A few days ago, somebody at my apartment complex took a screenshot from The California Sex Offender Registry and tacked it onto the bulletin board next to the mailboxes. It had the guy’s name, address, picture and everything.
I took it down and threw it away. Not because I’m any fan of child molesters (I’m certainly not!) but I do believe Megan’s Law is unconstitutional. It does absolutely nothing to protect children and only invites harassment against people who have supposedly served time for their crimes. (Do they post notices about former bank robbers and cat burglars who live in the neighborhood? I think not!!) In any case, this is clearly NOT an official Megan’s Law notification, but the work of some do-gooder vigilante who hasn’t bothered to read this part of the sex offender website: “Anyone who uses this information to commit a crime or to harass an offender or his or her family is subject to criminal prosecution and civil liability.”
Anyway, today someone reposted the screenshot, with the apartment # circled and marked with a felt pen, “HE LIVES HERE!” I took it down again, but I’m sure it will be back. I’m not sure what to do…should I notify someone, or should I leave well enough alone and thank my lucky stars they don’t have “Scarlet Letter” laws for speeding tickets and drinking in public? Any advice?
I have a sex offender living in my neighborhood, too. (lucky me! :rolleyes: ) The flier you mentioned was printed off a state website and is considered public information. Posting it on a public bulletin board is no crime, and is not considered harassment to the offender. I suppose it sucks for them, having everyone know they’re deviants, but that’s whatcha get for puttin’ yer doodad where it doesn’t belong.
Do you have a legal cite that this wouldn’t be harrassment?
And for the record, an 18-year-old who has sexual relations with a 17-year-old (or whatever one year below the age of consent is in your area) can be charged with statutory rape and be required to register as a sex offender if convicted. Not all registered sex offenders are creepy old “deviants.”
I’d be asking my landlord why they let a registered sex offender rent an apartment. The complex I live in does a criminal background check: even a misdemeanor could keep you out. How did your landlord miss this?
I’m all about the sex offender registry, but I’d want to know the facts before I go telling the whole complex about the pervert upstairs.
The guy could be a freak, or he might have been a stupid 19 year old who banged a 15 year old. People like that, IMHO, are not sexual predators and don’t belong on the SOR.
FWIW, IANAL but I don’t think putting up flyers is illegal or could be considered harassment.
Harassment would be calling the guy up with death theats or screwing with his car.
Printing out public information and posting it in the neighborhood the guy lives in probably isn’t illegal. Besides, isn’t the whole purpose of the SOR to inform the public?
(Interestingly, the Kentucky SOR has a “Print Flyer” link on every registrant’s website.)
But doesn’t the registry also state the nature of the crime? I’ve received two notifications about sex offenders in my neighborhood. One clearly noted that the man was convicted of aggravated rape. The other was (I forget the exact term) legalese for child molester.
The notifications I received came in the mail. Nobody else in this thread as mentioned anything like this. Is this not a common practice?
Interestingly, when I checked the SOR website, I couldn’t find the names of either of the two men who I’d been warned about. You’d think that if there was one government website that would be updated frequently, this would be it, but apparently not.
Well, felons have to live somewhere. What would you suggest?
In the interest of full disclosure, I did look the guy up on the sex offender website and he was indeed convicted of 288(a): Lewd or Lascivious Acts With a Child Under 14 Years, plus two counts of “Child Annoying” (whatever that means…) However, the website gives no further details as to whether or not the victim was related (which is the overwhelming majority of child molestation cases) or a stranger.
Plus, there’s a high likelihood that he doesn’t even live in that unit anymore – recently, my complex has been evicting/relocating everyone in order to gut and remodel all the units so they can charge higher rents. (Including myself…aaarrgh!!) I know that offenders are required to inform the state if they move, but as for keeping the website up to date…well, it’s the CA state gov’t, need I say more??
I did print out a copy of the FAQ and posted it with the relevant section highlighted, as Mynn suggested. Maybe I’ll discuss it with the rental office when I go in to sign my new lease next week…
I dislike sex offender registries in general, but what pissed me off the most about my local listing is that it listed the name and address of a 17-year old who committed a sex crime when he was 11.
There’s one in my neighborhood, and what a bruhaha there was when he moved here. Flyers, protests, and even the Guardian Angels letting everyone know who he was and where he was living, which was two doors down from a school bus stop. Turned out he had raped, tortured and killed two teens in Virginia, and was now back on the streets!
It made the front page of the NY Times Sunday magazine, and Geraldo did a whole show on it.
Of course, in our town, everyone knows your business two seconds after it happens.
This may be blindingly obvious, but where it says use this information to protect a person at risk - isn’t that a pretty big loophole? If you don’t know the circumstances of the offense, only that it involved a child, well then given the recidivism rate among sex offenders isn’t it reasonable to assume that all children are at risk? Isn’t that the point of having the database in the first place?
Compared to all other classes of criminals, sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates of any class of criminals. Is it reasonable to assume that children are at risk? Of course, but that’s not a particularly meaningful question because everyone is always at some risk. Does a released sex offender increase the risk significantly enough to warrant wearing a scarlet letter for the rest of his life even after he’s ostensibly served his sentence? IMHO, no. And to avoid this getting dragged into GD, I’ll leave it at that.
No. The average (multi-study) recidivism rate for sex offenders committing sexual crimes within five years of release is about 18.9% for rapists and 12.7% for child molesters, whereas the overall average for recidivism (violent and non-violent) is around 44%.
