The Cellar - A convicted VIOLENT sex offender is moving in up the street!

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Home Base (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - A convicted VIOLENT sex offender is moving in up the street! (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=24016)

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 696280)

Naw, the mafia is too scared to go to the bad part. Besides, it's easier to shake down the citizens in the good part, 'cause the denizens of the bad part got nothing to be shaken for

Fixed it.

Sex offenders should never be released from prison, they are always going to be a danger.:mad2:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TOPSY/TURVY (Post 696307)

Sex offenders should never be released from prison, they are always going to be a danger.:mad2:

That's just not true. Sorry, I know that everyone believes this, but the research just doesn't back it up. In fact, sex offenders as a group have just about the LOWEST recidivism rate of any criminal group.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-likely-are-sex-offenders-to-repeat-their-crimes-258/

From my point of view, it seeems that the most important part is to know what the conviction was about.

As I understand it, in the USA, sexual offenders can range from the guy/girl fooling around with his/her partner and got caugth by the police to a multiple count rapist.

In the first case, I don't see a problem... In the second, it should have been solved with a nice dose of .50 caliber straight to the head.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker (Post 696308)

That's just not true. Sorry, I know that everyone believes this,
but the research just doesn't back it up. In fact, sex offenders as a group have just about the
LOWEST recidivism rate of any criminal group.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-likely-are-sex-offenders-to-repeat-their-crimes-258/

In my reading, the links really don't support that conclusion.
A serious problem lies in the classification of "sex criminals",
and GunMaster's thoughts (above) seem closer to what the data shows.

From your primary link:

Quote:

One reason for the numerical confusion may be that supporters of sex-offender registries
who say sex offenders are more likely than not to re-offend are considering the rate
of repeat sex offenses of sex criminals compared with the rate of sex offenses of prisoners released for other crimes.
Sex criminals are less likely to be arrested for another crime of any type,
but they commit more sex crimes than other groups of criminals.
(In general, criminals are more likely to commit crimes in their category than are criminals from other categories.)

Here is the hard nut at the center of the statistical debate:

Quote:

Rankings assigned by the current test – called the Static 99 –
determine which offenders must publicly declare their crime and can affect everything
from sex offenders' chances at employment to their housing options.

Quote:

But the single test, which bases its risk assessment on factors such as age, marital status,
previous offenses and the victim's gender, can often be misleading even for adult male sex offenders.
And it is stacked against juvenile offenders entering the adult prison system, who,
because they are younger than 24 and unmarried, get two quick strikes against them.

Quote:

For juveniles, women and child pornography offenders, "there's no research to show [the Static 99] is valid,"
said Allison Taylor, executive director of the Texas Council on Sex Offender Treatment.
"It's easy to see a 48-year-old pedophile who comes out as low-risk – we see that all the time."

The distorted rankings can lead an 18-year-old with a minor crime record who has consensual sex
with his 15-year-old girlfriend to be labeled a high-risk sex offender for life.
Conversely, a 45-year-old married woman with a history of molesting her 5-year-old niece will often be ranked low-risk.

The result is that some predatory parolees are labeled low-risk and not forced to notify the community.
Juvenile offenders with so-called "Romeo and Juliet" crimes wear these scarlet letters instead.

Further, the link to the Texas article acknowledges that the are no plans to re-evaluate the existing group
of (released) sex offenders so data from the two groups will unavoidably be merged... garbage in, garbage out.

As I read these particular links, the recidivism (re-arrest/conviction/incarceration) rate for the
individuals of real concern is about 20-25%.
Of course, that is not speaking to the additional problem of the undetected/under-reported sex crimes.

That's why I suggested that the best course of action in Sam's case, is to let the guy know if he fucks up, the consequences will more than being inconvenienced by the court system.

Hmmm... What consequences would those be ?

Prevention of sex crimes is a tough one, and I don't pretend to know what would work.
If it were simple it would have been solved.

Quote:

Castration has been used throughout history to punish sex offenders. In 1776, Thomas Jefferson
promoted surgical castration for offenders convicted of sodomy, rape, or polygamy.

Quote:

J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 31:502–9, 2003

Chemical castration involves the administration of anti-androgen drugs,
such as cyproterone or the birth-control drug Depo-Provera,
which is given as an injection every three months, making compliance easier to track.

When used by men, these drugs can reduce sex drive, compulsive sexual fantasies, and capacity for sexual arousal.
Life-threatening side effects are rare, but some users show increases in body fat and reduced bone density,
which increase long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis.
They may also experience other "feminizing" effects such as gynecomastia, reduced body hair, and loss of muscle mass.

Oregon is one of 9 (?) states that has a law regarding the use of "chemical castration",
but using simple Google searches I have not been able to find if it is still in effect,
or what results the program obtained.

Quote:

ORS 144.625: Oregon's Chemical Castration Pilot Program which was approved on July 1, 1999
by Governor John A. Kitzhaber, directs the Department of Corrections to establish
a supervised pilot treatment program for forty to fifty convicted sex offenders
who are eligible for release within six months on parole or post-prison supervision.

The link for the above quotes is an excellent 2001 review that can be downloaded from here

Oregon Law Review : Vol. 80, No. 1, p. 267-301 :
Chemical Castration:
Oregon's Innovative Approach to Sex Offender Rehabilitation, or Unconstitutional Punishment?

The problems with chemical castrations run from coercion vs true informed consent,
effectiveness, tracking compliance, to constitutional rights, cruel and unusual punishment, double jeopardy, etc.

I think he may have been referring to a garden variety beat-down.

FTR, from a previous thread re banged up paedos:

Quote:

Louis Theroux (English broadcaster) dealt with this very issue in A Place for Paedophiles, a one-hour show set in a holding/ rehabilitation facility in California. The inmates have all served the sentences mandated by law, and are being held indefinitely in the public interest.

Very few make it through the program. Many refuse even to participate. Those that do are subjected to a battery of tests, one of which is the "peter metre". Developed during the Vietnam era, to determine whether men were really gay or just trying to avoid the draft (I bet it got more negatives than positives - patriotic gay Americans kept their mouths shut) it measures involuntary arousal to images shown.

Those that make it through, and are deemed no longer a threat can remain incarcerated for years awaiting a safe place to live.

These men are no longer criminals. So they have every possible state paid luxury you can have while still having your freedom denied. Three square meals, cable tv, classes, exercise etc etc. Something that must rip a hole in right wing sensibilities.

Quote:

Something that must rip a hole in right wing sensibilities.

Sentences have been served, but still being held indefinitely in the "public interest"

Such a program rips a hole in my (left wing) sensibilities too. :eek: :eek: :eek:

I've read that the ACLU has taken positions on this sort of stuff,
but I haven't seen any higher federal court decisions.

It's incredible to me how bent out of shape societies can get over matters involving sex,
by throwing away the same civic principals they say they hold dear.

What I meant, Lamp, was the feeding and housing of criminals - in this country it's considered by right wing newspapers to be a shocking waste of taxpayers' money, when they would be better off having a millstone tied around their necks and walked into the nearest stretch of water.

In fact they veritably froth at the mouth that "these people" get three square meals a day, heating and electricity. My Dad especially, says that he'd have been better off in prison for many years. I wonder if this is about escaping me and my Mum though, as I really can't see a prison indulging his favourite activity - going to Tesco (supermarket) at least once a day).

OK, I looked up what constitutes a violent sexual offender under Colorado law and the statutes say its someone who commits a sexual assault defined as a class 3 or 2 felony:

Quote:

(4) Sexual assault is a class 3 felony if it is attended by any one or more of the following circumstances:

(a) The actor causes submission of the victim through the actual application of physical force or physical violence; or

(b) The actor causes submission of the victim by threat of imminent death, serious bodily injury, extreme pain, or kidnapping, to be inflicted on anyone, and the victim believes that the actor has the present ability to execute these threats; or

(c) The actor causes submission of the victim by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim, or any other person, and the victim reasonably believes that the actor will execute this threat. As used in this paragraph (c), "to retaliate" includes threats of kidnapping, death, serious bodily injury, or extreme pain; or

(d) The actor has substantially impaired the victim's power to appraise or control the victim's conduct by employing, without the victim's consent, any drug, intoxicant, or other means for the purpose of causing submission.

(5) (a) Sexual assault is a class 2 felony if any one or more of the following circumstances exist:

(I) In the commission of the sexual assault, the actor is physically aided or abetted by one or more other persons; or

(II) The victim suffers serious bodily injury; or

(III) The actor is armed with a deadly weapon or an article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon or represents verbally or otherwise that the actor is armed with a deadly weapon and uses the deadly weapon, article, or representation to cause submission of the victim.

So this is not some 18 year old kid who slept with his 15 year old girl friend. This is not even a poor, misunderstood child molester who will never again touch Jimmy's thingy or look up Susie's skirt - swear to God.

This is about the sociopath who uses physical violence, threats of death, etc and/or causes serious bodily harm to the victim and/or uses a deadly weapon to ensure submission on the part of the victim.

I am NOT happy about having a person such as this live only 3 blocks away. And if a person is predisposed to violence, I don't know that chemical castration would effectively address that issue. And I admit I have no sympathy should a VIOLENT sexual offender have to spend some time in jail. Hell, the longer, the better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoothmoniker

Please forgive me for maligning tranquil LA where women walk alone at night with no fear, people love their neighbor whether black, white or brown, and the police occupy themselves with doing crosswords and eating donuts all day because their job is so boring.

However, I am rather surprised that you reject the idea of a sex offender being sent to sleepy LA, since you feel the offender will never do anything naughty again.

I like Bruce's solution except that I don't know any bad asses who could implement it.

The very person! Thanks, footx3! :thumb: