Sex Offenders

Sara - posted on 03/16/2010 ( 9 moms have responded )

9,313

50

586

March 15, 2010

ATLANTA (AP) -- Georgia's top court has upheld the state's sex offender registration law, rebuffing a challenge that the stiff requirements are unconstitutional because they require some who have not committed sex crimes to register as offenders.

The Georgia Supreme Court's 5-2 ruling Monday found that it is of "no consequence whether or not one has committed an offense that is 'sexual' in nature before being required to register."

The challenge was brought by Jake Rainer, who pleaded guilty to false imprisonment and robbery in 2001 to robbing a 17-year-old girl after arranging to buy some drugs from her.

He contended he should not have to register as a sex offender because the crime did not involve any sexual activity.





If there was no sexual nature to the crime, how is it legal (or justified) for someone to be forced to register as a sex offender? That would be like charging a petty theif with murder, despite their victim getting away alive and well (minus their money, of course), would it not?!


"no consequence whether or not one has committed an offense that is 'sexual' in nature before being required to register."

Call me crazy, but, isn't that exactly what the SEX OFFENDER title means? I don't know about you all, but i feel like there's something missing from this story...

This conversation has been closed to further comments

9 Comments

View replies by

?? - posted on 03/18/2010

4,974

0

172

I think this is dangerous and opening the door to a lot of misplaced anger being spent on someone that did 'nothing'. Obviously they did SOMETHING but they didn't rape a child. They didn't even look at a child in a sexual way.

People that are on the sex offender list are targetted by community members as predators and many of them face brutality (the actual sex offenders deserve whatever comes at them IMO) but people who are on there because of something completely irrelivant to SEXUAL ASSAULT....... they're going to be faced with those same community members and I gaurentee they aren't going to get the time / consideration to explain themselves.

This isn't going to do anything except allow more opportunity for crime.

Carolee - posted on 03/16/2010

21,950

17

585

I think all offenders should have to register, no matter what the offence was... change the title to Offender Registry, and give details on what kind of crime it was. But, in this case, if there truly was no sexual offence done, he shouldn't be on that registry... but I also think there's more to this story.

Dana - posted on 03/16/2010

11,264

35

495

It's still insane. You either commit a sexual act or you don't. It's really plain and simple.

[deleted account]

Oh, thanks Kelly.......I can kinda get it now but I still think it's being taken out of context!

Kelly - posted on 03/16/2010

700

16

37

"The law, said to be one of the toughest in the nation, allows the state to keep a tight leash on child molesters, rapists and other sexual predators after they have served their prison time. But it also requires anyone convicted of kidnapping or false imprisonment of a minor to register as a sex offender regardless if a sexual act was committed."

So it is very specific, and he will have to register because he pled guilty to the false imprisonment of a minor. He would have had to be informed of this by the DA and his lawyer before he pled, and obviously he was because that was not brought up in his appeal. It's nice to know that in a time when other states release re-offending child molesters on a regular basis (Vermont comes to mind) Georgia is tough on crime.

[deleted account]

There's gotta be something missing.......you can't possibly expect him to register as a sex offender is he hasn't been convicted of a sex-related crime! WTF?

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms