Well, if the “pedo-creep” wasn’t your SO, your “nice uncle Fred that loves to watch the kids”, a teacher or perhaps even a religious figure- the chance your kids were in danger was tiny.
“Stranger Danger” is way overrated. Much more dangerous is the nice guy that you *(think) * know and trust. In other words, your kid is in far more danger from *one of your co-workers *than that weird stranger.
Now, why might this guy be watching the kids? Well, maybe he was a non-custodial father and this was his only chance to see his kid, as the Mom had convinced a Judge that Dad was dangerous- by simply lying. Yes, that’s all it takes- a flat out lie or two (“I saw him touching them inappropriately and he had kiddie porn on the computer”), an unscrupulous but competent lawyer and a sympathetic judge - and Dad not only has no visiting rights, he’s not supposed to get within 500’ of his own kids. Why would a Mom do this? Well,many people hate their exes (maybe he was cheating on her, after all), and she wants to retain custody and there are people who will advise Mothers to lie like that to make sure they get the kids. :mad:
Or why might this guy be watching kids play sports? This is America, people love to watch sports, even Little league and Pop Warner Football.
Why did he act so suspicious and drive off in a hurry then? Because we have scare tactics used by the media= thus over-protective Moms like our OP that will (and did) call Security or the Police based upon “a feeling”. And he will get in trouble and he may have to spend thousands of dollars on a lawyer, and he will likely lose his job. “Local Man Questioned on Pedophilia Charges”= no more job, ever. And, just because he wanted to watch some sports in an idle minute.
So yeah, of course he drove off in a hurry.
As for Registered Sex Offenders? By far the great majority of them are harmless. You can get on the database by:
Being a stripper with an “obscene” act.
Having sex with your Gay BF in a car, somewhere on a secluded lane- that the old-time homophobic police have staked out to “nab the perverts”.
Being a streaker.
Urinating in public.
wiki “In New York and various other states, crimes that society does not necessarily view as sexual in nature are also considered to be registerable sex offenses, such as kidnapping, unlawful surveillance, “sexual misconduct” (such as mooning or streaking), unlawful imprisonment, and in some cases “sexually motivated offenses” (such as assault, burglary, etc.) that are not categorized as sexual offenses unless the court determines that the offense was committed pursuant to the offender’s own sexual gratification” “The Adam Walsh Act requires anyone convicted of a sex crime to register as a sex offender where it will be posted on the internet for all to see. This includes anyone who is at least 14 years of age who engages in consensual teenage sex, urination in public, mooning, streaking and/or failure from preventing your children from having consensual sexual relationships.”
Now,I don’t want to say it’s OK to pee in an alley. It smells, and it’s nasty. But why do we put the poor schnook on a Sex offender database? Fine him and let him go.
Here’s how effective Megans Law is (wiki) "A December 2008 study by Kristen Zgoba Ph.D., Philip Witt Ph.D., Melissa Dalessandro M.S.W., and Bonita Veysey Ph.D. found that Megan’s Law has no effect on community tenure (i.e., time to first re-arrest), showed no demonstrable effect in reducing sexual re-offenses, has no effect on the type of sexual re-offense or first time sexual offense (still largely child molestation/incest), and has no effect on reducing the number of victims involved in sexual offenses. Moreover costs associated with the initial implementation as well as ongoing expenditures continued to grow over time. Start up costs totaled $555,565 and current costs (in 2007) totaled approximately 3.9 million dollars for the 15 responding counties in New Jersey according to the study. The authors feel that given the lack of demonstrated effect of Megan’s Law on sexual offenses, the growing costs may not be justifiable. Philip Witt is a psychologist and the co-principal author of the study who helped implement Megan’s Law in New Jersey"