Original Article
02/16/2015
FRANKFORT - An eighth grade boy and his seventh grade girlfriend engaged in voluntary sex at her house in Kentucky. After it was discovered, the boy was arrested and prosecuted. The girl walked free.
State Assistant Attorney General Gregory Fuchs said the boy initiated acts that were “within the parameters of the crime.” The boy pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors for having sex with his girlfriend, as well as exchanging nude photos with her. He will be required to register as a sex offender.
The attorney for the boy, John Wampler, argued that voluntary sex between children should not be prosecuted as criminal. The boy was apparently too young to consent to sex, with the minimum age of consent in Kentucky set at 16, but he was prosecuted anyway.
New Life Style
Tampilkan postingan dengan label ConsensualSex. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label ConsensualSex. Tampilkan semua postingan
Minggu, 22 Februari 2015
Rabu, 05 November 2014
CA - Sex-offender laws are ineffective and unfair, critics say
Original Article
10/17/2014
By Puck Lo
Frank Lindsay, 62, is a father, small-business owner and avid surfer. He’s also one of 105,000 people in California — and 760,000 nationally — listed as a sex offender. In accordance with federal law, his name, photograph and home address appear in a public, online offender registry. In 1979, Lindsay, then 27, was convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under the age of 14.
“I thought I could do whatever I wanted,” Lindsay says. “Add on some alcohol, and I was a real asshole.”
Today, Lindsay considers himself a reformed man. He says he hasn’t had a drink in 30 years, is a Taoist and advocate for restorative justice — encouraging violent people to make amends for their actions. But, he says, “It seems that I can never be forgiven.”
Few groups are as widely despised as sex offenders. Activities prosecuted as sex offenses vary by state, but can include public urination, consensual sex between teenagers, streaking, prostitution, downloading child pornography and rape. In some states, law-enforcement officials distribute flyers to notify neighbors of registrants’ convictions. Some registrants are prohibited from using the Internet. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that indefinite detention at psychiatric hospitals — or “civil commitment” — of sex offenders is constitutional.
The first law requiring sex offenders to register publicly and for life was passed in California in 1947 and targeted gay men, according to Andrew Extein, executive director of the Center for Sexual Justice. But many of today’s laws have their origins in the late 1970s, when feminists and social conservatives worked together to publicize high-profile “stranger danger” attacks on children, says Roger Lancaster, anthropology professor at George Mason University and author of “Sex Panic and the Punitive State.”
Beginning in the mid-1990s, several laws went into effect that changed how sex-offense cases were prosecuted. In 1994, states were required to create databases of sex offenders. Two years later, Megan’s Law, named for a 7-year-old in New Jersey who was brutally raped and murdered by a neighbor with two previous sex convictions, allowed states to make those registries public. States passed their own versions of the law; in some cases, they required that neighbors be notified of paroled offenders’ previous convictions. Later laws moved those sex-offender databases online, created a national registry, required lifetime registration of people 14 years old and up and imposed harsh mandatory minimum sentences for crimes involving children.
But almost 20 years after the passage of Megan’s Law, criminologists and judges, along with a burgeoning movement of sex-offender registrants and their families, are challenging not only the constitutionality of the laws but their effectiveness in reducing sexual assault. In January, a California court ruled in favor of a paroled sex offender who had argued that city and county “child-safety zone” ordinances prohibiting people in the registry from using parks, beaches and similar recreation areas were an unconstitutional form of banishment. In April, the state Supreme Court upheld the ruling by declining to review it.
See Also: California Reform Sex Offender Laws
10/17/2014
By Puck Lo
Frank Lindsay, 62, is a father, small-business owner and avid surfer. He’s also one of 105,000 people in California — and 760,000 nationally — listed as a sex offender. In accordance with federal law, his name, photograph and home address appear in a public, online offender registry. In 1979, Lindsay, then 27, was convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under the age of 14.
“I thought I could do whatever I wanted,” Lindsay says. “Add on some alcohol, and I was a real asshole.”
Today, Lindsay considers himself a reformed man. He says he hasn’t had a drink in 30 years, is a Taoist and advocate for restorative justice — encouraging violent people to make amends for their actions. But, he says, “It seems that I can never be forgiven.”
Few groups are as widely despised as sex offenders. Activities prosecuted as sex offenses vary by state, but can include public urination, consensual sex between teenagers, streaking, prostitution, downloading child pornography and rape. In some states, law-enforcement officials distribute flyers to notify neighbors of registrants’ convictions. Some registrants are prohibited from using the Internet. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that indefinite detention at psychiatric hospitals — or “civil commitment” — of sex offenders is constitutional.
The first law requiring sex offenders to register publicly and for life was passed in California in 1947 and targeted gay men, according to Andrew Extein, executive director of the Center for Sexual Justice. But many of today’s laws have their origins in the late 1970s, when feminists and social conservatives worked together to publicize high-profile “stranger danger” attacks on children, says Roger Lancaster, anthropology professor at George Mason University and author of “Sex Panic and the Punitive State.”
Beginning in the mid-1990s, several laws went into effect that changed how sex-offense cases were prosecuted. In 1994, states were required to create databases of sex offenders. Two years later, Megan’s Law, named for a 7-year-old in New Jersey who was brutally raped and murdered by a neighbor with two previous sex convictions, allowed states to make those registries public. States passed their own versions of the law; in some cases, they required that neighbors be notified of paroled offenders’ previous convictions. Later laws moved those sex-offender databases online, created a national registry, required lifetime registration of people 14 years old and up and imposed harsh mandatory minimum sentences for crimes involving children.
But almost 20 years after the passage of Megan’s Law, criminologists and judges, along with a burgeoning movement of sex-offender registrants and their families, are challenging not only the constitutionality of the laws but their effectiveness in reducing sexual assault. In January, a California court ruled in favor of a paroled sex offender who had argued that city and county “child-safety zone” ordinances prohibiting people in the registry from using parks, beaches and similar recreation areas were an unconstitutional form of banishment. In April, the state Supreme Court upheld the ruling by declining to review it.
See Also: California Reform Sex Offender Laws
Label:
California,
ChildPorn,
CivilCommitment,
ConsensualSex,
Internet,
MegansLaw,
OnlineRegistry,
Prostitution,
Registration,
Streaking,
TeenageSex,
UrinatingInPublic
Lokasi:
California, USA
Kamis, 23 Januari 2014
Danny Finds Out Why Will Is on the Sex Offender Registry (Love Thy Neighbor)
Hard to believe this is from the Oprah Winfrey Network!
Video Description:
After convincing his mother to end her relationship with Will, Danny finds out that Will is only listed as a registered sex offender because he dated a 16-year-old when he was 17.
Video Description:
After convincing his mother to end her relationship with Will, Danny finds out that Will is only listed as a registered sex offender because he dated a 16-year-old when he was 17.
Senin, 04 November 2013
NEW ZEALAND - 'Roast Busters' sons of high-profile entertainer, cop
![]() |
| Roast Busters |
11/04/2013
By Karen Rutherford
More details about a group of young Auckland boys called the 'Roast Busters', who've been luring girls into underage group sex and boasting about it online, can now be revealed.
One boy being questioned by police is the son of a celebrity with an international profile, while the other is the son of an Auckland police officer.
One girl, who is choosing to remain anonymous, says the Roast Busters stole her soul.
"They don't understand how I feel inside; they don't understand how this has hurt me," she says.
Police say the girl is one of a number of drunk, underage victims they've interviewed about being exploited by the Roast Busters.
The family of former Roast Buster Joseph Levall Parker has told us he left the six-member group mid-year, while several others have also bowed out.
Social media today carried apologies from at least one.
"If I suffer any consequences from my past actions then I guess I deserve it," the Facebook post read. "But I just want people to know I am a good person at heart and I have matured and have taken this as a massive learning experience."
Police have confirmed that one of the boys is the son of a high-profile entertainer, and the other is the son of a police officer.
Police say that's not the reason they've failed to lay charges to date.
"The reason we have not prosecuted anybody is we don't have sufficient evidence at this stage," says Detective Inspector Bruce Scott.
Police have known about the group since 2011, but they say their hands are tied until victims - who in some cases have been suicidal - agree to make a formal statement.
That has angered vigilantes, who today took to Facebook to express their anger.
"We're sick of it, we don't want this happening in our community," one post on the page read. "I'm a father, I have teenage girls and they have to walk in society, I don't like this scum walking in my streets."
Two of the Roast Busters were not walking the streets today; they were being re-interviewed by police.
As a result of publicity around the case, one of the young men who previously declined to co-operate presented himself at a police station early this afternoon. Another young man is also being interviewed by police.
Detective Inspector Bruce Scott says the investigation is making progress, but it is too soon to say if this development will result in any prosecution.
"We're grateful that the publicity around this case has enabled us to make further progress, and we hope to build on the work done by the enquiry team to potentially take us to the stage where we have enough evidence to build a case."
Video from a previous story:
Selasa, 22 Oktober 2013
MO - Juvenile sex offenders say the crime doesn't fit the time
Original Article
10/16/2013
SPRINGFIELD - "My face is blacked out because I am ashamed for everyone to know what I am," says Convicted Sex offender _____.
- But leave it up to the news media to splash your name all over the article!
Missouri considers _____ a sex offender, after one decision he made 15 years ago with a 14 year old girl when he was living in Washington.
"One thing led to another and we ended up having consensual sex," he says.
That's considered to be a crime in Washington. _____ served time in juvenile hall for the crime, even though the sex was consensual.
"It wasn't rape, wasn't child molestation. It wasn't anything with a baby, it wasn't a violent crime and yet I am still paying."
_____ has tried to move on with his life, he even joined the army. But, his past still haunts him.
"Even with my military record and my degrees in school, I am still overlooked and passed. It sucks," he says.
"There's a whole coax of people who are accused, plead guilty that didn't have that mindset that don't have that same mental makeup as some of the people who are on the list," says Attorney Adam Wood.
Wood says the problem is with how the registry is run, separating the consensual crimes from those that were not.
"The list is all encompassing list and it doesn't differential between those two types of people and that's a big issue," he says.
It's an issue that _____ deals with every day of his life.
"If you're going to judge me on something that happened 15 years ago for the person I am today, then shame on you. Shame on you," says _____.
There was a push a few months ago for a bill that would allow people 18 and under to no longer appear on the registry. But, it did not get passed.
10/16/2013
SPRINGFIELD - "My face is blacked out because I am ashamed for everyone to know what I am," says Convicted Sex offender _____.
- But leave it up to the news media to splash your name all over the article!
Missouri considers _____ a sex offender, after one decision he made 15 years ago with a 14 year old girl when he was living in Washington.
"One thing led to another and we ended up having consensual sex," he says.
That's considered to be a crime in Washington. _____ served time in juvenile hall for the crime, even though the sex was consensual.
"It wasn't rape, wasn't child molestation. It wasn't anything with a baby, it wasn't a violent crime and yet I am still paying."
_____ has tried to move on with his life, he even joined the army. But, his past still haunts him.
"Even with my military record and my degrees in school, I am still overlooked and passed. It sucks," he says.
"There's a whole coax of people who are accused, plead guilty that didn't have that mindset that don't have that same mental makeup as some of the people who are on the list," says Attorney Adam Wood.
Wood says the problem is with how the registry is run, separating the consensual crimes from those that were not.
"The list is all encompassing list and it doesn't differential between those two types of people and that's a big issue," he says.
It's an issue that _____ deals with every day of his life.
"If you're going to judge me on something that happened 15 years ago for the person I am today, then shame on you. Shame on you," says _____.
There was a push a few months ago for a bill that would allow people 18 and under to no longer appear on the registry. But, it did not get passed.
Jumat, 04 Oktober 2013
AFRICA - Teen sex no longer a crime
Original Article
10/04/2013
By Sapa and Yolisa Tswanya
Cape Town - Criminalisation of sexual conduct between consenting adolescents is unconstitutional, the Constitutional Court has ruled.
On Thursday, the court confirmed a lower court’s order that sections 15 and 16 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which relate to sexual offences, were unconstitutional.
The unanimous judgment, written by Judge Sisi Khampepe, was published on the court’s website on Thursday.
The sections infringed on the rights of adolescents between 12 and 16 to dignity and privacy, and further violated the best interest principle contained in section 28(2) of the constitution.
Relying on expert evidence, the court concluded the impugned provisions criminalised developmentally normative conduct for adolescents and adversely affected the very children the act sought to protect.
The court said the effects of the impugned provisions were found not to be rationally related to the State’s purpose of protecting children.
“We must be careful, however, to ensure that, in attempting to guide and protect children, our interventions do not expose them to harsh circumstances which can only have adverse effects on their development,” said Khampepe.
She said the matter was not about whether children should or should not engage in sexual conduct, nor was it about whether Parliament should set a minimum age for consensual sexual conduct. Khampepe said the court was concerned with a far narrower issue: whether it was constitutionally permissible for children to be subject to criminal sanctions to deter early sexual intimacy and combat the risks associated therewith.
The judgment declared invalid provisions of the act that criminalised consensual sexual conduct between adolescents. The criminal prohibitions against non-consensual sexual conduct with children of any age remained in place.
Criminal restrictions against sexual activity between adults and older children on the one hand, and adolescents on the other, also remained.
Childline national co-ordinator Joan van Niekerk told the Cape Argus Childline was pleased with the ruling.
“We are 100 percent delighted by the ruling, we say it is about time. From the time it was passed we objected to it, we found it to be very child- unfriendly.”
Van Niekerk said Childline had not been given the opportunity to “make their voices heard” before it was passed.
“We were denied public participation, there were absolutely no public hearings on this. But we think it violates children’s rights to health care. We are pleased to see that the children who were convicted under this act will see their convictions expunged.”
Van Niekerk said it was important to understand that the ruling did not mean that the age of consent had been reduced but that adolescents who consent to sex would not be criminalised for it.
Paula Proudlock, child rights manager at the Children’s Institute said the institute was “elated by the judgment”.
“We have been getting so much confusion from doctors and nurses because if an adolescent came in for contraceptives and HIV tests they would have to report them to the police, but it is their obligation to treat them.”
Proudlock said many teens were afraid of getting help from professionals because they were afraid of be handed over to the police.
The judgment suspended the declaration of invalidity for 18 months to allow Parliament to amend the provisions.
Khampepe ordered a moratorium on all investigations, arrests, prosecutions and criminal and ancillary proceedings (regarding adolescents) in relation to sections 15 and 16 of the act. This remains until Parliament has remedied the defects identified.
10/04/2013
By Sapa and Yolisa Tswanya
Cape Town - Criminalisation of sexual conduct between consenting adolescents is unconstitutional, the Constitutional Court has ruled.
On Thursday, the court confirmed a lower court’s order that sections 15 and 16 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which relate to sexual offences, were unconstitutional.
The unanimous judgment, written by Judge Sisi Khampepe, was published on the court’s website on Thursday.
The sections infringed on the rights of adolescents between 12 and 16 to dignity and privacy, and further violated the best interest principle contained in section 28(2) of the constitution.
Relying on expert evidence, the court concluded the impugned provisions criminalised developmentally normative conduct for adolescents and adversely affected the very children the act sought to protect.
The court said the effects of the impugned provisions were found not to be rationally related to the State’s purpose of protecting children.
“We must be careful, however, to ensure that, in attempting to guide and protect children, our interventions do not expose them to harsh circumstances which can only have adverse effects on their development,” said Khampepe.
She said the matter was not about whether children should or should not engage in sexual conduct, nor was it about whether Parliament should set a minimum age for consensual sexual conduct. Khampepe said the court was concerned with a far narrower issue: whether it was constitutionally permissible for children to be subject to criminal sanctions to deter early sexual intimacy and combat the risks associated therewith.
The judgment declared invalid provisions of the act that criminalised consensual sexual conduct between adolescents. The criminal prohibitions against non-consensual sexual conduct with children of any age remained in place.
Criminal restrictions against sexual activity between adults and older children on the one hand, and adolescents on the other, also remained.
Childline national co-ordinator Joan van Niekerk told the Cape Argus Childline was pleased with the ruling.
“We are 100 percent delighted by the ruling, we say it is about time. From the time it was passed we objected to it, we found it to be very child- unfriendly.”
Van Niekerk said Childline had not been given the opportunity to “make their voices heard” before it was passed.
“We were denied public participation, there were absolutely no public hearings on this. But we think it violates children’s rights to health care. We are pleased to see that the children who were convicted under this act will see their convictions expunged.”
Van Niekerk said it was important to understand that the ruling did not mean that the age of consent had been reduced but that adolescents who consent to sex would not be criminalised for it.
Paula Proudlock, child rights manager at the Children’s Institute said the institute was “elated by the judgment”.
“We have been getting so much confusion from doctors and nurses because if an adolescent came in for contraceptives and HIV tests they would have to report them to the police, but it is their obligation to treat them.”
Proudlock said many teens were afraid of getting help from professionals because they were afraid of be handed over to the police.
The judgment suspended the declaration of invalidity for 18 months to allow Parliament to amend the provisions.
Khampepe ordered a moratorium on all investigations, arrests, prosecutions and criminal and ancillary proceedings (regarding adolescents) in relation to sections 15 and 16 of the act. This remains until Parliament has remedied the defects identified.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)




