Sex predators will get to pick the therpy they choose

I get why you don't want the offender to choose the therapy- but just who do you think should choose the therapy program?

and you seem to think the therapy is considered part of his punishment... I get that you want him to suffer- but is that really the function of therapy?

a more valid argument would be that you believe the offender wants to choose a therapy that allows him to hide his issues more easily.. IMHO, the function of therapy in sex offender cases is NOT an attempt to "cure" the offender... it's to keep an ongoing investigation into the person's psychological status.. therapists are supposed to detect when something in the offender's mind is changing, or being hidden, and report it to probation.. the probation officer and therapist discuss each of the offenders under their watch, and determine when they need to take action to prevent/minimize recidivism.

Quote:

---

that's ok, I'll stay in the fight

---

Good for you, I will as well.

Quote:

---

Now who is using extremes?”

---

I am, why? It’s acceptable for you to enter this thread with an over-the-top example, as if that somehow validates your position on the subject and in-turn demeans another [me] in the process, yet when countered with a parallel conspiracy example it is no longer appropriate to use your same tactic? Nah…post up bullshit and I’ll counter it with more bullshit.

Quote:

---

anyone who knew it was going to happen, and didn't TRY to stop it should face the full charges...

---

Contradictory. Then what was your point in posting your “prison rape example.” Is that conspiracy and deserving of registration or not if convicted?

Quote:

---

”…but life doesn't always occur in black and white, it's in shades of gray and colors... How about a case in Colorado Springs where a mentally retarded (not mentally ill) individual is now on the sex offender list because he has the mentality of a 6-8 year old, and when talking with another "mentally challenged" person, they dropped pants and "compared".. they never touched each other, but he's now a registered sex offender- should someone seek him on the list, and seek justice because he's dangerous?

---

Another 1-percenter sample eh? As if pulling-out yet another sensationalized one-off makes your case? It doesn’t, far from it. I’ll counter with this, what about the “other” 99% that are registered and accurate? Does society solution for your 1 or my 99? Re: Your weak attempt to “poke me in the eye” by asking should someone target this mentally retarded individual for justice?” How do you think a rational person who lives in the real “colorful and gray zone” everyday would respond to that example and question? I’ll answer, very succinctly, “no.”

Quote:

---

”…or a 15 year old that comes onto an adult, and tells someone she's 18, and is literally asking for it?” She's not responsible for her behavior because she's underage, but it's not as black-and-white as the picture you paint above.

---

Ah..yes…this worn-out obligatory classic failure of justice saga suggesting this too invalidates a registration database, eh? I like the National Inquirer flair you’ve chosen, “underage and…She was literally asking for it?” Your fictional [and I do accept these failure cases as fact] adult is fucked either way if wrongly convicted so I’ll ask again here, what does this have to do with the “other 99%” that are accurately registered?

Quote:

---

I was trying to say that under the letter of the law you posted, they could make a case for MANY people to be tried as a sex offender... however absurd the circumstances, if you "conspired" (hypothetical example, a father of the victim states that "he deserves to get the same thing to happen to him"- that gets to an inmate, and he acts on it.. under the text you posted, it's possible a PA/DA could make a case to try you as a sex offender... you conspired with the inmate to exact revenge. If a jury bought into it, you could be found guilty- I have seen (not hypothetical, observed) the law used to the LETTER, however strange the consequences- those on the side of justice are HUMAN- do not expect them to be perfect... they may USE the system however they can to get a conviction, and the most severe one they can to further their career, or using a "the ends justify the means" mentality

---

With or without a sex-offender registry nothing you posted above changes, nothing. The system has been exploited, twisted, used negatively, wrongly, and viciously for decades, and will be today, tomorrow and far into the future. And human failings [and impacts] will persist. But, that criticism and acknowledgment granted, the justice system doesn’t “just fail at every turn” as you seem to be insinuating either. So what exactly is your point with the above? Are you stating “a federal or state registry is a failure in its entirety and must be abolished because the justice system as a whole has failings?”

Quote:

---

"Engaging in Sexual Conduct in a Penal Institution" is a bit ambiguous - perhaps it's more clear in the details of the statute- but it should be clearly defined- masturbation? undressing? showering? clearly sodomy/rape would be over the line, but at what point is it "sexual conduct" other than that, the rest of the crimes are certainly deserving of the label,IMO. Attempt, conspiring or soliciting of remaining offenses would also be deserving.

---

So we now count two, only two of the statutes you would remove. Indecent exposure, which I agree with FWIW and sexual conduct in a penal institution, do I have that right? Two are trivial offenses, the rest are “ok” to be added if convicted? But…we need to step back and revisit the clarity of the others as well right?

Quote:

---

(E) Sexual assault on a child by one in a position of trust;

---

Quote:

---

I have seen this statute applied where there was no coercion (in fact, a coercion charge was on the case, but dropped), and no violence.. either change the wording, or move it off the "SVP" list.... I'm in no way condoning the behavior.. but it was NOT violent in any way.. and predatory is reaching in this case (I know the victim, the victim's family, as well as the offender & his family)- but he was found guilty.. he should have been charged with "Unlawful sexual contact", but that's a class 1 misdemeanor... not a felony- felony convictions look much better on the PA/DA's resume. IMO, the jury felt compelled to hand down a guilty verdict so he wouldn't "walk"- but the charge should have fit the crime..

---

I cannot speak to this and you know that, nobody can, like you, unless privy to the facts and brevity of such case. Are you choosing to share this to substantiate that registry’s are a failure or the system is a failure? I’m missing the connection to having a registry because in your words; “should have been charged with "Unlawful sexual contact",” and strangely enough, guess where that designation lands you?

Quote:

---

Please show me where anyone stated that it was of "of no value".. (you're going to extremes again) somebody (BigBear, I think) expressed distress over finding a high # of offenders close to him- we (I don't speak for Stuart, but I'm inferring) simply tried to point out that the system is not perfect.. I certainly never said it was "of no value", but suggested it be taken in full knowledge of it's flaws... would you prefer to HIDE the flaws of the system? (full disclosure, right?) also, nobody should fly off the handle, or decide that those on the list deserve further punishment outside the law...

---

Ah…I’m going to extremes again, if only such not-so-subtle-attempts to discredit had any impact on me (they don’t], you’re welcome to continue that kind of inflammatory rhetoric though, that tactic always makes me laugh and I enjoy the humor. “Show me, “show me.” You never said that verbatim so why the misguided question? Is that another attempt to discredit? It failed. Your position on registries is unclear, you pipe-in with negatives [post #19] and samplings of misses suggesting that the registry or mapping as a whole is invalid as a result, what should the reader interpret? So far you’ve suggested the justice system is imperfect, and it is, stated the statutes should be adjusted, changed, clarified, etc., in some instances I concur but what do those statements have to do with a member of society using the data in an advantageous way? Frankly, whether you acknowledge it or not many of us in society have the ability to decipher the data, understand there are flaws, apply a reasonable level of critical thinking, reach conclusions and use that data to our advantage. Thanks for the attempt to “educate me” though.
Would I prefer to hide flaws? What do you think my response is to such an ignorant question?
My “flying off the handle” comment – I’ll give you that, my failure, it was wrong and inappropriate, but you already knew that too.

Quote:

---

overall, unless you've seen the system at work, you're simply eworking on theory that justice is always served perfectly.. have you factored in everything? are you sure? when you've seen the system at work with knowledge of the case, you can see that the PA (Prosecuting Attorney) is a lawyer, and subject to the same human flaws as the "scumbags" that defend criminals... maybe I have been jaded by a specific bad example... I'm not perfect, either..

---

Bullshit, your presumption and comment suggesting one [me in this case] interprets the system as perfect and that is our [my] baseline for decision-making is utter crap. Once more, a fallible justice system, which is your stake-in-the-ground, has no bearing on whether an offender registry is worthwhile.
I applaud your passion and real-world experience on the topic as whole but your underestimation of others [me] is far from accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 68Charger

I get why you don't want the offender to choose the therapy- but just who do you think should choose the therapy program? The board appointed by the courts should select the treatment based on the type of offense and the phyc evaluation of the offender.

and you seem to think the therapy is considered part of his punishment... I get that you want him to suffer- but is that really the function of therapy? Therapy is part of the punishment, most offenders of any crime dont voluenteer for treatment. The treatment should be based on helping the offender understand and control their problem.

a more valid argument would be that you believe the offender wants to choose a therapy that allows him to hide his issues more easily.. That is my argument and clearly I did not make that point, this is why the offender should not choose the thearpy.
IMHO, the function of therapy in sex offender cases is NOT an attempt to "cure" the offender... it's to keep an ongoing investigation into the person's psychological status.. therapists are supposed to detect when something in the offender's mind is changing, or being hidden, and report it to probation.. the probation officer and therapist discuss each of the offenders under their watch, and determine when they need to take action to prevent/minimize recidivism.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Contradictory. Then what was your point in posting your “prison rape example.” Is that conspiracy and deserving of registration or not if convicted? .

---

The offender that is specific to this case, is a family member of the representive that put the last minute lanuage into the bill to allow her family member who raped women in prison, using his power of position as a physican, to make it easier for him and not his victims.
All other examples said, lets go with the specifics for this case as this lanuage would not be in the bill if the represenitives family member was not a rapeist himself.
This is about another elected offical using the law, again, to make rules that allow their family to do as they please.

Call "the snake" Ritter and maybe he can leave office doing something right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Contradictory. Then what was your point in posting your “prison rape example.” Is that conspiracy and deserving of registration or not if convicted?

---

I wasn't saying this action would be legal, morally ethical, or tasteful... but I simply contend that as a crime, it's not on the same level as someone who fondles a patient or a child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Another 1-percenter sample eh? >snip< what about the “other” 99% that are registered and accurate? Does society solution for your 1 or my 99? Re: Your weak attempt to “poke me in the eye” by asking should someone target this mentally retarded individual for justice?” How do you think a rational person who lives in the real “colorful and gray zone” everyday would respond to that example and question? I’ll answer, very succinctly, “no.”

---

You seem to be fond of statistics that you've created from thin air... (1%, 99%) I do not know of any studies or actual statistics that characterize the "quality" of sex offender cases.. it wouldn't serve the purpose of the justice system to point out it's flaws, and there are not many groups willing to stick their neck out for "sex offenders" no matter how trivial their crimes. it's a political black hole.. And it was a rhetorical question- I was not attempting to poke anybody..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Ah..yes…this worn-out obligatory classic failure of justice saga suggesting this too invalidates a registration database, eh? I like the National Inquirer flair you’ve chosen, “underage and…She was literally asking for it?” Your fictional [and I do accept these failure cases as fact] adult is fucked either way if wrongly convicted so I’ll ask again here, what does this have to do with the “other 99%” that are accurately registered?

---

More thin-air statistics.. and I specifically stated that it is NOT my intent to "invalidate the registration database"
I don't know what you think what I'm trying to accomplish here, since you seem to be ignoring some of my statements to explain it...
when somebody uses the "sex offender" label, many will automatically "assume" the roving pervert in the van, luring children with candy... it's human nature- and it's used to invoke an emotional response that can be exploited to trample the rights of innocent people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

With or without a sex-offender registry nothing you posted above changes, nothing. The system has been exploited, twisted, used negatively, wrongly, and viciously for decades, and will be today, tomorrow and far into the future. And human failings [and impacts] will persist. But, that criticism and acknowledgment granted, the justice system doesn’t “just fail at every turn” as you seem to be insinuating either. So what exactly is your point with the above? Are you stating “a federal or state registry is a failure in its entirety and must be abolished because the justice system as a whole has failings?”

---

again, when did I call to abolish it.. but thank you for acknowledging the system is imperfect, and subject to human error- that is my main point. Can't we work to try and improve it- I never said we should abolish it, but is it pointless to try and improve it, either?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Two are trivial offenses, the rest are “ok” to be added if convicted? But…we need to step back and revisit the clarity of the others as well right?

---

To repeat my point on this- by putting any cases in the category, it trivializes the label.. reserve the label for dangerous criminals, and I'll respect it fully.. it also ruins the lives of those that get the label, even if all they did was pick the wrong alley to take a leak in... because as soon as anyone sees the label, they assume the worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

I cannot speak to this and you know that, nobody can, like you, unless privy to the facts and brevity of such case. Are you choosing to share this to substantiate that registry’s are a failure or the system is a failure? I’m missing the connection to having a registry because in your words; “should have been charged with "Unlawful sexual contact",” and strangely enough, guess where that designation lands you?

---

I'm glad you asked- that designation would have landed him with a "sex offender" status, as opposed to his current "Sexually Violent Predator" status... it may seem like a nit to you- but he is neither violent, nor a predator- the law was not clearly defined as to when it should apply.. so it should be fixed.. but nobody would dare, for fear that they would be perceived as soft on predators...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

that tactic always makes me laugh and I enjoy the humor.

---

better laughter than anger- besides trying to get a point across, I enjoy the debate, your assumptions that I'm attacking or belittling you are not valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

“Show me, “show me.” You never said that verbatim so why the misguided question? Is that another attempt to discredit?

---

It was another rhetorical question- not an attempt to discredit, I honestly would not expect anybody here to promote hiding flaws in the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Your position on registries is unclear,

---

I'll try to clarify... the status of "sex offender", if used in a registry, should be used to define criminals that are dangerous, with the intent to prepare people to protect their loved ones.
Ever wonder why there is no "thug registry"? why is this reserved for only sex offenders? Why not create one for drug pushers, violent criminals? They can ruin or end lives as quickly as sex offenders...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

Frankly, whether you acknowledge it or not many of us in society have the ability to decipher the data, understand there are flaws, apply a reasonable level of critical thinking, reach conclusions and use that data to our advantage. Thanks for the attempt to “educate me” though.

---

You can only decipher/process data that you're aware of, and critical thinking is only based on the data at hand..
I have been exposed (no pun intended) to cases that I think knowledge of will only enhance the critical thinking process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

your presumption and comment suggesting one [me in this case] interprets the system as perfect and that is our [my] baseline for decision-making is utter crap. Once more, a fallible justice system, which is your stake-in-the-ground, has no bearing on whether an offender registry is worthwhile.
I applaud your passion and real-world experience on the topic as whole but your underestimation of others [me] is far from accurate.

---

Refer back to my last paragraph- even the best critical thinker can be fooled by omission of facts... and to reiterate, I have never stated that the registry is invalid, just that if you go with your gut instinct of what you think it is, you'd likely be overreacting...

in the previous case I brought up, where I knew both families- the father of the victim confronted the offender, and before the police arrived, attempted to strangle him (offender was not fighting back, he was remorseful at that point)... I was once asked by someone "what would you have done if it was your daughter?" with what I knew at the time, I thought about it, and responded "you'd never find the body".. so I speak of the "gut instinct" from some level of experience

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 68Charger

...

---

Be back with ya', I need to go knock-down some real work this afternoon.

Sorry for my derailing of your thread, Jim... not my intent..

More reading on this subject:
http://thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?aID=8511

the comments are also food for thought.. having the offender choose their therapy directly is not the answer, but through what I've seen someone within the system go through, I can attest that the current system is abused, and needs some checks and balances put in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim02

Lets focus a little on the person that is a family member of the person that is pushing this bill, Julian "Uncle Budd" Newman http://www.khow.com/pages/boyles.html
He is not a one time offender of a exposure incident, he has used his authority as an physican to rape women.
Pass a bill to get streaking and all other non-sexual offenses out of the legislation but dont make it easier for guys like this and all the other serious offends to make it easier on them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 68Charger

Sorry for my derailing of your thread, Jim... not my intent..

More reading on this subject:
http://thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?aID=8511

the comments are also food for thought.. having the offender choose their therapy directly is not the answer, but through what I've seen someone within the system go through, I can attest that the current system is abused, and needs some checks and balances put in place.

---

No problem, I just want to get this bill stoped, I agree that the entire law needs changed and that is a measure I would support if the lauange would not make it easier for the real offenders and it would not classify all the non-offenders as crimals that need to be on a registery.

My friends son did a little streaking at the school football game and they were talking sex offender registry for that, lucky he did not expose his genitals, something was covering them, and that is what appeard to save him from that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cebeu

No Stuart, I’m not but your cavalier responses suggesting to ignore registry data entirely because they may contain “lesser offenses” in your view is bullshit.
In the prior listed statutes where there are "no crimes" and only circumstances?

---

Guy makes coffee naked in his house.
Guy takes a leak in an alley.
Two mentally retarded kids compare penis size.

Where/who exactly is the victim in any of these cases?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

Guy makes coffee naked in his house.
Guy takes a leak in an alley.
Two mentally retarded kids compare penis size.

Where/who exactly is the victim in any of these cases?

---

Tax payers? (gettin' raped)... Sorry, had to...[Beer]