Monday June 5, 2023
HomeNews by DateSportsVideo ReportsWeatherBusiness NewsMilitary NewsRoad ReportCannabis NewsCommentsADVERTISEStaffCompany StoreCONTACT USRSS Subscribe
Salem-News.com is an Independent Online Newsgroup in the United States, setting the standard for the future of News.
Aug-18-2006 02:57TweetFollow @OregonNews
Oregon Sex Offender Law Put Into QuestionKevin Hays Salem-News.com Op-Ed
Why aren't women convicted of misdemeanor sex crimes required to register as a sex offender in Oregon?
(SALEM) - For most of us, there are those inevitable memories of our younger more foolish days, fooling around in a parked car.
Do it today, and you could have a register for life as a sex offender in Oregon.
Well, three local adults who had consensual sex in a car in Salem, say Oregonians need a wake-up call on the state’s sex crimes laws.
All three couples were caught by police in Bush’s Pasture Park in Salem, and were convicted of Public Indecency.
In each case, both the men and women have to attend and complete a sex offender treatment program, take polygraphs, and are not to consume alcohol or do drugs.
However, only the men have to register as sex offenders, the women do not.
ORS 163.465 Public indecency. (1) A person commits the crime of public indecency if while in, or in view of, a public place the person performs:
(a) An act of sexual intercourse;
(b) An act of deviate sexual intercourse; or
(c) An act of exposing the genitals of the person with the intent of arousing the sexual desire of the person or another person.
(2)(a) Public indecency is a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, public indecency is a Class C felony if the person has a prior conviction for public indecency or a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445 or for a crime in another jurisdiction that, if committed in this state, would constitute public indecency or a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445. [1971 c.743 §120; 1999 c.962 §1; 2005 c.434 §1]
163.466 Public indecency; felony; sentencing classification. The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission shall classify felony public indecency as a person felony and crime category 6 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the commission. [1999 c.962 §3]
Note: 163.466 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 163 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.
Reporters note: All of the couples we interviewed wished to remain anonymous.
They were all caught in a public parking area of Bush Park having sex.
All were arrested, and convicted in Marion County of Public indecency, Class A misdemeanor.
For all three it was their first run in with the law.
One of the women has the couple's two kids, her husband cannot have contact with the kids until the treatment provider determines his past and current sexual history.
She asks how is that fair, "That my husband has to register and I don’t? How stupid to be arrested and charged for just having a little innocent and consensual fun in the car."
There was nobody else in the park.
Don’t police have better things to do than to search parks for adult couples fooling around?
One of the men said there are more couples in Oregon dealing with this than you would think.
He said that he knew of at least ten other couples going through the same thing they are. Men have to register, the women don’t. Unfair! He said.
One of the other men said this is something the media and the courts have hidden from the public for years because if the public knew the truth, authorities in Oregon would have a lot of questions to answer.
I believe once people read this, authorities and public official's phones are going to be ringing off the hook demanding answers. The law needs to change.
We have let ridiculous laws ruin lives based on the fear that every sex offender is dangerous, so when they pass sex crime laws in this state, they throw this one in, without telling the public about it, why?
Because if Joe Public knew this, they would demand the law be changed.
Another one of the men put it this way: "There isn’t anyone in the state, including the Governor, who hasn’t fooled around in a car in a public place at some point in their life. So you can pretty much call everyone in Oregon a sex offender."
And the public should be asking why women who are convicted of sex crimes in Oregon, for the most part, are getting a free pass from having to register as a sex offender.
Only the predatory ones have to do so, those charged with lesser crimes are not, it’s the truth. Now the public knows and if people speak up, the state and district attorneys are going to have a lot of questions to answer.
One of the women finished with, "Right or wrong, we got caught and we have to live with our punishment. But just how far will the lawmakers in Oregon go to make every adult sexual activity that is consensual a sex crime?"
Oregon | Crime | Op ed | Legal | Most Commented on
Articles for August 17, 2006 | Articles for August 18, 2006 | Articles for August 19, 2006
Contact: email@example.com | Copyright © 2023 Salem-News.com | news tips & press releases: firstname.lastname@example.org.
All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.
Chris June 29, 2016 1:30 pm (Pacific time)
All the men caught are sex offenders. The women, they are not. Its fact, men are predatory and dangerous. Thats why the men are the ones required to register as we know if they are having sex in cars, they are going to be molesting children too. Where the women will not.
Mr. P. February 24, 2013 3:38 pm (Pacific time)
I was convicted of encouraging child sex abuse II back in 2000 then went to court in 2003 and convicted of owning thumbnailed pictures less than 15 pixels by 15 pixels..barely visable. And one picture of MY WIFE age 23 at the time as evidence.. The thumbnailed imaged were from advertisments for teen sites that were on a regular porn site...Not anything to do with any kind of deviant behavior whatsoever. My wife however got off scott free desite Me giving information from her to the police detective. She forced her 8 year old sister to perform oral sex on her when my exwife was 15, amongst four other children under the age of 12 that my exwife also admitted to me....She was never even questioned about anything... I was convicted of having advertisings to other sites...and a picture of my Wife neked on our bed at age 23. I also went into the appeals process after my sentancing in court my wife admitted ON TAPE "not illegal and was directed by my attorney to do so" She addmitted how she looks for child pornography on the family pc and setup the entire thing out of revenge for my cheating...And LAUGHED that she had the detective eating out of her hands along with DHS..My appeals attorney threw away the dam tape But thankfully I made a cd of the recordings..Can anyone help me out to reversre this curse?? email@example.com Please put offense relief into the main title so I wont toss it out as spam..
September 22, 2012 11:38 am (Pacific time)
when poep[e get in to trouble for sex act dont have prof of the criam take the woman side and she has sent 10 more poeple to prison for say the rape her the da say ok these laws need to be canged and poeple that get in trombe and what do it again they made a missstake have to pay for life is not rigght
Pissed in AZ! March 21, 2008 9:55 am (Pacific time)
As long as the victim feminist left and the religious right continue to fuel the hysteria of intellectually malnourished and essentially apathetic parents,Ambitious politicians will continue to placate that irrational fear to encourage votes,it's really that simple.
anonymous March 7, 2008 4:24 pm (Pacific time)
I was convicted of Online Solicitation of a minor and have to register as a sex offender for 10 years after my probation. I was online chatting with a female who was flirting with me and talking about how she liked older guys. I admit that I used bad judgement in talking with her. I should be punished. My problem comes when I have to register as a sex offender and can't find anywhere for me and my family to live because of the city ordinances that prohibit you from living within 1,000 or 1,500 ft from anywhere children meet. First of all, I have never had sex with a minor. Second, the minor that I met online was 15. I have gone my whole life and haven't had any occurances with any children. And just because I would get caught up in a situation with a girl that show me a picture of a young woman but says she is 15 doesn't mean I would have any interests in a child in daycare or grade school. By the way, it was a cop that was setting me up. I am homeless with no where to live because I was forced to sale my home because there was a learning center down the street from where I had lived for over 10 years and haven't had any issues. I realize I was wrong for what I did and should be punished, but I should be able to live somewhere. Everyone deserves a second chance. If I do it again I would deserve what ever I got. Is there any help for this issue anywhere?
Concerned US Citizen February 4, 2008 5:16 pm (Pacific time)
The registry is flawed. End of story. You have people who are on there for things they did when they were younger or things that happened years ago. On top of that you have women who are committing sex crimes that are worse than some of the men. How fair is it for society to blame the male and not the female. I am sorry but its not a one way street when it comes to this discussion. Either they need to make it more fair for the men and sentence women more harshly then they already are or they need to do away with the sex crimes act all together. You cant have your cake and eat it to as the saying goes. Concerned US Citizen
anonymous January 12, 2008 7:29 pm (Pacific time)
Hear this! today, our son has to register as an offender. Why?, cause he had a relationship with a girl, who was,(he thought),at least 14 to 15 yrs of age, he was 16. Now, after her dad caught wind of this, he causes all this to happen with our son, charged, like he took her innocence away! Wrong.... As I did my investigation, I found her on myspace, in very prevocative poses, and posts from other boys, saying how they had thier way with her... We downloaded the prrof, took to his lawyer(state),and even she said, this is NO YOUNG GIRL!!! That she looked like a COLLEGE girl. I agreed, yet it did not help our son!! All the proof we had, overlooked! Sad, the girl dont register, he has to! She made her rounds with other boys in the neighborhood...our son ends up being the looser, out of them all...FAIR?
anonymous December 26, 2007 10:43 pm (Pacific time)
I am concerned over the sex offender registery. I have seen a recent case where the victim lied about the incident and the person who she lied about is now in prison. The allegied event never happened but can not be proved satisfactory in court. There are other cases like these around the nation. One accused person spent two years in jail then DNA found this person innocent. Is it fair for this person to be on the sexual offender registry? Does a sex offender registry really serve its purpose? These people did go to jail and served time. Why are they not allowed to begin a new life? If they are so set on a sex offender registry why not a murder registry? California was trying to pass that a sex offender was required to wear an ankle bracelet to determine their whereabouts. A murder did not have to wear an ankle bracelet. Another state was trying to get it passed that a sex offender was required to have a car license plate that read "Sex Offender" but a murder who was released on early parole did not have to have a car license plate that said "murder". Where is the logic in this. Why is it not that when a person has time in jail for a sex crime (innocent or guilty) that this person is not is not allowed to rebuild their lives once released. My concern with the registry is that it does not allow the person to rebuild their lives. It allows the person to be on trial for life. Also the registry has caused some offenders to lose their life to vilagantes.
Anonymous SO June 12, 2007 4:07 pm (Pacific time)
In 1991, I was convicted on Rape 3 (Statutory Rape) for having consenual sex with a minor. I find it very odd because I met her in an 18 and over establishment which she gained entrance to by using a false ID. Even her own cousin told the police that... But still I was convicted and forced to go into sex offender treatment, and then register. It caused many, many problems in my life. I eventually lost my wife through divorce, yet I was awarded custody of my boys. So let me get this straight, you make me register for life as a sex offender, but you think I am good enough to have custody of my kids?? What is the reasoning? My life has been hell due to all of this. I moved back to Kansas with my boys in the fall of 1998 as my father was ill and almost died. At first I was not required to register because the crime I was convicted of in Oregon was not a crime in Kansas. Then they amended the law and now I am required to register forever here... Well, I can move back to Oregon, apply for the waiver since it's been 10 years, and hopefully get that granted to me. Then I can move back here. Does that make any sense? Oh yeah! Here's one more very important fact: the girl finally admitted in a notorizes statement that she lied about her age and used her sister's driver's license sp she could get in. So now what do I do? Here I am stuck in Kansas and being forced to carry a driver's license that says "REGISTERED OFFENDER" for the entire world to see. Prior to this happening in my life, I was making in excess of 100K per year, and now I make half that. My children suffer because I cannot keep a job and health and dental insurance. I hate the whole sitiutation and cannot wait till the day my kids are old enough to be on their own. They do not deserve this, and I do not deserve this. One lie has ruined my life forever and no matter what I do, I will never find happiness again.
The Fox April 25, 2007 12:01 am (Pacific time)
the treatment of sex offenders is RIDICULOUS!!! they tell sex offenders they need to get on with their lives yet there are few places where sex offenders can live! and then they have to worry about the government putting in a PARK or SCHOOL or SOCCER FIELD next door forcing the offender to move!!! the government has thousands of acres of land that aren't being used why can't they convert some of it into housing speciffically for sex offenders? away from parks and schools but still close enough to allow the offenders to get into town to do their shopping and errands with out driving for hours.
Anonymous January 25, 2007 6:04 pm (Pacific time)
Unfortunately, from my understanding, it is the federal government forcing more of their rhetoric down the state government’s throats. They give states no choice on the laws or much choice on the pieces of them. If you want to abolish the registry because it only serves to create hysteria and helps murderers and violent individuals focus their anger on living targets, you have to go to the federal level. That's much more difficult.
Ex-Sex Offender September 23, 2006 12:53 pm (Pacific time)
I am a registered sex offender. I did molest my niece when I was young through 18. It was then that I got caught. After serving my time, I was ordered to sex offender treatment. I went through a few years of counselling and it helped me alot. Though my disease really is incurable, I have ways to deal with it. I haven't wanted to get with a child at all since my treatment. Here's my proposed question: If treatment is readily available and most offenders do want it, why not give them the chance to change BEFORE having to be convicted of a crime that will be on thier records forever? For the victims, there would have to be some sort of restitution for what they did of course. I'm on the registry for life because of something I couldn't control nor understood. I now deeply regret what I did and cry many times, when I think about it. I would have taken a treatment over going to prison anytime.
PD September 3, 2006 12:35 am (Pacific time)
In answer to the one who read it takes two convictions is partly right. It takes two convictions but it can be for the same incident. The language of these charges is such that they can use several on the exact same act as in it was a crime under this catagory and a crime under that. Two seperate "crimes" do not have to be committed. Say a couple parked to have sex in a park at 2 am-- they can get them on private acts, public acts, acts in an area where children play, etc etc. They could get them for a half dozen at least, convicted for all they really look like they are perverts, instead of married couples mistakenly listening to Dr Phil or Dr Ruth. By the way, its illegal to bother them about it too. ORS 166.065 OR
Anonymous September 1, 2006 8:42 pm (Pacific time)
While my husband was on trial for nothing, I waited outside the court during jury selection. I noticed out the window, two small children,, about four and six, frolic on the courthouse lawn. I expected to see a frazzled mother, glad to have released them from her car, appear. No one came. I went outside to try and spot the parent, but the several women there said they were not their children and one was about to call 911. We watched them protectively, as we waited. One woman said they had been out there an hour that they knew of, and ill dressed for cold weather. My husbands case adjourned for lunch and moments later the prosecuting attny called his children to him. Noting the furious looks of the women, which included me, he told them they needed to come in now and stay in the room where he had placed them. I had seen him commit at least one Class A misdemeanor. I had seen him endanger his chilren. I had seen him allow unattended small children in the area of the town most likely to contain a criminal. We knew nothing would happen to this man who had committed a real crime, the one crime that makes every parent cringe. Maybe he knows how few real child predators exist. They were out there again, after lunch.
Anonymous September 1, 2006 1:05 pm (Pacific time)
A year ago we came to OR for the summer. We wanted to see determine suitability for a summer home. My husband took a job at a fast food restaurant to pay his child support. He became aware a teen was following him around. She began chatting about her sexual exploits with older men. He kept his distance. One day he was out on break and she found him literally against the wall. She entered his personal space asking if there was something on her face, he said no and she threw her arms around him and he pushed her away and said, "You could get me arrested" and she leaned back on him, he pushed her off again and fled. Three times that same day she summoned him for a task in her work area. The first time she put her head on his shoulder. The second time she crossed four feet of floor and hugged him again, again he told her he could be arrested and pushed her away and fled. The third time he kept his hands in the pockets of a winter coat donned in August, and the manager at his back. How do I know for sure? It was all on the security tapes. Two days later the police publically arrived to arrest him for touching her rear. Being questioned, before arrest, he said he didnt remember touching her rear while pushing her away and the cop refused to believe he would not remember sexually assaulting a child. A year later, his career lost in the SW because he could not leave Oregon, our dreams of a summer home a bad joke, our savings drained, a death in the family back east he could not attend, a son in CA he could not visit and no longer support from my pension, it went to court. The defense did not call the manager who had written in that he did nothing wrong. The teen had her friends write in that he was scary and they feared he would touch their rears. She got on the stand and said she didnt actually know if he had touched her rear, she did not remember that. (no rear touching was on the video) He was convicted on two counts-touching a sexual part of a minor - her buttocks, and sexual harrassment. The jury who were shown the video of the tapes were told to disregard all her acts, that she was too young to be responsible for herself. (though not too young to be on trial had she been a teen boy offender). He was told he will go on sex offender probation, poss. serve time, and be on the list forever. The B and E he committed as a teen adding to the sentence. Sentencing is in a week. He is suicidal. His life is over either way. Rejection hurts. She still seemed to feel the victim, but she killed my husband and she was assisted with this law.
J. Burkett August 29, 2006 8:40 am (Pacific time)
For more information on the effects of registration on families study contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
J. Burkett August 28, 2006 9:30 pm (Pacific time)
Hello, I'm the director of research and development for the Northwest Institute for Restorative Justice. We have just finished a preliminary study on the effects that registration has on the families of those who must register as being convicted of a sex offense. There are two overall issues: 1. This generates income for the state, counselors and polygraphers. As law enforcement block grants are reduced, this is a new source of income. 2. 90.4% of nationwide families surveyed experience harassment in the following order: a. The convicted spouse will lose their income or become unable to secure employment b. If they are renting they will be evicted in the first six months after the conviction or registration. c. If they own their home they will be driven out of it within 1 year d. Their children will be harassed at school and on the average will need to move to 3-4 different schools in the first year e. If the non-offending spouse's employer learns of the (usually) husband's conviction she will be fired also. We are setting up the next generation to fail for people who are honestly trying to rebuild their lives. A Milo Maine man was killed in their living room by a Canadian who pulled his and other names off the Internet registry. (Canada doesn't have a public registration list) The widow has not even received a bereavement call from her pastor or anyone since the murder in April. This is for a crime her husband was accused of over 22 years ago. This could happen to anyone. The actual number of persons who, if they committed the crime in the first place, to ever commit a similar crime again is very low, compared to what the media would lead us to believe. We are asking the wrong questions about sex offenses and of course we are finding the wrong answers.
Anonymous August 23, 2006 10:11 am (Pacific time)
It is probably inaccurate to say that "most" are questioning this law. If you read the registration law (which is what should have been quoted in this article), it requires registration for Public Indecencies upon a second conviction for such (making it a felony sex offense), or if there was a prior sex crime conviction. I may be mistaken, but I don't believe a Judge's order can override the criteria established by law for registration. Which would indeed mean that these women would have to register BY LAW if they met that criteria, and failing to do so would be a crime. These defendants should probably seek additional legal guidance about what the law actually mandates, and those so quick to judge by what this article inaccurately represents, should read the law a little more closely themselves.
Kay August 22, 2006 4:17 pm (Pacific time)
I.m all for protecting our childern, but as has been stated a list isn't going to do that. If we have to have a list there should be degrees so it is known that only a few would hurt our childern. That most on the list are there for doing what most of us have done at some point in out lives. My life has all but been distroyed by the registry. My life partner was looking at a mag. while waiting for me to finish shopping. Now he can't be around our grandchildren because he may hurt them? Give me a break because he looked at pictures of naked women means he'll hurt a child??
Albert Marnell August 21, 2006 9:18 pm (Pacific time)
I agree with KC or Casey. The police are some of the biggest sex offenders which makes this whole situation even more absurd. Go to www.badcopnews.com, it is unbelievable what they get away with and how much is never reported. The biggest offenders of all are locking up other people? This is worse than evil.
KC August 21, 2006 5:28 pm (Pacific time)
Everyone should read George Mathewscomments. He hit the nail right on the head. With less then 5% of the people on the sex offender registry ever being convicted of a second offence can we really still believe the myth that ALL sex offenders are recidavists who cannot be cured? Everyone seems to be in agreement that the sex criminals who are going to re-offend (somewhere between 3-5% of the total number according to the governments own statistics) are not going to be deterred by a registry why do we even need a registry at all? If the truley evil sex predetors (who are not just men either by the way) are not going to let a registry stop them, and the rest seem to be completely re-habilitatable (and most didn't commit a crime as an adult against a minor anyway) why do we cast all sex offenders to the outskirts of society? Who in their lives has not had a sexual experience they regret? Anyone? Just one person? Yeah, that's what I thought. There is not one living human being who has had sex who has not had at least one (nost people have dozens) regrettable experience. So who are the sex offenders again? What is so different about them then everyone else? So why must they be punished for all of our collective sins? Lock up the really bad one's for life and abolish the sex offender registry entirely so the 95% who are no different form you, me and her (in that they have a sexual experience they regret and do not wish to repeat) can get one with their lives.
mike August 21, 2006 11:58 am (Pacific time)
well when you have politicians stating that "if we "err" we will err on the side of caution", and also statements like "if we can protect just 1 kid it is all worth it" it makes it hard to fight that blind rationalization.
Anonymous August 21, 2006 8:33 am (Pacific time)
Sadly it's going to take more instances like this to get people to realize how ridiculous these registries are. They do absolutely nothing to protect our children. People intent on hurting children are not going to worry about registering or not going into a restricted zone. In the mean time people who make dumb mistakes (and their families, including children) are made to pay for it, in some states, for the rest of their lives.
Joe Smith August 20, 2006 7:16 pm (Pacific time)
What sucks is that the OSP office in Salem is only open Monday-Thursday. They have a part-time employee doing the registrations. And Salem PD requires an appointment, No wonder why so many offenders fail to register, they are making it harder and harder to do so. Why don't they let them do so online?
Albert Marnell August 20, 2006 4:27 pm (Pacific time)
Bingo! Lainie, You make yet another important point about this international hysteria.
Lainie August 20, 2006 7:28 am (Pacific time)
This is the perfect story to show WHY the sex offender registry is not protecting anyone, let alone children! You'd have to wade through thousands and thousands of names on the registry before you'd actually come across a PREDATOR, and how in the hell are you going to tell the difference between the predator and the husband that had sex with his wife in a car??!! I'm so sick of people saying things like "well, everyone on that list has the potential to become a predator." If that's true then we need to look at every victimized child as a "potential" predator as well because statistics show that offenders were usually victimized as children themselves. This country really is in hysterics over this and I see no end in sight.
Anonymous August 19, 2006 4:47 pm (Pacific time)
Anyone who commits a Class A misdemeanor sex crime shouldn't have to register. The state police state needs to get more troopers on the roads, not waste money spending it on guys and girls likely to not re-offend. Oregon needs to wake-up and get the registration requirements changed.
AM in the AM August 19, 2006 3:30 am (Pacific time)
Good One Greta!
Greta August 18, 2006 11:43 pm (Pacific time)
Great...sigh More people on a humiliating registry that we don't have to worry about. Is this really America? Lets put a star on them like the Jews in Hitler's Germany while were at it. Fricking ridiculous.
AM in the PM August 18, 2006 8:40 pm (Pacific time)
Great point Isabelle. Any as for you, Anonymous female, stop looking into people's cars. You are a voyeur of the worst sort. Your granddaughter, if you actually have one would be too short to look into a car. Prudes like you are responsible for this hysteria. Who in the hell are you Gladys Kravitz from Bewitched? Abner, Abner, look, look. Seek and ye shall find you frigid freak.
Albert Marnell August 18, 2006 8:32 pm (Pacific time)
These kind of laws play into the easy arrest pattern that most law enforcement look for in order to make their unofficial arrest quotas. If you are in law enforcement and you have never arrested anyone, you will be pressured to do so or else. When police accept things from cash to free pizza, it is a form of bribery. Let the police arrest themselves. I am sick of them and their hypocrisy. If you do not believe me go to www.badcopnews.com
Anonymous female August 18, 2006 5:48 pm (Pacific time)
This may be consentual sex between married couples that you interviewed but they were also doing it in a public place. Grow up and go home to your bedrooms. I don't want to walk by a parked car at a public park with my granddaughter and have her see a sex act in the process. Like I said, grow up.
Isabelle August 18, 2006 4:14 pm (Pacific time)
This country has bought into the sex offender hysteria. Just post a question on the internet about sex offenders and most people will respond that they all deserve what they get and should have to wear GPS units for life for what they did to their young victims. Some even go so far as to say they all should be castrated and locked up for life. Most people don't know that very few sex offenders are stranger and not all are child molesters. This story shows one part of the problem. The other part is consensual sex between teenagers. There is one young man that was recently indicted in Georgia for supposedly having consensual sex with a 15 year old when he was 19, there is no proof, and it is only based on her word. He was indicted on one charge of Statutory Rape, and two charges of aggravated child molestation (one for sex with him on top, one for sex with her on top). He could be facing life in prison without parole. This is ridiculous, but he probably will be convicted based just on her statements, she won't even have to appear in court. When this country ruins the lifes of the young men and women for consensual sex for ever, what can we say about justice for all in the United States? It makes me ashamed to be an American.
Pissed Off August 18, 2006 12:43 pm (Pacific time)
What happened to gender equity? I have to give up my job to a woman because we are 'equal', but in this case we are not?
cj August 18, 2006 12:08 pm (Pacific time)
Just an after thought, I personaly don't think that any of them should have to register for that but if its for one to register, its for all.
cj August 18, 2006 12:07 pm (Pacific time)
They won't leave them alone becausse its NEWS!!!!! Someone starts talking about changing "sex offender" laws that have some commone sense their opponants will call them "soft on crime" Wanting to help the worst of worst is why. Want to protect the kids, which we all do and should do, make the laws that will work to do that. Read the statistics from US Department of Justice to learn just who victimizes kids. I'll give ya a hint, it isn't from someone hiding behind trees at playgrounds.
George Mathews August 18, 2006 10:59 am (Pacific time)
One last thing. If you want to reach me then email at: GMathews@BlueBottle.Com Thank you!
George Mathews August 18, 2006 10:52 am (Pacific time)
By the way, the website www.sohopeful.org is a national organization based in Portland Oregon. Why not be the first to do a story on this fast growing organization?
George Mathews August 18, 2006 10:48 am (Pacific time)
This is only the tip of the iceberg. At least 35% of all registered sex offenders are from underage consentual teen sex. 95% of all RSOs are first timers, one timers. 95% of all new sex crimes will be committed by someone who is NOT now a registered sex offender. And what about the families of those citizens who are required to register as sex offenders? The wifes, mothers, and other family members are also humiliated by the public registry. Do they not have rights? Get the facts -- www.sohopeful.org
anonymous August 18, 2006 9:15 am (Pacific time)
ridiculous- while it may show poor judgment it does not in any way mean they are sex offenders. i had no idea that this was against the law. why don't the police and courts focus on the real sex offenders- like those who prey on minors?[Return to Top]
©2023 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.