeeCat]

1. Why is this man not in a treatment program?

He's obviously an active pedophile who has lost all sense of boundaries and
rational behavior.

It's just a matter of time before one of the neighborhood kids goes missing.

This is so sad.

[izquierdista]

2. American style treatment program

[CoffeeCat]

3. LOL!

Ok, there's a part of me that wouldn't mind that.

I tell ya, if that bastard so much as looked at my child the wrong way...

I can't believe he, as reported, picked up a one-year old child without the parents consent and began
playing with the child.

Who does that?

This man is a ticking time bomb.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ourbluenation]

29. are you suggesting that touching and feeling a kid for sexual gratification is ok?

as long as he or she doesn't, lord knows what.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ourbluenation]

37. Um yeah, no stranger is touching and feeling my kid for any gratification, sexual or otherwise.

Some poor soul. Please give me a break. Pedophiles have been around long before the titillation in advertising. And here's a newsflash for you - most people don't have to repress the feeling to touch and feel children, because most people aren't pedophiles.

Full disclosure. I work at an agency that advocates for sexual assault victims of all ages, including children. We also counsel adults molested as children. The long lasting effects of the abuse, even an inappropriate touch, are long lasting and incredibly difficult to overcome.

If it were up to me, outside of ridiculous things like an 18 year old having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend, I'd lock em all up and throw away the key.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CoffeeCat]

39. No adult has the right to....

...touch a child or act out sexually with a child.

Babies will die unless they are picked up, hugged and taken care of by responsible adults.

That certainly doesn't mean that these children want to engage in sexual behavior. Children
who believe in Santa Claus, or who aren't even eligible to drive--are incapable of making
sophisticated decisions about sex.

The long lasting pain and trauma that comes from childhood sexual abuse---is due to the pedophile's
flawed thinking---that he has a RIGHT to act out sexually with a child and that those behaviors do
not harm the child. He harms, but he doesn't care. His penchant is tantamount and he'll rationalize
the harm he's inflicting. The child is merely an object.

The pedophile does what he wants, and often traumatizes these children into silence---with fear and
intimidation.

Pedophiles believe that they are tortured souls...only wanting to love children. Flawed, twisted
thinking.

I strongly encourage you to visit a sexual-abuse support group and see what I have witnessed. People are
destroyed, and it's not because these adults just didn't understand their bodies when they were children. They
were used like objects--by pedophiles, and their humanity was torn to shreds--because someone they relied upon
and trusted treated them inhumanely--for their own selfish purposes.

That fractures a child's spirit. A child has the right to be free from men who want to have sex with them,
regardless of the rationalizations and distorted thinking of the pedophile--who carries around a warped
sense of entitlement and belief that he is only helping the child.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CoffeeCat]

53. Wow...

You said: "Go back to wallowing in the past when your humanity was torn to shreds -- one more good wallow should fix everything right up."

I don't think I've ever seen anyone have more empathy and explanations for the pedophile, while
displaying such contempt and for victims and the trauma they've endured.

...and by the way, talking about the very serious, long-term consequences of childhood sexual abuse
doesn't make someone a "basket case."

Yeah, you and your distorted, bizarre, upside-down thinking is just too "rational" for us "basket cases."

You're contemptible.

[Dora]

43. It is not okay to touch anyone, child or adult, without their consent. nt

[CoffeeCat]

32. What a strange point to make...

You're actually suggesting that a grown man who gets gratification from "touching and feeling" is "in actuality not a
threat at all"??

Wow, that's messed up.

If a convicted pedophile was "touching and feeling" he was probably in the first stages of grooming their victims.
These types work up to the more horrendous stuff--confusing and emotionally blackmailing their victims every step of
the way. So, if you view "touching and feeling" as harmless you fail to understand how these calculated predators operate.

We're talking about a convicted pedophile here. He's been convicted of sex acts with a child under the age of 16. He
needs to stay the hell away from children, and keep his hands off of the one-year-olds.

When it comes to pedophiles, you don't take chances with "maybe, maybe not" when it comes to children.

I find your thinking very disturbing.

[ourbluenation]

27. they rarely work. once a peder, always a peder. n/t

[AngryAmish]

28. He should be on Monday Night Rehabilitation

[EOTE]

49. One night in rehab?

That doesn't sound that bad.

[LostinVA]

50. He should be in jail -- pedophilia is not "treatable"

[MercutioATC]

4. No sympathy here. People who abuse children should be tortured.

Yes, I said tortured.

I know it's not a popular stance here, but I have absolutely no tolerance for somebody who abuses a child.

[Harry Monroe]

5. I don't think they should be tortured

They should be castrated.

[silverojo]

6. I don't believe in torture

But child molesters should be "humanely euthanized".

[lonestarnot]

8. Tortured? Are you nuts?

[MercutioATC]

13. No, just vicariously vindictive.

I wasn't abused as a child, but I've known and been married to people who were and the damage caused was horrific. Abusing a child, because they're still so formative, effectively kills parts of them. It takes a certain type of creature to do that kind of damage to a child and I believe they should truly suffer for causing that kind of harm to ones so defenseless.

[lonestarnot]

18. That's what warehousing is for... life. Torture enough.

[varkam]

48. Strange that prison has become torture.

No wonder we're looking at a 70% general recidivism rate

[Name removed]

9. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[varkam]

10. Yes, because that will make everything all better

:sarcasm:

[MercutioATC]

14. No, it will just make sure that THAT particular person is no longer a threat to children.

...and that they suffer.

Italian genes, a vindictive streak, second-hand experience, letting emotion cloud reason, take your pick...I believe that people who hurt children should have different...and horrible...punishments.

[varkam]

15. Why should we want that, though?

For one thing, advocating for torture as an acceptable punishment for child abuse is likely to make children less safe - not more. One of the many reasons why it is so underreported is because family members are usually the perpetrators. Making torture the punishment is likely to drive the problem deeper underground. It might satisfy people's sadistic streak, but it isn't like to do anything productive.

If your main concern is to make children safer, then that could be accomplished simply with prison sentences, post-release supervision, and access to treatment - sans torture.

I would further assume that would be taken as cruel and unusual punishment under the constitution.

And on a personal note, it seems fairly barbaric to me to want to torture people regardless of what they've done. Of course, in my view retribution is not a good stand-alone justification for punishment.

[MercutioATC]

17. You forward some good arguments.

...and I respect your personal views.


My position, however illogical, remains unchanged.


I'm not attempting to convince anybody, I'm simply expressing my view.

[varkam]

20. I'm likewise expressing mine.

Just the law student in me, I guess :D

[CoffeeCat]

22. I would never advocate torture for anyone....

...but surely, you can understand the disdain that normal people have for child
predators who sexually traumatize children? Being repulsed by predators who rape
children--is essential.

I think when people advocate torture for these people--it's just a passive way of
expressing their outrage, anger and disgust on this issue.

Surely--you can understand why people are very angry that we have predators in
our society who sexually traumatize children?

Society needs to be completely outraged, disgusted and on fire about this issue. You'd
have to be dead not to feel complete repulsion, outrage, anger and sadness. We must
use those very-valid emotions to find better solutions to this epidemic.

I agree. Torture is not the solution. However, I think suggesting torture and fantasizing
about it--for these predators who commit the worst of crimes--is totally understandable.

[varkam]

44. Well...that's good.

...but surely, you can understand the disdain that normal people have for child
predators who sexually traumatize children? Being repulsed by predators who rape
children--is essential.

I understand it, sure. Where is it written, though, that we have to let our disdain for these crimes translate into a thirst for sadism? Where is it written that we should let our emotions rule over our reason? As when that happens, we tend not to think up solutions that would actually benefit children but rather those solutions that make us feel better (which is what has happened with our current laws on sexual crimes and violence).

I agree. Torture is not the solution. However, I think suggesting torture and fantasizing
about it--for these predators who commit the worst of crimes--is totally understandable.

Except that the problem is that it is not fantasy for some people - it's reality. Perhaps they got their start on an internet message board, harmlessly fantasizing about how they would like to do X. In my mind, such actions are just as wrong as the crimes which they find so repulsive.

Further, there is a difference between the crime and the person. You know the Christian saying hate the sin but love the sinner?

[CoffeeCat]

45. I agree with you philosophically...

...that finding solutions to end the epidemic of sexual abuse is tantamount.

However, not everyone is meant to find the solution. That's not everyone's calling.

It's not my calling to paint abstract art. It's not my calling to litigate personal-injury
lawsuits. So, I comment, read and am involved in these subjects at the periphery. The
periphery isn't all that serious.

Same as people who work daily to stop childhood sexual abuse. They're the ones working
hard on the solutions. Us poor schleps on messageboards are venting emotions and
sharing opinions.

Not every person's calling is to delve deeply into this issue, and not every venue
(in particular, a messageboard) serves as a place for solving the world's problems.
This isn't a think tank.


People need places like this to just vent--and be. And express emotions.

I think it's a positive comment on our society that people actually want to discuss
this subject. It's healthy. We shouldn't try to quell emotions or opinion on this
topic--just because we're all not in deep analysis mode. Expressing anger and outrage
with one liners is valid too.

[varkam]

46. I'm not trying to shut anyone up - just to engage in discussion.

I feel that my views on the subject are just as valid as anyone else's. I also think that my view provides sort of a counter-point, given that the popular sentiment is to string anyone up who is convicted of a sex crime. If there's any place that's appropriate for discussion, it should be a message board.

I realize that we're not convening a legislature here, but I merely wanted to illustrate that perhaps relying solely upon emotion isn't the best way to handle things like this. If people realize that their violent and bloody fantasies aren't the way to handle the problem, then I suppose that's all well and good. The problem is, of course, many people don't realize that.

[RedCappedBandit]

33. How will torture make children safer?

You said it - your stance is illogical.

[LoZoccolo]

52. Not so at all.

Most of the time the perpetrator is a relative or a friend of the parents. These crimes do not get reported enough as it is, leaving these perpetrators free to further victimize; what will happen when people start covering up for their relatives who they do not want to see tortured?

[The Straight Story]

11. screw torture, a quick shot to the head works well for me

:)

[AngryAmish]

30. Not only popular, the majority opinion.

Funny thing, nobody wants to be seen as "soft" on pedophilia. So internet tough-guys can shoot off their mouths. It is consequenc-free and may earn one the admiration (on-line) of others.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. Thanks for the opinion, Professor Yoo.

:eyes:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

54. Feh. You're soft on crime. Watch this.

Current torture techniques are woefully lacking, because in a short time -- months, with the most skilled torturer you can find -- the body just gives up and dies, depriving society of its oh so holy & righteous Right to Justice.

Therefore, ALL scientific resources of mankind should be destined to one task and one task only: finding a way to feed pain at the maximum possible level directly into the brain, while preserving it (maybe separated from the body) for as long as possible, ideally until the entropy death of the Universe. Everybody who is not actively working on that endeavor full time is a criminal lover and pedophile enabler.

[last_texas_dem]

12. I still don't understand the point of these "1,000 feet" laws

Oh yeah, so we're getting these pedophiles out of "civilized" society by pushing them out of the cities. Well, they still have to live somewhere... doesn't this just push them to small towns and rural areas where it would probably much easier for them to "get away" with something?

Also, I'd be curious if FL's ordinance only relates to pedophiles. Yup, we're keeping those pedophiles 1,000 feet away from schools, day cares, parks, and playgrounds, but we're not so concerned about violent criminals living within 1,000 feet of these same areas... Perhaps I'm wrong, and FL does have such an ordinance. I don't believe in such restrictions, but if they're going to have them they should at least be consistent.

[varkam]

16. Me neither.

The stated rationale for many of these laws is that if a person who has expressed a disposition towards committing crimes against children does not live near places where children are, then they will be less likely to commit a new offense. If that strikes you as asenine, then you're on the right track. There's no data to suggest that residency restrictions lower recidivism rates, but it could be argued that RRs actually increase recidivism rates by pushing offenders away from stable employment, support networks, and treatment; all things that are important in relapse prevention. Currently, such restrictions are having the unintended effect of creating "sex offender ghettos" because, yes, they do have to live somewhere.

As far as I am aware, there are no RRs in place for anyone but sex offenders which is a category that includes anyone from your predatory child molester to an 18-year-old that slept with his 16-year-old girlfriend to a fellow that urinated in public when he was drunk.

That's the law, though...not that it needs to make any sense.

[aikoaiko]

25. In GA, 18 yr olds with 16 gf, and public urination will not get you on the list

Where has that happened?

[varkam]

42. Yes it will.

According to the Adam Walsh Act, anyone who has two indecent exposure charges (aka public urination) within three years will have to register as a sex offender.

As far as people being on the registry who probably shouldn't be, here's just one case: http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/is_ricky_really_a_sex_offender/6726/

[izquierdista]

23. 1000 feet laws

It's just statistical probability. Since Americans are overweight and don't exercise, 1000 feet is too far to go unless they get in their car, and children have been taught never to get into a car with strangers. See, problem solved.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

19. Anyone named "Buck Clark" has got to be up to no good (n/m)

[varkam]

21. Snort!

:rofl:

[ourbluenation]

31. Bwahahahaaaa!

:rofl:

[Smith_3]

24. What was he convicted for? Public urination?

As long as there is no further info on that, no judgement.

[Lars39]

26. He was already convicted of a sex crime against a child under 16

[csziggy]

36. He was convicted of sexual battery of a helpless child

Search for his name and city to find his listing on the Florida Sexual Offenders and Predators page:
http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/offenderSearchNav.do

The flyer link gives all the details available to the general public.

SEX BAT/PHYS HELPLESS RESIST; F.S. 794.011(4)(a) (PRINCIPAL IN ATTEMPT)

794.011(4)(a) Commits Sexual Battery; Victim 12 Or Older And Physically Helpless

(4) A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older without that person's consent, under any of the following circumstances, commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082,s. 775.083, s. 775.084,or s. 794.0115:

(a) When the victim is physically helpless to resist.

(1) As used in this chapter:

(a) "Consent" means intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent and does not include coerced submission. "Consent" shall not be deemed or construed to mean the failure by the alleged victim to offer physical resistance to the offender.

(e) "Physically helpless" means unconscious, asleep, or for any other reason physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act.

(h) "Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(i) "Victim" means a person who has been the object of a sexual offense.

[Forrest Greene]

34. The First Line

That should be "suspiciously," not "suspicious." "Acting suspicious," good grief. How the hell do illiterates manage to retain jobs as professional writers?

[XemaSab]

51. Not to mention the headline

Convicted Sex Offender Arrested After Asking Parents To Babysit Children

"Hi, is this your child? Can you watch him for a couple hours while I run some errands? I'll give you $12 an hour. Thanks. I'll be back in a while."

[GreenPartyVoter]

47. That would have creeped me out if he'd asked me out of the blue to babysit my kids or pick them up

from school. Major alarm bells would have been going off.

A woman, a complete stranger, once asked me if she could take my toddler for a walk. We were at an outdoors concert and there was just something about her that seemed off. She was just way too interested in my child. I didn't let her take him.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

55. The pedophile's actions were so idiotic that a theory has popped up in my mind:

He just wants to go back to prison, because he found out life outside it has become impossible.

Either that, or he's fucking retarded.