NationStates Jolt Archive

A New Jersey judge has ruled that a young man convicted of a sex offense must tell the parents of any girl he intends to date. I wonder how many parents will end up greeting him at the door with a shotgun? I've got a feeling this kid's not getting a date for a long time.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1147842271274630.xml&coll=1

It does seem to be a breach of juvenile confidentiality

To be honest, it seems fair. Sex offenders have a very high repeat rate... Also, a friend recently did a debate on should people with AIDS be legally required to inform potential partners before having sex. Seems a similar idea...

It does seem to be a breach of juvenile confidentiality
Maybe, but it's for a good cause. What parent would want his daughter going out with a sex offender?

Looking at Indiana's registry, it's odd how many I went to school with. I do think the legal definition of "Sex Offender" is too broad.

Dude probably should have thought about that before he raped someone. It's not like they couldn't find out anyhow. Sex offenders are registered.

And if he wishes to date an adult ?

A New Jersey judge has ruled that a young man convicted of a sex offense must tell the parents of any girl he intends to date. I wonder how many parents will end up greeting him at the door with a shotgun? I've got a feeling this kid's not getting a date for a long time.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1147842271274630.xml&coll=1

Wow. I know a lot of parents that are not very involved with their kids, and couldn't tell you who their children are dating. Is this a precedent that could lead to all boys telling parents they are dating their daughters even if they are NOT sex offenders?

Maybe, but it's for a good cause. What parent would want his daughter going out with a sex offender?
I would have thought it a bit better to have a condition of probabtion that he did not date or be within a certian distance of any underage female untill age of majority

Alows confidentiality while not puting anyone more at risk

Dude probably should have thought about that before he raped someone. It's not like they couldn't find out anyhow. Sex offenders are registered.
where does it say rape?

I was reading the article and it doesn't actually say what he did. In fact, the only charge mentioned makes no mention of any sexual encounters or the like.
When a Sussex County teenager admitted endangering the welfare of his 6-year-old half sister, a judge sentenced him to three years probation and added an unprecedented condition: The boy must tell the parents of any girl he dates that he is a registered sex offender.
Thus, this could mean he didn't watch her when she was playing and she ran into the middle of the street.

I was reading the article and it doesn't actually say what he did. In fact, the only charge mentioned makes no mention of any sexual encounters or the like.

Thus, this could mean he didn't watch her when she was playing and she ran into the middle of the street.
It sounds really weird. How does endangering the welfare of a 6 yr-old equate to being a low risk sex offender (to quote the judge)?

A New Jersey judge has ruled that a young man convicted of a sex offense must tell the parents of any girl he intends to date. I wonder how many parents will end up greeting him at the door with a shotgun? I've got a feeling this kid's not getting a date for a long time.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1147842271274630.xml&coll=1


I'd greet him, but not with a shotgun.Thats crude.

I'd show him all the hospitality right to the shallow grave in my basement

Presumably the judge had access to information about what happened...

It sounds really weird. How does endangering the welfare of a 6 yr-old equate to being a low risk sex offender (to quote the judge)?
I'm no lawyer, but I vaguely remember reading news stories where child molesters were charged with endangering the welfare of a minor.

It sounds really weird. How does endangering the welfare of a 6 yr-old equate to being a low risk sex offender (to quote the judge)?
I agree. The charge is rather vague.

I'm no lawyer, but I vaguely remember reading news stories where child molesters were charged with endangering the welfare of a minor.
But that (child molestation) isn't what one would call a 'low-risk sex offender'.

The only thing I can think of is maybe he was showing the girl porn movies. something like that.

But that (child molestation) isn't what one would call a 'low-risk sex offender'.

The only thing I can think of is maybe he was showing the girl porn movies. something like that.
Or... told her all about the birds and the bees! :eek:

But that (child molestation) isn't what one would call a 'low-risk sex offender'.

The only thing I can think of is maybe he was showing the girl porn movies. something like that.
I just did a google search and from what I can piece together sometimes kid touchers are allowed to plea down to "endangering the welfare of a child".

I'd greet him, but not with a shotgun.Thats crude.

I'd show him all the hospitality right to the shallow grave in my basement

Without even asking what exactly he had done ?

Yeah, it's vague, but...

"As a practical proposition, this kid doesn't date for three years," said Furlong, a long-time critic of Megan's Law.

I'm sure he'll survive. I haven't been on a date since I was 17.

I just did a google search and from what I can piece together sometimes kid touchers are allowed to plea down to "endangering the welfare of a child".
I guess that makes sense coupled with the other bit of his sentence - that he's not allowed to have unsupervised contact with children under 10.
I guess he's viewed as low-risk with teenage girls cause they're too old (!) for him.
Cheers for clearing that up.

Without even asking what exactly he had done ?

Sure. Its likely I'll maul several guys that come to the house for her anyway.

May as well have a good reason for at least one of them.

Some people just have to learn the hard way.

Without even asking what exactly he had done ?

He's a boy, trying to date your daughter. Isn't that enough? LOL

It sounds really weird. How does endangering the welfare of a 6 yr-old equate to being a low risk sex offender (to quote the judge)?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/17/beware.boyfriend.ap/index.html

According to this article, he admitted to committing a sex-act on his 6-yr old half sister.

Looking at Indiana's registry, it's odd how many I went to school with. I do think the legal definition of "Sex Offender" is too broad.

I agree that "sex offender" can be too broad, although it doesn't appear that it is misused in this case.

I know a guy who has to inform those in his neighboorhood (when he moves) that he is a sex offender. His crime? Selling a comic book. In fact, the court found that the comic book he sold was not illegal to sell the the kid he sold it to, and that the comic book in question was, in fact, not lewd. However, he was still convicted as a sex offender (oh, the fun things that can happen in the law).

Interestingly enough, they are trying to get him yet again, on a similar charge, because he gave a free comic book to a child. He had not read the comic in question, and it was not marked as "mature". But it did have nudity (although not in a sexual context), so he is now being charged as a sex offender yet again.

I agree that "sex offender" can be too broad, although it doesn't appear that it is misused in this case.

I know a guy who has to inform those in his neighboorhood (when he moves) that he is a sex offender. His crime? Selling a comic book. In fact, the court found that the comic book he sold was not illegal to sell the the kid he sold it to, and that the comic book in question was, in fact, not lewd. However, he was still convicted as a sex offender (oh, the fun things that can happen in the law).

Interestingly enough, they are trying to get him yet again, on a similar charge, because he gave a free comic book to a child. He had not read the comic in question, and it was not marked as "mature". But it did have nudity (although not in a sexual context), so he is now being charged as a sex offender yet again.
Thats pathetic. Is it really worth ruining peoples lives like that, just because of something dumb like that? Its total overkill.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/17/beware.boyfriend.ap/index.html

According to this article, he admitted to committing a sex-act on his 6-yr old half sister.

Again the vagueness.. what is "a sex act" ? Did he french kiss her? Touch her nipples ? Show her porn ? Tell her of the birds and the bees, using his own body as demonstration dummy ? Let her use his dick as a lollipop ? Rape her ?
Way too broad :(

A New Jersey judge has ruled that a young man convicted of a sex offense must tell the parents of any girl he intends to date. I wonder how many parents will end up greeting him at the door with a shotgun? I've got a feeling this kid's not getting a date for a long time.

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1147842271274630.xml&coll=1

Easy way around that, don't "date" girls, just "hang out with them as friends" and occasionally have sex. No parents required!

Sex offenders should be castrated (with anesthesia, of course) AND registered.

Sex offenders should be castrated (with anesthesia, of course) AND registered.

So my friend who sold a comic book that wasn't lewd (even according to the courts) to a person that wasn't underage, but still got labeled a sex offender should have been castrated?

I agree that "sex offender" can be too broad, although it doesn't appear that it is misused in this case.

Indeed. The girl was named "Sex" by her hippy parents, and he offended her when he said he considered it a stupid name.

So my friend who sold a comic book that wasn't lewd (even according to the courts) to a person that wasn't underage, but still got labeled a sex offender should have been castrated?

By sex offender I mean child molestor, rapist, etc.

By sex offender I mean child molestor, rapist, etc.

Then you should have said "child molestor, rapist, etc." The term "sex offender" covers all sorts of bases that most would say shouldn't even be criminal, much less things that should lead to castration.