Jessica’s Law: It is time to get this law passed in Idaho!

First, regardless of his political registration, I wouldn’t take BO’s word for anything…

Nor would I agree with his characterization that Idaho is “headed in the wrong direction”. It’s true that there’s no law in Idaho with the name “Jessica” attached to it, but there were several laws enacted this past year which address many of the elements in the Florida law:

- Idaho’s registration requirements for sexual predators are twice as frequent as Florida’s (3 months vs 6). Idaho also requires monthly verification by mail between registrations.

- Idaho increased the mandatory minimum sentence for sexual abuse from 5 to 15 years, with mandatory life for a second offense. That’s less than the minimum 25 in FL, but it’s hardly BO’s “slap on the wrist”.

- Failure to register is already a felony in Idaho.

- A bill was introduced last session to provide for electronic monitoring of parolees, but it died in committee, probably because other provisions of the bill were addressed in different legislation which may have conflicted. I’d expect that issue to be reintroduced this coming session, and I would likely support it.

I didn’t ask for your opinion of O’Reilly,

True, but I gave it since BO is so often slipshod in his research and reasoning. Using him as a source to say that Idaho has “done NOTHING” (he doesn’t say that, by the way, though he implies worse by saying that Idaho is “heading in the wrong direction”) is just not credible.

and I asked for anyone to add additional web sites to be added by others from any source they wished so as many people as possible could have access to sending a message to Gov. Risch.

Sorry, I misinterpreted. It sounded to me like “I realize some readers may object to what I believe is an easy, excellent link to send a message to Boise…That is fine with me – find others and post them in subsequent posts.” was asking for other ways to email the Governor. That way works fine!

I would appreciate the courtesy of you referencing your remarks of what has and happened in ID with the URLs or other references.

Of course – all bills are archived at the Legislature’s web site, including their status. There’s a topical index for each session.

You can find what’s been enacted in Idaho Code via the Idaho Statutes search page.

I guess you haven’t seen or decided how to answer my other question posted for you on another subject several days ago.

No, I don’t remember seeing your other question, but then I don’t read every topic or comment on this site – do you have a reference or URL to the other subject you are referring to?

Given the many commitments you already have, how will you make time to accomplish what you would like to do in Boise?

Hmm…I’m at a loss here. Which commitments are you referring to? I can certainly put my business on hold for the session, and rearrange my schedule for out of session duties, as every other working legislator does.

I think if you’ll re-read what I asked for those running for office, I said, ” I’d like to invite the candidates running for state senators and state representatives to comment here, regarding their position on Idaho’s version of Jessica’s law.” Personally, I think it should be named after Shasta Groene. I never said it would be the identical to the law enacted in FL.

I personally don’t care for laws to be named after individuals, but that’s not a big deal to me.

It’s impossible to comment on my “position on Idaho’s version of Jessica’s law”, since it doesn’t exist, as such. I pointed out that the major elements of Florida’s Jessica’s Law have already been enacted in Idaho, with the exception of electronic monitoring.

I guess that my position would be that there’s simply no need for an omnibus law to reenact what’s already in Code.

I am curious, however, what would make you “likely to support a bill” in the next session instead of knowing you would or woudn’t back it.

Very simply, I would never commit to supporting a bill that hasn’t been written yet. There are many, many bills written, and even introduced, that wrap good ideas in bad language. I also won’t commit to supporting a bill without verifying the fiscal impact. It doesn’t do any good to pass a law that doesn’t have the tax dollars appropriated to implement it.

Guest 1382:

Thanks for the feedback. Many times I’ve found that words I’ve written didn’t come across as I intended, and this is obviously one of them.

I certainly didn’t feel either stressed or defensive when I wrote either of the above posts. I was attempting to be plainly factual (except for my opinion of Bill O’Reilly, which is based on seeing and hearing his numerous and unapologetic misrepresentations on a wide variety of issues, including this one), and to answer OK4Now’s questions as straightforwardly as i could.

I’m sorry that what I wrote offended you, and I apologize.

I use my real name on-line at my peril, obviously, but I appreciate the opportunity to comment.

It was also my impression that OK4Now was being overly antagonistic in this exchange. Although it’s harder to see now that the comments have been edited. As soon as Mr. McGimpsey said that he wouldn’t take BO’s word for anything, feathers got ruffled.

IMO when you start using Bill O’Reilly as a source of information, you set yourself up for confrontation. Although many disagree, it’s obvious to me that Fox News is not really “news” and Bill O’Reilly will twist the facts or ignore other facts to portray the spin that he desires. But people seem to like listening to commentary they already agree with. Doesn’t challenge the mind much that way, does it?

It appears that Mr. McGimpsey got a little defensive himself, but I can’t really blame him. In Ok4Now’s first response to Mr. McGimpsey there were too many insults and sarcastic comments to count. I thought that John did a good job of addressing the comments point-by-point, but sometimes it’s hard to exchange ideas with someone whose mind is already made up.

And no, I don’t know nor have I ever met John McGimpsey, I don’t even know for sure who I’ll vote for. I was just looking at this thread and noticed the new comments, especially the remarks of Guest 1382. I would like to think that adults can disagree without being so rude. Is that the kind of manners you learn from watching Fox News? I thought so.

FeelinLucky, I agree with everything you said in the previous comment.

I apologize, FeelinLucky and outfoxed, that I didn’t ask you the most important question in my last post. How do your comments pertain to child protection and how long sex offenders should be sentenced to prison?

Mostly likely you both have thoughts about this subject; however, I can’t be sure. So because I’m not certain, I am asking each of you to please clarify your remarks and how they advance the discussion of Jessica’s Law in ID, a neighboring state, the results of states who have enforced tougher laws or other subjects pertaining to Jessica’s law.

OK4now — I believe that you are just seriously nitpicking each and every word looking for an arguement where one does not exist. All of us on here love the idea of protecting children — and none disagree on the need to make our laws as tough as possible on this terrible crime. To prove my point I will use one line of yours and show you what I mean — You said:

He/she states all he/she doesn’t like what I’ve written and why he/she doesn’t think Fox News is news. Then his/her very last statement says,

“FeelinLucky, I agree with everything you said in the previous comment.”

***********************

I said that I really like BO. I didn’t say that Outfoxed liked BO. By Outfox agreeing with everything I said — is he not agreeing that I like BO? No where did he indicate that he liked BO from his comment agreeing with me that I did.

So why you would try to pull some point out of that is beyond me. The fact is — the laws covering protection issues for women and children have changed considerably over the last 10 years or so. The laws are getting much tougher, as they should. The real truth is that when you look at laws governing child protection issues, they are tough! And John pointed out that fact in one of his posts above. The only real difference is that we here in Idaho haven’t named any of those laws after a person — which I personally believe is rediculous to do. When someone runs a stop sign — should they be cited for a “Harvey’s Law” violation, because good Ol’ Harvey was the first guy to run a stop sign in Boston back in 1903? To name the law after a person is quite an honor I would guess — for the families of that particular victim — but it really makes no sense to me. Its the law that counts — and what it will or will not do to protect people from becomming a victim. I am all for tough laws against crimes affecting children. I was able to investigate cases and send several of these animals to prison in my nearly 20 years as a Police Officer. I would venture to say that I have done at least as much as you in an effort to make a difference.

The entire post just hit me as odd because you started out with a great post — about an important topic. Then when John added to that nice post — you began to get so upset at John, who really never even disagreed with you in the first place. Especially on any point that mattered. Then out of the blue comes Guest1382 with the now infamous quote: Jeez, chill MCGIMPPSEY!

I didn’t see where John went overboard at all – so I made my comments in defense of his writings.

You made several very pointed comments that are argumentative in nature:

I didn’t ask for your opinion of O’Reilly,

Who cares what you asked or did not ask for? This is a discussion board where people write their opinions, and some of their opinions may branch out into other areas that are still relevant to the topic.

Its funny — right after you BLASTED John for sharing his opinion about BO — that was not asked for — you wrote THIS to Joe V:

I encourage you to share your views with Bill O’Reilly.

Just because a person starts a post about a certain topic doesn’t mean they are “Queen for the day” and can expect to hear only what they have asked for — from only those they ask.

The points I am making are simple and only two:

1. We all agree that these laws need to be tougher — and we all agree that slowly we are heading in the right direction. Also, we all agree that more needs to be done.

2. I believe that for some reason you have a personal problem with John — and you seemed to hit him pretty hard for doing really nothing at all. All I did was recommend a hot bath and a glass of wine — for it was obvious you had a difficult week — it was Friday and it just seemed like you might need one of each. I made the same recommendation to several of my other friends that same day — and even took my own advice — shortly after writing the suggestion to you.

Thats a great idea. I will email O’Reilly in the morning.

A caller on todays neal larson show said bill oreilly took butch otter to task on last monday’s show, calling otter villainous for not pushing jessica’s law.

Very interesting article. It does point out correctly that taking away prosecutorial flexibility will increase the dockets and force the prosecutors to take these cases to trail whereas they might have plea bargained before. This would also put the children in a position of being forced to testify to assist in obtaining a conviction. The last thing we want to do is traumatize the victim(s) more.

Perhaps what could help assist in both of these matters is some changes to law in allowing taped and/or closed circuit proceedings so victims would not have to see their attacker and/or allowing for a judge, prosecutor and defense counsel to question the witness in chambers.

Additionally, perhaps allowing prosecutors the flexibility to offer a 15 vs. a 25 yr. mandatory sentence would give them some way of not only gauging the strength of their case and what/when to offer a better deal….but it would still impose a mandatory minimum to avoid the problem(s) that bring the need for this law in the first place, namely, too much discretion from judges and prosecutors, and unequal sentencing for heinous crimes against children.

As for the death penalty application, I think this is a good step. However, we will inevitably have to spend more money on making sure this system, just like in capital cases,has qualified attorneys and adequate resources. If we wish to put a child molester or anybody to death, we need to be very certain 101%. This means creating state capital case units of prosecutors and defense attorneys that handle nothing but these types of cases. Take these cases away from the local prosecutors and apply the law fairly across the board from the State, if you molest a child in Dubois (Clark county) or Boise (Ada county)…the resources are the same for both sides. Obviously if you kill somebody or molest someone in Clark County you won’t get the same justice (prosecution or defense) that you would in Ada County. Allow for adequate scientific testing to prove guilt or innocence. I for one am willing to pay more now rather than have some guy sit 27 years in prison for a crime he did not commit (due to revived DNA testing).

This shift in public policy will require a renewal of our resolve to see to it that more money is placed into the criminal justice system. I just hope it is not into the current system where we throw money at a problem and hope it goes away. If this is all that we do, I think that we rightly provide the courts with a reason to strike down the statutes as being unconstitutional. We have to be able to convince the men in robes that we are serious about the problem and serious about the processes that we utilize. The infrastructure and procedures will need to adapt to preserve the rights of the accused and allow the community to protect itself. I wish that more of the commentators pushing this legislation would talk about these kinds of hurdles and suggest solutions. It seems rather irresponsible to act out like a mob mentality and not get the legislation right the first time.

I remain optomistic Idaho will eventually get this bill. As John pointed out many posts ago, there are laws on Idaho’s books about child sexual abuse; however, I support the name “Jessica’s Bill” as it is a national name that potential offenders recognize as well.

O’Reilly, updated where in the U.S. states still hadn’t moved on Jessica’s bill. HOPE: Gov. Huntsman in UT is close to signing a bill (maybe he can help influence Gov. Otter).

Unfortunately, Gov. Otter will NOT sign legislation for Jessica’s bill, per O’Reilly. O’Reilly’s staff has learned the IDAHO LEGISLATURE supports the bill.

SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM GOV. OTTER?

You have kids and grandkids, doesn’t this mean anything to you? Or, do you want to be the hold out to be the last Gov. to sign this into law so you have gain national attention?

You wife, an educator, should be quite aware of the problem. Doesn’t she understand the rest of Idaho residents aren’t that far behind? Or is it you, Gov. Otter, who doesn’t recognize what Idaho residents and the legislature approves?

Is there some reason the trial of Joseph Edward Duncan can’t go forward if new legislation is signed into law now? I don’t think this is the case as I thought the State’s case had been plea bargained and what was awaiting was the Federal Case, but I might be wrong.

I encourage all to e-mail, write or otherwise get in touch with Gov. Otter’s office. It’s embarrassing and unrepresentative of what most people in Idaho want, to now have a Jessica’s Law in Idaho.

It won’t hurt to reach local representatives as well. While they are apparently on board to pass this bill, it never hurts to remind them that they haven’t. Maybe some very influential law makers, such as Bart Davis and others, need to have a “long visit” with Gov. Otter and encourage him, in whatever ways they must utilize, to get him on board.

After all, Gov. Otter, not only are Idaho residents (who vote you in or out next tern), but others nationally are watching the decisions you make. Please don’t embarrass and anger us with your choice!

Pass Jessica’s law Gov. Otter. It is long overdue!

Had other former Idaho Govs been more proactive with this issue, perhaps the Groene family wouldn’t have had their lives as shattered as they did from a criminal who admitted he has killed other children in other states.

Mike,

Thanks for your efforts! If the laws are so tough, what would it hurt to add the nationally recognized “Jessica’s law” to this alleged tough group of laws.

I fear you are right Otter equals no change. I don’t care the political affiliation of anyone who takes this issue on, as long as they hold the Gov. accountable.

Judges may “grow” backbone if the Gov. had one.

Do you think the legislature has the guts to override a bill Otter would veto? Someone in Idaho has got to get this on the “agenda” as a major problem.

Any thoughts about writing the first lady instead of the Gov? I really want to see this change and there just has to be a way to make it happen.

Could someone explain the differences we would have between Idaho’s current sex offender environment and if Idaho passed this Jessica’s Law?

I’ve always supported stronger penalties for these criminals, but then I heard something a few months back to cast doubt on mandatory minimums.

Some prosecutors say it is actually more difficult to get testimony and convictions with super-strong mandatory minimums like life in prison and death penalty.

They say kids are even less willing to testify against the family member or family friend if they know they will help send them to prison forever or to the chamber.

They say judges and juries are less likely to convict for the same reasons.

The concern is that it is better to get ten years than nothing at all.

Does anyone know if the states who have enacted these tougher penalties have experienced this phenomenon?

I wonder where O’Reilly stands re- his own sexual harassment issues in terms of sexual aggression and perpetration. I’d be first in line to support him were he first in line to register.

Joe,

I was a bit surprised by your comments in the chat box, and even here. To model tolerance, well O’Reilly doesn’t have to be your favorite person, but he does have a good cause.

If it is your child, would you want a mandatory 5 year sentence or a mandatory 25 years sentence?

Joe, I sincerely thank you for digging through the O’Reilly stuff to get that exact wording.

GPS and 20 extra years of a mandatory sentence sure seem different to me, than what Idaho currently has on the books.
Yes, John told us early on Idaho had a law. Is it as tough as Jessica’s Law? If you child is sexually abused, how long do you want that perpetrator behind bars?

Thanks Mike for your attempts to bring civility to this discussion.

Someone has got to take on Otter. He won’t budge. Not the first time in his career either.

Would O’Reilly seem more credible to you, who write what you do, if he was still at ABC, the Oregonion, one of the Boston Papers or several other media outlets where he worked? Probably not, even in this post we see, “Faux” News.

Fox News wouldn’t be successful if there wasn’t an audience who is sick of the other stations (MSNBC in particular). Fox News independent stations are very well respected in many cities. It appears there is no need to push for a 4th Channel locally and all the benefits it would bring.

Anonymous, Post #38. Please document when Bill O’Reilly was accused of and perhaps even convicted for sexuallly abusing a child. If you can’t do that, your comments don’t belong in this thread.

And for some who were kicking O’Reilly and Fox News today in the Chat box, read Joe’s article. Things were taken out of context.

O’Reilly NEVER said Idaho citizens didn’t care. If that is what I wrote, then I apologize for my typo. He is specific it’s Otter and the legislature.

The issue was raised because of Michael Vick’s stupid behavior with the animal fights and which states have no laws protecting animals. It appears it’s ok to talk for weeks about Rex Rammell here, but heaven forbid, O’Reilly mentioning ID not having passed Jessica’s laws appears to need silenced immediately.

Having lived in many other states, like many of you have as well, I know some of the details people look at and for when thinking of relocating.

Maybe the state can put a link on Idaho home page saying we don’t have Jessica’s law as we have this other law already in place that requires a mandatory 5 years in prison. It’s 20 years less than what other states are adopting as their standard.

In the O’Reilly remakrs, Idaho and WY were NOT the main topics. But, I’m sure most of you who were chatting and bashing in the chat box earlier today know exactly what was said and in what context.
Otherwise, how tolerant are you being? How respectful?

If I made typos, I would appreciate the courtesy of those people asking me if I wrote the wrong word, or made a typo? I’ll gladly own my mistakes.

So, if you are thinking Idaho can survive with the law that John referenced above, why bother looking for sex offenders in YOUR neighborhoods or near your kids schools. After all to quote what Joe wrote in Post #42, “So I re-read the discussion in this article from first comment down, and recall John pointed out that Idaho already does almost everything in the Jessica’s Law!

“He (John) pointed out that Idaho Law may actually be twice as strong as the Jessica’s law in regards to re-registration time periods.”

May be doesn’t prove that an existing law is twice as strong as Jessica’s law.

Also, I guess I missed the part about the extra 20 years in prison, mandatory, and the part about GPS monitoring.

I’m not a lawmaker, but to me, those seem like BIG differences. However, maybe one has to work with kids who have been raped etc. to better understand why the naunces actually matter.

Be careful, Okay4NOW. Your posts might start to get deleted. You questioned if Joe Vandal was tolerant and respectful of ALL who posted opinions. That might be dangerous on this site to quote a non-liberal source.

Then again, maybe the so called “Comment Rules” aren’t followed anymore or don’t pertain to all. Guest 2468 was a great example on 7/19/2007 of how some lately have treated others here here.

In the chatbox a new person looking for something he couldn’t find, and in asking for help, the new guest was told by Guest 2468 to “open your eyes,” along with other instructions of how to find the information desired.

Would it appear that Guest 2468 is abiding by the community rules for this forum?

Now, if you could just cut and edit like Michael Moore allegedly does with his films, you could express your concerns and beliefs and repeatedly tell many different people that needed to see his film before posting. Apparently regardless of their years of medical, nursing, pharmacy, PT/OT/Speech Therapy or Mental Health practice, or other professional or personal exposure to the healthcare system, those viewpoints aren’t valid until those people hear and see Moore’s.

Interestingly, comments of why others have to see Moore’s film before engaging in the healthcare discussion here, have been not only tolerated, but considered acceptable on this site.

Is there a way to work Michael Moore into the Jessica’s Law discussion? I wonder what Michael Moore thinks should happen to sex offenders? Maybe some would be far more respectful of the seriousness of the issue if Michael Moore’s name could be attached to it.

Maybe those posters who told others to see the Moore’s movie first before engaging in dialogue, if they found themselves suddenly as parents of a kid who had just been molested or raped, wouldn’t find O’Reilly’s views so outrageous. He may actually appear well informed and educated on the issue.

Having first worked as an educator in the public school system, being a reporter for both CBS and ABC, and writing for newspapers in Boston, Denver, Dallas and Portland, OR, O’Reilly has a Master’s Degree in Public Administration from Harvard and a Masters Degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston College.
He’s only won two Emmy’s and other numerous other awards for his work. Yet, the climate here appears to encourage others to ignore and belittle O’Reilly (he doesn’t really know anything, right). But, bow and honor Michael Moore – he’s from Hollywood.

If O’Reilly were working for NBC or back at CBS or ABC (even as not just a reporter, but an anchor for one tv station along his career), he probably would be accepted by more as a “real” news authority.

Please verify the information about O’Reilly per the Wikipedia page about him to make sure my facts are correct. Otherwise, citing all the sources will only make my post longer.

O’Reilly’s Fox News/Westwood One contracts have never been just to report news, but to add his own editorial view. That is where many struggle to understand his program isn’t like the other pre-molded ones. He’s suppose to be smart enough to break down the complex news issues, but he shouldn’t comment on them, dispite that being the format of his broadcasts.

It seems logical to me that someone writing for a Boston newspaper when the Catholic Priests were being accussed of sexually abusing boys decades before in Boston, might KNOW a bit about child sexual abuse and those who molested them.

For the Idaho Fallz.Com Comment Rules, the second and third Comment Rules found before someone can write a post it say

2) Do not personally attack, name-call, put-down, or bait other guests, races, genders, or religions.

3) Express opinions, facts, logic, and reasoning; just don’t argue for argument’s sake.

I don’t see how all posts in this column follow these rules. Does that mean only if the host agrees with you, then the rules must be followed?

John McGimpsey, Post #1, on Oct. 26, 2006 wrote this about Idaho’s laws pertaining to sex offenders.

“- Idaho’s registration requirements for sexual predators are twice as frequent as Florida’s (3 months vs 6). Idaho also requires monthly verification by mail between registrations.

- Idaho increased the mandatory minimum sentence for sexual abuse from 5 to 15 years, with mandatory life for a second offense. That’s less than the minimum 25 in FL, but it’s hardly BO’s “slap on the wrist”.

John, I respectfully disagree. If your child is the SECOND victim of an Idaho sex offender who has already been imprisoned for sexually abusing another child earlier, would you feel the ID laws of 5-15 years for a first time offense are adequate?

If my child is sexually abused by an ex-con, who previously was in the ID prison system for molesting a child, what should I do besides becoming a political activist to vote all politicians out of their offices because THEY and Gov. Clem Otter let this law remain?

Maybe I should I sue the state of Idaho for not keeping a convicted sex offender locked up from 10-20 years more on a first offense compared to what 42 other states have already adopted? Lawsuits don’t do anything to help either of the child victims this perpetrator has been caught abusing, let alone the dozens of others not reported.

Maybe several parents whose children were the “Second Victims” filing a mass lawsuit against the state of Idaho and Gov. Butch Otter would get Butch’s attention. I wouldn’t bet on it. However, I wouldn’t bet on it.

Butch likes to be a stand alone kind of guy. So what if hundreds of second victims exist because he wouldn’t adopt Jessica’s law. How does that hurt him?

The way I see it, if someone is sentenced to 5-15 years in prison and then molests again in the next year after release, that second molestation was totally preventable. If the convict had been in prison 25 years, a lot of changes occur.

Remember, those who molest and are finally caught abusing a child average having over a 100 victims, before they are caught. Maybe, if the guy I’m talking about is caught at age 30 some victims have already been silenced. If this 30 year old per were sent to prison and released in 5 years, how much will his life really have changed in 5 years (meaning how athletic, places he frequents, friends and neighbors who live nearby who have he knows with kids etc.).?

Now that same 30 year old, caught in say a neighborhood in Montana, Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada or Utah, and convicted for his molesting of my kid or yours, would be behind prison bars for 25 years.

Do 55 year old men hang out where 30-35 year old men do? Sometimes. From those you know, are there physical differences between a 55 year old man and a 35 year old man? Could aging, work and potentially injuries/illnesses possibly have changed the body condition of the 55 year old? You decide.

That isn’t to say a 55 year old doesn’t stand a chance to molest again, as he does. But, having already spent 25 years in prison, realistically, won’t this person be spending the rest of his time behind bars with his next conviction? If someone were in prison for 25 years on the first offense, hopefully he would get treatment and learn skills to overcome the pediophillic urges he gets. A 55 year old man, might try to use those coping skills and avoid the urges to abuse again, as he can probably remember his 25 years in prison much more vividly than the 35 year old who spent 5 years there. Will the 55 year old see something besides prison for the rest of his life? Probably not.

If you need to look at this using numbers, a 30 year old man sentenced to 5 years in prison, by the time he’s released at age 35 has spent 14% of his life in prison. Probably missed some important events in his family.

A 30 year old who is released from prison at age 55, might have already lost his family. He would have spent 45% of his life in prison to date.

Do you think time away from family, selection of your own food, working in jobs that you like, living where you want etc. matters to ex-cons? Ask one, if you’re not sure.

Would it nor be logical that someone who has already spent 45% of his life (and with normal life expectancy) will have about another 20-25 years alive. So maybe something that ex-con thinks of before abusing another kid, is whether he’ll die in prison or ever be able to go to a restaurant of his choice again, or see his grandkids etc.

Does a 35 year old, who only spent 5 years in prison, appear to have as much to lose on his second offense?

Some may say we can’t afford the cost of mandatory first imprisonments for 25 years. I say you are correct – prison is expensive. It’s also expensive to have be a victim of a molester and not all costs are in dollars. For those who say it is too expensive, are you ignorant to the facts or just resitant to knowing and comprehending the real costs to the victim and family members?

Maybe someone can remind me of the Steeds financial picture, let alone what the Steed boys didn’t participate in during their teen years and why Adam, at least, dropped out of high school. I’d like to refresh my memory of this case.

As for what Idaho’s registration requiring sex offenders to register twice as frequently as those in FL, could someone tell me more about people like Dennis Empey and those who don’t bother to register? People who molest children tend to ignore many laws.

What factors would make anyone honestly believe a pedophile looking for his second victim would regard a law enough to register, as they are suppose to do? And in Idaho, that means twice more than in FL. Disrespect and disobendience of the laws requiring registerationg, aren’t exacty at the top of the list for sex offender looking for his second victim, as he can’t control his urges to abuse again.

But, maybe after 25 years in prison, there would be more respect for all laws?

Molestation of a child is illegal. If someone doesn’t fear imprisonment enough that he goes ahead and sexually abuses another child (doesn’t follow the law), I think it’s laughable to believe that person will register more frequently in Idaho compared to FL, just because the law requires it.

Please note I am not laughing at the person who clarified Idaho vs. Florida’s laws. I’m laughing at the ignorance of the legislature and the Gov. to actually believe people will register twice as often in Idaho as sex offenders, as they are suppose to do.

Dennis Empey and others have already proven that fact how important registration and following that law is for some in eastern ID.

I appreciate John’s factual information of the law. My post isn’t intended to attack John as a person. He is as entitled to his opinion as anyone else is to theirs.

I think Ok4NOW raised an interesting question asking how those who support Michael Moore, as well as others, and those who posted those comments and views on Idaho Fallz.Com are to be tolerated, respected and accepted as one poster’s opinion, on this site. But, to mention Bill O’Reilly (or BO as John mentions in the first post), that probably is would be almost a “felony” and should carry a longer sentence than the possible 5 year minimum a molester can receive, in Idaho, for sexually abusing a child.

Ok4NOW also points out the host’s use of “Faux” News instead of Fox News. Nice double standard of showing no respect not only to the person who took time to write the post, but also a successful business with distinguished commentators and journalists.

Yah, I know, I’ll probably be banned now too. At least I got to point out the hypocritical statements and behavior of some, until my post is removed too.

Think about the different standards on this site, as they most certainly exist. And Mr. Vandal has asked readers how anyone could view this site as liberal.

I don’t know Joe. It’s your site, your rules. You tell us if the site distributes the same amount of tolerance and respect for all posts (and sources of information).

One thing is crystal clear, those who keep trying to make progress on Jessica’s Law receive little to no support here. I cheer you all on and suggest you might want to post your thoughts on other sites where people will listen to the real facts, instead of like Mike said, “attack the messenger.”

After all, watching a child be raped isn’t as entertaining to see in a movie as Michael Moore. And having to read about it upsets many people – easier to avoid it.

Joe,
just an FYI….I’ve had problems editing comments the past week.

As for the topic, I’m all for the 25 year minimum sentence and a GPS IMPLANT in their body somewhere. These predators need to be stopped and the sooner we do something about it the better!
I just watched the lastest Dateline “To catch a predator” series the other evening and it’s absolutely amazing how many older guys are trying to meet these underage girls to have sex. AND 9 out of 10 of these guys have seen the series in the past and it STILL doesn’t stop them from trying. So yeah…5 years is not enough deterrent, because these animals will continue to reoffend until we put some laws on the books that will do more than just a slap on the wrist. (imo….5 years is a slap on the wrist)

I say along with the 25 years and GPS….castration and/or sterilization as well.

Interesting Mike. Thanks for the update. I’ll try looking for that information too.

When you wrote, “I’ll add, even though you’ll roll your eyes at it, watch “OutFOXed” and you’ll understand why many people hold Bill O’Reilly in low regard,” why did you write it? What does it add to how molesters are sentenced in this state?

Good comments, CR67. I like your logic.

Anonymous #48 – I guess you can spend your weekend proving all that was wrong with my earlier post. Doesn’t look like all agree with you, but be my guest.

Please reference your facts.

I think we discussed this earlier but many prosecutors will tell you that mandatory minimums make their jobs tougher….defendants do not take plea agreements to goto prison for 25 years…they take it to trial…what do they have to lose?

Alot of prosecutors like the ability to offer plea agreements to avoid trial…and the system is set up to work this way. Mandatory minimums would require an additional infusion of monies to the counties in Idaho to hire more prosecutorial staff. I think one way around this is to grade the system by age….molest anyone under 12 and look at 15, 12-17 look at 10 years. We can also have enhancements for repeat offenders that tack on an additional 10 years. Prosecutors can choose to file the enhancement, much like they do in current law for persistent violators (on the third felony for enumerated crimes, the offender is subjected to a lifetime imprisonment). This gives prosecutors a good tool to get pleas and keep things moving and still put these jerks away for a substantial period.

Additionally, lifetime probation for these offenders is the way to go as well. I mentioned earlier about Ronald Hamburg. He received a 5 yr. probationary sentence….I mean this guy molested a 5 year old girl that he kidnapped in the Rexburg Park. That is way out of line. Hamburg is now off probation and only has to register.

I also wanted to point out another falsehood John pointed out about registration: Idaho has Violent Sexual Predators (VSP) and others that are classified lower risk. VSP’s have to register every 90 days. They also have to have their picture publicized in the paper when they move. The other registrants do not.

Joe, I think it is too early to see the conviction rates or any trending as a result of Jessica’s Law. This is in large part because the majority of these states haven’t had these laws on the books very long. While raw data may be available, there are a number of controls that have to be looked at if there are to be any effective studies. However, I am going to search the US DOJ site to see if any information is available.

You’re right Ok4now….I was living in Florida at the time that rape and murder happened with Jessica Lunsford. A lot of people don’t really think about the issue until it happens to someone they know or in or around their community. I must say it was a very heated and discussed issue at the time it occured down there. It’s sad that it took a precious little girls life for this law to be enacted, but I for one was happy to see the law pass and to know that Florida has some of the toughest laws in the country when it comes to sexual predators & offendors. It absolutely makes you sick to your stomach when that type of thing happens so close to home, and it was great to see all the communities around Florida ban together to not only find this sick individual, but actually make some changes so this type of thing wouldn’t happen again. And hopefully these types of people will think twice before they attempt a heinous act like this.

Before I moved to Idaho I looked at the crime statistics and was pretty impressed with the fairly low crime rate. The one thing that did jump out at me though, was the amount of sexual offenders in Idaho Falls. I was rather surprised that the number was as large as it was, being such a small town, but it just goes to show that no community is safe from this type of crime.
This is why it’s so important that we ALL come together on this to contact our governer and our congressman and get this law changed. All it takes is 5 minutes out of your day to write a letter or send an email, and I’ll make it easy for you by providing the links.
Gov Butch Otter: http://gov.idaho.gov/WebRespond/contact_form.html
Congressman Mike Simpson: http://www.house.gov/simpson/emailme.shtml

Personally, I believe the law should have been passed nationwide back in 2005. But just remember folks….they work for US. And I assure you…you WILL get a response from both of these gentleman. I know firsthand, as I’ve already contacted both of them regarding a couple other issues since I’ve been in Idaho and have received both emails and snail mail replies.

Here’s another link thats good to keep in your bookmarks. (all the state registries) http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/Registries.jsp

I’m glad their we’re talking about this issue and I hope that with everyones help, we can make a difference and protect our children!

HERE’S an idea: Do some research and discover that longer sentences actually make offenders’ recidivate to a higher degree.

Just wondering as well, where, in our overcrowded prison system, do you intend to incarcerate these demons? At what cost? Are you prepared to pay the higher taxes for something proven not to work?
If not, who do you intend to release to make room? Druggies? Murderers? Aggravated batterers?

Sometimes thinking before speaking around here would be a welcome trend.

You’re simply, flatly, completely, and predictably, wrong. Nothing sarcastic there, unfortunately. Just curious, out of which academic study do you draw your “profile” and conclusions re- how repeated rapes assist in lowering recidivism?

Anonymous in Post #61 wrotes,

“July 24th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
HERE’S an idea: Do some research and discover that longer sentences actually make offenders’ recidivate to a higher degree.

“Just wondering as well, where, in our overcrowded prison system, do you intend to incarcerate these demons? At what cost? Are you prepared to pay the higher taxes for something proven not to work?
If not, who do you intend to release to make room? Druggies? Murderers? Aggravated batterers?

“Sometimes thinking before speaking around here would be a welcome trend.”

I agree Anonymous. Let’s first start with you stating YOUR SOURCEs
for your comment, “Do some research and discover that longer sentences actually make offenders’ recidivate to a higher degree.”

Please name cite your sources, the legal cases, the journals, books and other information you have so you can explain much more clearly what a “higher degree” means. That is ambigious; it can be taken at least 2-3 different ways just reading it. But, I’ll let you clarify your remarks as I don’t know your sources and what you meant to say with the broad statement.

Meanwhile, having been one of 13 appointed to a Gov.’s Special Tasks Force to address in particular the younger sex offenders, I will be happy to give you references that I’m permitted to release.

To clarify my statement, I had to sign some confidentiality agreements for that Task Force, and despite it being in another state, that agreement is still binding today.

However, I’ll be happy to give you national sources so as you’ve requested, we – INCLUDING YOURSELF- can prove how much those of us who have posted here have read, written, helped form public policy and worked with sex offenders and victims of sex offenders directly.

In fairness, I have to say I have a very tight schedule this week and I doubt I can post that information before the weekend. However, I’ll be happy to take some time and do it then. As my sources do exist.

CR67 – I agree that perhaps we need to look at some of the others currently being incarcerated and reconsider what options there are for some of those populations instead of prison. I also agree sex offenders are not the group to do as we’re currently doing and avoid the incarceration period, in many cases.

Mike, as always you’ve added some insight to the punishment aspect of a sentence. I agree, being on probation essentially allowing the convicted s.o. to go most places while having a tracking device, doesn’t serve as enough of a consequence to deter future abuse by that sex offender.

Part of how any sex offender has any chance of improvement (I didn’t say cure, I said improvement) is teaching that person how to manage the urges, not being in high-risk situations, addressing previously unassessed or under treated mental health issues – and often starting a mood stabilizer, or another medication as indicated, as well as treatment of substance abuse problems (usually alcohol) as many offenders actually drink before violating a child and the alcohol lowers their normal inhibitations that would have stopped them otherwise.

Also, I believe and know a sex offender has to work in psychotherapy to get to the triggers and previous events that allowed this person to violate a child. It is some of the most difficult work a person will ever do.

Even jail, if not prison, helps ensure the person has to deal with some of these issues as he can’t just run away when it gets so painful he’d probably rather die than go that next level of treatment.

There is a point in treatment at which sex offenders who are serious about treatment and change are at high risk to injure themselves or bolt because the truth of their own lives is so hard to address. I strongly recommend incarceration during this time in particular.

There comes a point when some of the work and certianly working to pay off the fine a judge hopefully ordered, may be best accomplished by a half-way house. However, as I understand that issue, it takes us back to the sentencing and prosecutors no longer settling for no days incarcerated being allowed.

Anonymous,

You may be a judge, attorney, troll, or someone who see this issue very differently. I respect that.

I see no harm in obtaining information from other states, those who have worked on sex offenders as a category for decades compared to ID. How does that hurt you or any of us here? What are the costs of obtaining that information? Nonetheless, I respect your right to see that differently.

Anonymous, please comment of what the harm is for Judges, Prosecuting Attorneys, Pre-Sentence etc. learning from the experiences and research from other states. I have an open mind to your viewpoint.

Also, most judges and attorneys are smart enough to realize that many who ask questions in the courtroom or in this format already know the answers; however, they are either trying to get others involved or are trying to get the synergy of group thought to potentially produce better answers than those currently being practiced in sentencing sex offenders.

I, for one, would appreciate you detailing the part of your CV that has direct work with sex offenders in any capacity. Names or even jurisdictions do not need to be shared. Just your documented experience so we know how educated YOU are about the subject (and how current your education is).

If you are a judge, prosecuting attorney or have other direct responsibilities leading to recommendations of what sentence a S.O. is sentenced to, instead of trying to insult us of how uneducated we are about this subject, please set the example for all of us. Document your reference articles, books etc. telling us the problems as YOU know they exist.

I’m confident others posting here have equal or more experience as you working with sex offenders and understanding the literature.

And YES, I am willing to pay more taxes to make sure ALL sex offenders spend some time behind bars.

If you READ what I wrote previously, if sex offenders kill their victims, their case then becomes not one strictly about their sexual offense, but a capital case for murder as well.

Looking forward, Anonymous, to your sources showing the specific details about incarceration leading to as you say, “actually make offenders’ recidivate to a higher degree.” I’d like to read the material, especially prior to when I’m able to post my own list of sources.

I agree it would be great if some would READ and become informed, and then THINK, and subsequently post post as a result of both.

It’s nice to have you raise the bar here, Anonymous, with your comments. While everyone is entitled to their own opinions, which I respect, let’s get down to the expert opinions.

I look forward to your CV, and documentation to support your points.

I would also ask one additional request of you, Anonymous from Post #61. I respect your right to be Anonymous, Guest, or “Stop Sign,” “Tree Trunk,” “Big Rigger,” or any other unlimited variety of user names you could select. Would you please at least use a specific number with your Anonymous posting, or a different username?

One clever trick that is played here and those users who use their real or self-assigned username repeatedly have no way of knowing, is someone will address what “Anonymous” said only to be told no, that was a “different Anonymous user.”

It’s hardly fair that we who use our names or a consistant username get shots taken at us, yet the person who posts those remarks doesn’t use a consistant name so a dialogue can follow.

I want to make sure I give you credit for what you write, as well as your real world experience. So until you decide which benign username to use, I’ll just refer to you as Anonymous – 8B- so everyone is clear when I’m addressing you say vs. Anonymous SkyDiver, Anonymous Cop, Anonymous Bus Driver etc.

This is just my addition to your suggestion that people read before they post. I want to know in your f/u comments that you are the same person. Accountability, not only for offenders but everyone is good, IMO. That includes those who post here.

Looking forward to your next post, Anonymous-8B.

Ok4now….once again, great post. However it’s pointless trying to have a civil discussion with this “anonymous” person, as we all know from his previous posts. This person is more than happy to put down other posters and dismiss their thoughts on a subject and asking that we cite OUR sources. Yet when we ask the same of him, he refuses, telling us to look it up ourselves. One has to take the comments of these types of posters with a grain of salt in my opinion.

Early 90’s?!!! LOL! That’s light years away in terms of statistical applicability, particularly in a field that is as rapidly evolving and progressing as sexual offender treatment. You’d be laughed out of any professional gathering w/ that old of data.

Insofar as me using large words, [edited by site admin]

What’s wrong w/ playing by your rules, CR? Where’s YOUR documentation re- your prison rape deterrent commentary as well as your “profile?” I can’t find it…anywhere; I’ve looked…everywhere. Can you find MY citations? They’re easily available. Have you looked? Hmmmmm…..

Look harder. Try the Center for Sex Offender Management sites; the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abuser sites; the Department of Justice sites; the Safer Society sites; etc., etc.

Who said I was for lax sentences? I’m for EFFECTIVE sentences. I’m as abhorred by these individuals’ actions as anyone else. I’m simply advocating that we be smart about dealing with them, rather than emotionally reactionary, the latter approach never having proven its worth in resolving any problem of any kind.

Re my personal history? W/ all due respect, none of your business.

It seems aparent to me that Anonymous is a troll just looking to argue for argument sake and attack people personally rather than the issue(s). Anonymous threw out a bold statement about how longer sentences cause more recidivism. I would love to see that study. I could argue the reverse, shorter sentences cause more recidivism. So where does that leave us. Anonymous wants effective sentences….as do all of us on here. The only difference is Anonymous is calling posters stupid. My vote is ignore the troll and talk about effective sentences (with out without anonymous’ sources).

It stands to reason that longer sentences decrease recidivism because you keep them locked away from society longer. The major age range of criminal activity is probably in the age range of 18-25 years old. If you lock people up past this criminal ‘prime time’ period many offenders actually mature and grow out of criminal behavior. The only main exception would be those persons that have Anti-Social Personality Disorder and/or Psycho/Sociopaths. You can’t change their makeup. All you can do is keep a thumb on them and control them from hurting others.

I have seen countless stories and talked to former prisoners that tell the tale that prison saved their life and put them on a correct course for living a better and more productive life.

Now, if one wants to argue that longer sentences are a bad thing for sexual offenders and we might make them worse when they come out….then what is the other side’s answer? The concepts Anonymous discusses seem aiken to the Restorative Justice Model being implemented around the country. This model believes in supposedly equal rights for criminals to be made whole, just like the victim. In effect, society must look out for the criminals that have injured it. Society takes on the role of nurturing the criminal instead of ostracizing the criminal and punishing him/her for the behavior. This is a sad state of affairs, especially in the area of sexual offenses. When the criminals have equal and in many cases more rights than society—and we have to treat them with kid gloves we are turning a blind eye to predators in our midst. In my opinion, this will only do more to encourage recidivism.

Mike, we all know that Anonymous is only out to start arguments and is not capable of discussing a topic in a civilized manner. The majority of the posters on this board have no problem supplying each other with reference material to back our beliefs up. Its called the unspoken law of common courtesy and one most of us abide by. And when we do happen to state our opinions, that’s how each of us portray them, as “our opinion”. Don’t let the trolls suck you in and drag you down to their level. It’s not worth the time & energy to repond.
We’ve each fallen prey to his games on a number of posts here, and it won’t be long until he’s just talking to himself.

Anonymous, your points are worth considering fairly like any others, but I must ask, have you ever personally worked with (as in treatment, therapy, rehabilitation or incarceration) sex offenders, especially those who offend against children?

Have you talked with any of them (professionally) at length, over time, about their behavior, urges, or thoughts and feelings about what they did?

I realize you may respond the same as you did in post 71, but I highly suspect your knowledge is from the other side, or doing paper research and quoting other’s stats. If you directly worked with a man or woman convicted of such offenses, your arguments would be taking a much different spin.

Regardless, seems this issue is another no-win situation. Nobody wins in a real life molest or rape either. We all need to be SO vigilant with our children’s safety, and fight against the judges or prosecutors who are too lenient with them.

Today in the PR they said that a man was seen peeking into the stalls at the girls’ bathroom at the 4-H fair the past 2 days. He is a registered sex offender who has only been out of prison since July 24. But there was no offense they could legally charge him with. Shouldn’t it be against the conditions of his parole? Is he even on parole? Here is a link to his information, better watch out for this one.

http://www.isp.state.id.us/so_viewer/showSO.do?nic=SX06996

Hi “Okay4now”…saw your post (#88);

First, thanks for bringing this important issue to the discussion boards;

Second, my understanding is that the only relevance of “Jessica’s Law” to the death penalty is that when considering aggravating/mitigating factors in a death penalty case, a person’s status as a lifetime sexual predator (under Jessica’s Law) can be considered as an aggravating factor. (When deciding between death and other options at the penalty phase of a death penalty eligible case, the defense presents ‘mitigating’ factors (ie character witnesses to say what a good person the defendant is, his wife and kids, etc..) and the prosecution presents aggravating factors of the crime and/or defendant (ie, prior crimes s/he has committed, his lack of remorse, etc.) ). This inclusion as an aggravating factor would, obviously, open the door for more executions.

Even though I am opposed to the death penalty, I still do like the idea of Jessica’s Law, although I think the statutory age of the victim should be increased from “children under age 11″ to “children under age 13″.

My 2 cents, for whatever its worth.

Thanks Babs. I will look into that when I have a bit more time. Kind of crunch time here for a few more days.

Wow – that case in NJ where those 3 college age kids were shot, really brings a lot of these issues together (as I understand them).

No, they weren’t children protected from perps, but apparently the ring leader has been booked on Child Molestation and I believe it was aggrevated rape. Maybe not aggrevated, but this ILLEGAL ALIEN made his $150,000 bail in NJ for each offense.

Apparently lives in NYC, “owns property.” RIGHT – someone want to explain that one to me?

But, because he was seen as having ties to NYC via his “property” he made bail.

Then he got these other kids to allegedly help him murder the college kids about 10 days ago.

Sick, sick, sick stuff. As several attorneys asked, why wasn’t he denied bail for the seriousness of his crimes. He not only allegedly sexually abused a little girl but also apparently brutually raped a younger woman.

Some say he should have been deported. But, apparently ICE couldn’t touch him as long as he was in jail or something like that. These senseless crimes are only more bizarre given the ring leader isn’t even a U.S. Citizen and keeps making bail.

What most people pointed too as a core problem was the Sactuary City status of NYC.

I know this is a little off topic of Jessica’s Law, but had this creep been held in jail for either of his previous crimes (and I believe they were both in the last 3 months), maybe those college kids would be alive today.

I suggest we all continue to write and email our governor and congressman regarding this issue until they get sick of hearing from us.
We need this McClelan character off the streets for good. His behavior is borderline right with him skating on the edge of the law. But it’s only a matter of time before he gets to that point and does something terrible. Should we wait for that to happen, or take action now? This scum needs to be put away for good.

I don’t hate John but I also didnt vote for him lol. I aksed him on one of his house visits how he felt aobut our president lying to all of us? And he didnt seem to really care a whole lot. I want to vote for a guy who will stand up and say” this is BS!!! ” ” I am outraged with the careless ways our government has operated!” Someone who knows there are bills out there that are unconstitutional and will reak havok to protect all of us. I will vote for that person. Maybe I just need to run for office. Everyone vote for me lol. I will end the drug war. I will open up treatment centers. I will get more money for education. I will make sure everyone has the right to vote and express freedom of speach and that you have the right to say anything you want to me. I will make sure anyone can own a gun that isnt to bad. I will get rid of millions of garbage laws that steal money form Americans. I will fire all of the corrupt government and police force. If you don’t vote for me then may someone step up to the plate and bat for america.

” I am sick of watching my fellow countrymens constitutional rights just wilt and die”" I want someone who will defend the constitution of the united states.

This story has some positive news to it. A local man, David Bigelow, is circulating a petition for mandatory minimum sentences. He is a neighbor of Mike Nef. Nef was given a slap on the wrist by Judge Brent Moss.

http://www.localnews8.com/global/story.asp?s=7527788

Bigelow’s contact address to partake in the petition is in the link. Count me in.

Joe,

I would e-mail him and give him your suggestion about the online petition. Right now, he has petitions with 17 signature spaces….they are to then be sent to the Governor. I think that an online version would be better…..and allow it to be sent to multiple politicians with more effect. We already know that Otter plans on doing nothing….so approaching him is a waste of time.

Actually, I am not sure when the research was done on Wyoming Criminal law regarding sexual offenders, but in July of 2007 Wyoming passed several new sexual offenders laws. This includes making it a felony to fail to register as a sex offender. Wyoming no longer has extremely relaxed sexual offender laws. They also used to have a hearing that each person convicted of a sexual offense would have to go through to determine their level of probability of repeat offending. The ranking would determine how far in depth their sexual registration would go. More often than not, this hearing either didn’t take place, or the person would be placed in a lower ranking than what he/she probably should have been placed in. The new law says that all sexual offenders will register, period. No more hearing. So when the research was done, I am sure that this article was true. Regardless, this is no longer the case in Wyoming.

Did you see that scumbag on the news this morning who is HIV positive and performed oral sex on a 14 y/o boy? He also admitted to meeting teens and older guys in the Idaho Falls parks to have sex and he didnt tell any of them he was HIV positive. He was sentenced yesterday and the judge only gave him six years to life. The prosecution was asking for at least 15 years to life. What is wrong with our society when our court system can’t even hand down a proper sentence? This guy should be locked up for the rest of his life! Six years is a slap on the wrist!
There was also a Pocatello school teacher who was also sentenced monday for molesting a 14 y/o student. 15 year sentence, with 5 being mandatory. Which means could and probably will get out after 5 years! It’s an outrage and our laws need to be changed to send a message to these sick individuals that we’re not going to put up with this behavior anymore!

All those sentences sure seem light. I wonder why the judges did these things? Do they not believe there was a terrible crime which occurred?

I don’t believe you can change who you’re attracted to, whether it be the same gender, or little children, etc. (I also know better than to equate homosexuality with pedophilia.)

So these guys/gal, when they get out, how does society stop them from acting upon their natural sexual proclivities?

I think we go at this with the wrong approach. Someone who is attracted to children needs to either be put away forever, or have some sort of medical treatment given so the inevitable next attraction and opportunity can’t be acted upon.

We can’t just say, you get to do x amount of time. The punishment doesn’t resolve the internal issue, the attraction that they acted upon that got them caught in the first place.

As a libertarian I am against the ‘war on drugs’. I don’t agree with drug use in general, but that includes most legal drugs. I agree with you that we did this to ourselves, in our overcrowded prison system.

I saw a documentary about the war on drugs having a tacit partner in the federal government. It was alleged (very convincingly) that the Feds actually helped drugs come in to the country for several reasons:

1. Most of the users were poorer blacks/minorities or gang members in the inner cities and ghettos. They either died from overdoses or were arrested/imprisoned and therefore off the streets.

2. The drugs came in from countries where we were trying to persuade the leadership to be in our corner, rather than ally themselves with the Soviet Union. We wink/wink-nudge/nudged when the carriers came in, the countries got lots of money and the power went to leaders that supported us. (Think Noriega, Ollie North, etc.)

3. Private companies take advantage of building prisons, make big bucks off the state governments to take the massive overflow of prisoners due to mandatory minimum sentences, and then have a ready-made workforce for products or services from which additional profit can be made. Even if there’s no inmate labor, private companies make tremendous profit from this overflow prison ’service’.

So we have an ongoing war on drugs. Now, remember that I do not use, nor do I condone using drugs. I just truly believe it is being mishandled all around.

Wow, my bad. I got caught up in my self righteousness about the ‘war on drugs’ and totally left the molester thread! You’re right.

If we stopped the mandatory imprisonment of users, we’d have room to put away the molesters. I don’t think they ever can change their attraction, so unless we can guarantee they will not reoffend they should be given life sentences the first time.

But this then goes into the broader question of, what is a sexual offender? A rapist? Sure, unless it was a “he said, she said”, and non violent issue. Then I’m not sure if I’d want to have a life sentence. Those kinds of cases are difficult to decide.

A pedophile? Absolutely.

What about a statutory rapist? Consensual sex with a teenager, when you are a young adult. Does that deserve a life sentence? Well, I’m not so certain about that, especially when young girls tend to pursue older boys, and the boys don’t mature as fast as the girls do, anyway. I’m not even sure that should be considered to be a predatory situation if the age difference is under 10 years (don’t ask me why, that just seemed to be a good reasonable number to cap it off at). If the two are over 10 years different in age, then it seems predatory to me, and pedophiliac in nature.

But get the predators off the streets for the balance of their lifetimes, or find ways to totally guarantee they will not reoffend. And with today’s overcrowded prisons, we are not seeing heavy sentences for this type of crime.

Studies have shown that outpatient treatment that is not long term and without community monitoring is not effective. KIDK or KIFI had a story on the supposed success rate of 77% for the State Penitentiary Therapeutic Community Treatment Model, or TEAM for short. This is a longer term program of intensive treatment to a captive audience. Especially with meth, outpatient is not cutting it….these folks need longer term treatment in a secure setting…..that means prison in many cases. Otherwise, it is an ineffective use of resources to treat persons for short periods of time without the ability to hold them accountable and without easy access to drugs. The TEAM model also uses a peer to peer model that seems to be effective in keeping drugs out of the units these guys are segregated in from the general population. (Remember the Dirty Dozen Movie with Lee Marvin…..he used an extreme model of the peer to peer….if any one of them failed they all failed. The other prisoners kept each other in line) This model has much going for it because if you think about it, most prisoners tend to probably believe one another more so than “The Man”.

I can understand people going to prison to pay for their crimes. But casual drug users that didn’t commit a crime, but got caught “holding”, should not be sent to prison for ungodly amounts of time. Especially when there is no drug treatment programs in the majority of our prisons. The program you point out does not happen in most of our prisons across the country and even this program admits that all inmates are not eligible for placement in this program.
The point I’m trying to make is, stop locking up drug users where they’ll end up coming out worse off than when they went in. Instead of spending billions of dollars on new prisons, spend millions on treatment programs. Or better yet…legalize it and tax it like they’ve done with alcohol and tobacco. But that’s a whole other can of worms there and I already know Mikes stand on that one.

I find this story to be amusing at best….how about providing Brad’s information, i.e. name is all…so that we can check his records out on the court website. You don’t get sixty days on a PV violation for frequenting….unless there are other details to the story. Either the poster is Brad, himself, or Brad didn’t tell the whole story to the poster…like perhaps he was using. Even with that said, you don’t get 60 days on a first offense PV for smoking pot. I know alot of the guys at County Probation. They don’t work that way and neither does their supervisor who has to approve discretionary jail time requests, which then goto a judge for final approval. There is a set policy at the Magistrate Level which was imposed by District Judge Greg Anderson that any jail time for technical violations of probation in excess of 14 days requires a hearing before a judge. It is not a slam dunk and you have to do more than frequent a place where drugs are used.

As far as CR67’s objections about people who are simply “holding” drugs….they shouldn’t be locked in prison. The simple fact is that simple users that are convicted of felony possession are placed on probation in most cases. Call the District 7 State Probation Dept. and ask for Supervisor Jared Thompson (208-528-4220). He can tell you that for a fact. The people that are incarcerated for these types of offenses either have a serious prior felony record consisting of numerous arrests and convictions, or they violate probation by failing to attend treatment, failure to report, failure to work, using drugs again (repeatedly…not just a one time deal….usually on average of 3-4 chances), or committing new crimes.

As I said before, these assertions to the contrary deserve scrutiny. Please provide some more background information. Those of you who doubt what I have espoused here are welcome to contact the professionals who deal with this field every day. They will tell you what really is going on in our area. Don’t take my word for it, please check into this if you are skeptical.

In post 121 mike does not know what he is talking about when he insists that nobody could get 60 days for a first offense PV. A close friend of mine has a family member who was sent to prison (2 years so far) for a first offense drug use PV. And no, I am not giving the person’s name so you can tell me how they deserved it.

I’m glad to see the comments of Mike, CR67, Nemesis and others in this thread. I still have hope someday that Idaho will enact some form of Jessica’s Law. However, that may require a different governor given comments I’ve been told.

So I think it is great everytime a post about those in prison or sexual predators is added here.

Because they are trying to do something positive to keep children safer, I say props to the I.F. City Council working on stronger Day Care Licensing Laws. I know it raises costs, which is difficult for many working parents. I’m not sure what to say to those parents, except how many dollars/day are you willing to pay for your children to be safer?

Ideally, all children would be safe wherever they are cared for during the day. I still remain concerned about neighbors caring for “a few neighborhood kids.” That is where I think uniform laws can help.

Please keep posting stories. In the new format Joe has where only 3-4 stories with the latest comments show up, I’m concerned that too many newer visitors many not even know this thread exists.

Never said you or anyone else was a dope smoking hippie. My critique of your story has no mention of liberal or conservative. I admit that I did accuse you of making the story up if you don’t want to offer up a name. The fact that the person is in prison is public record. The report of violation is public record. If you want to be credible, then cite the case name. Otherwise, you are blowing hot air (minus the dope fumes and liberal chants of course).

Thankyou judge Joel Tingey. I am going to call Frank Vandersloot and tip him off on this lenient judge. I hope Frank takes care of him like he did to Judge Herndon! lol

Seriously, Tingey and Judge Moss are both very soft on sex offenders. Wouldn’t it be nice to ask them to explain themselves. The problem is that as judges they don’t have to. They also hide behind the “Cannon of Judicial Ethics” which supposedly does not allow them to comment. My question is: If this is the case, how do we know who to vote for? What a joke that we can’t hear from the judges themselves! What a nice setup for them and a bad one for the community and victims who want to be protected and see justice served.

El Diablo had a great point in another thread. He noted Post Register reporters should jump at this story as a way to tell the truth about the judiciary. This is definitely one area the media should take an active interest in to check those in power.

I would urge all posters here to send an e-mail to Cops and Courts reporter Nick Draper with a cc: to Korny Rolston (city editor). Let them know your concerns about Judge Moss and now Judge Joel Tingey. They should follow up on their 1/27/08 editorial on the sentencing disparity between eastern idaho judges, i.e. Judge Moss sentencing Lewd Conduct defendants to prison only 9.5% of the time vs. the average of 50% for other judges. (Tingey was not on the bench at that time to be part of the analysis).

Here are the e-mail addresses: ndraper@postregister.com and krolston@postregister.com .

If enough of us send them mail perhaps they can take some action and bring these awful sentencing practices to the light of day!

Do you guys really think pedophiles can be rehabilitated? In California sex offenders are housed separately from the main pop. As for ousting judges weak on sex crimes/pedophilia, are you all aware of the Stogner ruling? California passed a law repealing the Statute of Limitations in molest cases, the law was appealed at the State level, and was upheld, only to then be overturned by the United States Supreme Court in Stogner v. California.

Crystal,

In response to your comment, # 137, I think it is very important to not label all sex offenders in the same group for starters.

I think there is a percentage that with the appropriate treatment really getting to the issues of why they have sexually abused, have at least a yearly plythsmograph, and had all of their supports in place, there is a percentage that can change.

I saw this after directing a program for sex offenders and victims, in another state, for 4 years, plus sitting on the Gov’s task force during that time. I also treated both offenders and victims. Most offenders are untreated victims.

IMHO -part depends on who quickly we prosecute and consequence for behavior. The average teen offender has had 100 victims. That is why the Gov’s Council I sat on focused on teens, trying to get mental health issues, perhaps their own living arragements etc. changed while they were teens with the hope that they would learn to monitor themselves.

Probably the easiest way I can explain how I see a percentage of offenders, is much like diabetics. Monitor their daily sugar levels, adjust medication, correct diet/food consumption etc. For sex offenders it is the same. Just a different prescription for each of what they need to successfully function in their own homes as spouses/partners, parents/grandparents or whatever; jobs; and other social activities.

For what it is worth, I don’t know if people really understand how greatly underdiagnosed depression and a couple of other mental health issues are. So for those people, medication maintenance would be a factor too.

There is also a segment of offenders that are true pedophiles and won’t change regardless of what is provided for them.

Just my experience of course, others may have different issues.

OK4Now, I am truly astounded. I’ve never been made of any such concerted effort on behalf of victims. In fact I’ve never seen such a concerted effort to portray child molesters as victims.

Joe, re comment 37, look up CSAAS, Child Sexual Abuse Accomodation Syndrome.

Great. It’s the basis for repealing statutes in these kinds of cases. The argument regarding the un-constitionality of repealing statutes makes perfect sense EXCEPT in light of the delays in reporting inherent in these kinds of crimes.

I completely agree! I’ll be sending my email today. Why aren’t the victims families coming forward more and shouting foul? (or are they and we’re just not hearing about it?)

Keep the e-mails coming. See Post 133 for the e-mail addresses to send the Post Register mail to get on this story and protect the public.

Hey Opinion…..why don’t you read the complete post before dissing the proposal? Or do you think it’s ok that our local judges and surrounding communites are so lax on child & sexual predators? The fact is, our local judges are handing down sentences that are equal to a slap on the wrist to these predators and most of us are fed up with it!

So how do you know when an Amber Alert is actually about a criminal act against a child versus a protective parent trying to flee an abusive situation…and how do you feel about being complicit in cases not involving stranger abductions but in custody battles where the child is possibly kidnapped by for example their own mother in (sometimes clearly lawful) attempt at protecting the child from further endangerment?????

And again, I refer you to http://www.protectiveparents.com.

Amber Alerts are not black and white.

I agree, better to notify the public, who then sees the child and notifies the authorities, who then sort it all out.

I didn’t go into your link other than the front page, Crystal. Does it show somewhere on that site that sometimes Amber Alerts are misused by an abusive parent, to find the family members who are trying to hide?

Nemesis, check out the case studies. In California, well over half of convicted batterers who file for custody get it. Laws protect persons who attempt to protect children from imminent danger including the imminent danger of being placed into the custody of a batterer. But these laws only work in theory, the police have a very limited role in family court cases.

Do your research, and make the distinction. Yes, Amber Alerts are very useful in STRANGER abductions. But before you make a call in a PARENTAL abduction alert, I hope you know your facts or you just may be ensuring a child is being forced into a more dangerous situation. Again, do your research before you meddle.

http://www.protectiveparents.com/cases.html

http://www.mothers-of-lost-children.com/

I thought police had to follow some pretty clear cut guidelines before issuing an Amber Alert? I would hope they are trained well enough to differentiate between hostile ex spouses and a child who is truly in danger, whether it be by a parent or stranger.

Would love to hear from local police officers how they would go about determining an Amber Alert for this area. I guess it’s case by case but are there clear cut rules that have to apply to every case before issuing an alert?

I read several of the children’s/teens stories on the site you mentioned – courageous kids – now I’m not saying their stories are not true, but what they wrote has been very heavily edited by someone. Having worked in education I can tell you the majority of high school, much less college students write, spell, or punctuate that well; especially those who have been tossed around the system for so long and had their education interrupted many times. In my job I learned to take what everyone said with a grain of salt, because even the most sincere sounding kids or parents would withhold important facts. They wouldn’t call it lying, just didn’t tell the whole truth.

Anyway, I think Idaho needs to get on board with Jessica’s Law – tougher sentences, etc. I agree with OK4Now the last few cases I’ve followed in the news, the Pocatello judges seem to be able to sock it to the perp much better than those up here.

There’s no need to come off with a condesending attitude. You state one case study done in California and think it’s “the norm” and then try to compare “Parental Alienation Syndrome” with the basics of the Amber Alert. The fact is Amber Alerts are very useful, whether its in regards to a stranger abuduction, or a parent illegally taking a child out of a “dangerous or harmful environment”. There are still proper procedures to follow when it comes to the so called “good” parent attempting to flee from an “abusive” one.
We appreciate your doing some “homework” on the topic, theres just no need to post a rebuttal in such a condesending manner.
I’m quite sure if you did a little more homework, it’s not “the norm” for more than half of “convicted batterers” to gain custody of their children in this nation.

I just don’t see it being the nationwide norm, so how about we both do a little more digging over the weekend and see what we come up with?

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/641

:

April 3, 2008

Biased Family Court System Hurts Mothers
Run Date: 09/05/01
By Garland Waller
WEnews contributor
Behind closed doors of the family court system, thousands of women each year lose child custody to violent men who beat and abuse mothers and children. The writer says family courts are not family-friendly and betray the best interests of the child.

Editor’s Note: The following is a commentary. The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily the views of Women’s Enews or NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.

(WOMENSENEWS)–Studies show that in approximately 70 percent of challenged cases, battering parents have been able to convince authorities during custody battles that their victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody, according to a recent report published by the American Judges Foundation.

That statement would have once shocked me, but no more. Nor am I surprised when I read that a family court judge has awarded custody of a 3-year-old girl to the father who has violently beaten her mother. I do not even lift an eyebrow when a 2-year-old boy, who comes home from unsupervised visitation with his dad, has a diaper filled with his own rectal blood and that same child is later turned over to his father on a full-time basis. And when a mother is thrown into jail, denied the right to ever see her children again, because she brought up the issue of child abuse in a family court, I’m sickened, but not shocked.

These injustices are commonplace today in the closed-door family court system. These courts often claim to operate in a manner consistent with the “best interests of the child.” In practice this often means that a judge, often a male judge, biased and imperious, defines that phrase. These judges decide, time and time again, when a woman raises the allegation of sexual abuse in a custody dispute, that it is she who will lose her children forever.

I used to think that the family court system was basically fair. That was before my childhood friend, Diane Hofheimer, asked me to consider doing a documentary on the family courts. She had taught herself the law so that she could work with her attorney husband, Charlie Hofheimer, in their Virginia law practice. …”

from http://www.smalljustice.com

WELCOME TO SMALL JUSTICE.COM
“Studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases.”
The American Judges Foundation
“Domestic Violence and the Courtroom, Understanding the Problem…Knowing the Victim”

Check out the latest news on the Small Justice News Blog.

Small Justice, an award-winning, independent documentary, exposes a lurking national scandal. Contrary to everything you might think, everything that makes sense, men who beat their wives, sexually abuse their children, and then ask the court for custody, usually get it. It is so counterintuitive, most people simply do not believe it is possible for a judge to hand over custody of children to men who beat their wives and sexually abuse their children. But it is something that happens every day in America, in every state, because the system is broken.

Dig away!

Excellent job explaining to Crystal what I’ve been trying to say all along. It really boggled my mind regarding her stance “against” the Amber Alert. I mean seriously, how can anybody in their right mind claim that the Amber Alert system isn’t an awesome tool thats been proven effective in thousands of cases?
Heaven forbid a child of hers gets abducted….would she reject the help of the general public by the use of an Amber Alert to find her child as quickly as possible? I seriously doubt it!
******Caution***** *****Blown Out of Proportion Alert*****
There have been numerous instances where innocent men & women have spent years in prison, and were later proven to be innocent. Should we do away with our court system because of these mistakes made by the judge and jury? I think not!
And the same thing applys to the Amber Alert.

So it looks like we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one Crystal.

I have not advocated doing away with Amber Alerts. I hope the info in links I have provided is read with greater care than were my comments here.

Mike and CR67, I believe we share the same beliefs here. Mike, I had previously read what Rebecca Walsh had written – what you linked above. IMHO, it is a good article to read.

In the case of Hser Nay Moo, South Salt Lake City Police Chief, Chris Snyder, said he would be criticized no matter what he did. Police and volunteers searched for the child prior to the official Amber Alert being issued. But, we have a Constitution which law enforcement must follow.

As “Reader” asked in Comment #163 and Mike answered in #164, each state does have their own guidelines of when to issue an Amber Alert. As many have agreed in this thread, Amber Alerts have done a lot of good, when issued per protocol.

Chief Snyder didn’t immediately issue an Amber Alert and actually some asked him to wait longer than he did. Instead he utilized what is apparently a new option in Utah, mobilizing the new Utah Attorney General’s Child Abduction Response Team (CART) to arrive. Through that office, efforts of local law enforcement (in this situation with the City of South Salt Lake and the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Department) as well as the FBI were coordinated. This is the first time, apparently, that CART has been utilized in searching for a missing child.

Some, as I think Crystal is suggesting, believe Amber Alerts are being issued too frequently. Some don’t, when the life of a child is at risk.

There is a fascinating Adobe attachment in the following article:

http://origin.sltrib.com/news/ci_8765468. It addresses all the Amber Alerts issued in UT since Elizabeth Smart and the success rate of recovering the child. I believe it is only 4 children who weren’t recovered alive, but haven’t looked at the graphic for a while, so I could be wrong.

As Crystal suggests, and this Adobe attachment also alludes too, several abductions were by family members. However, I think the questions become a little different in those cases and still support
issuing the Amber Alert.

Look at how quickly children abducted by other family members, or live ins were recovered. How can one say the outcome would have be as positive, if an Amber Alert hadn’t been issued? Is that abuse or over-use of Amber Alerts?

In my mind, an Amber Alert is alerting the public that a child is missing, and law enforcement needs help with all tips possible. Maybe I have failed to understand the concept of Amber Alerts.

Finally, I didn’t check the many links you provided Crystal. I commend you for providing published work for the points you want to make. However, many of us already know, via various jobs, about parental attempts at abducting a child.

Do you know one of the most difficult shifts to staff at a children’s hospital E.R. is? It’s not high volume trauma time or the never ending day. It is Sunday afternoon/evening. It is hard to staff, as talk about abuse, too many families have that emergency room visit preplanned, upon the advice of an attorney. Whether bruises or other physical findings were present or not, the attorney wanted photographs taken and official medical notes on the record so the physicians could later be called to court to testify in cases they really knew nothing about, beyond a one time E.R. exam.

There is a special name among the child protection and E.R. staff for these type of “emergencies.” However, it is best for me not to share it here. I’ve met very few in healthcare who entered their respective professions to be “used” by attorneys so their testimony and clinical notes could be used to alter custody arrangements, given the findings (or lack thereof) on one examination of the child.

I admit I haven’t seen all of Michael Moore’s Sicko, but have watched some and have listened to others who have watched it. I wonder if the cost of increasing health costs addressed the abuse of the E.R. by parents and attorneys, showing up for a child to be examined, who wasn’t sick?

I support Amber Alerts even in family abductions, as those family members need prosecuted quickly to send messages to others contemplating the same actions.

And from my POV, children are children. Regardless of who abducted them, I believe responsible, caring adults need to be involved in tipping off law enforcement or actually looking for the child. How else will the child ever learn to trust adults, when used as a pawn in some families?

Does anyone know how many Amber Alerts Idaho has issued, and the rate of recovery of those children?

Forgive them for they know not what they do

Why don’t we get back on the topic of this post which is the “Jessica Lunsford Act”. And the fact that our local judges continue to give sexual predators “slaps on the wrist” for sexual crimes & molestations committed against the children of SE Idaho?
Or perhaps at 180+ comments….this topic has pretty much burnt out and we’re just running in circles.

Wow, that is good information and I’m hoping that our law enforcement officials are looking into this program. I think you’re right, that an Amber Alert is not as quick nor is it really widespread. I personally only see them if I happen to watch the news or get an email from someone about it.

But my telephone or a voicemail would get to me quicker.

Thanks for the link.

It will be interesting to see what kind of time this low life will get for molesting kids for the past 29 years. http://www.localnews8.com/Global/story.asp?S=8149174
Unfortunately, they say the statute of limitations have run out on a number of cases involving this man.
They need to put this man away for life. I don’t see any type of rehabilitation helping this person. (castration perhaps?)

Trina,

In response to your comment #186, I’d encourage you to check Bill O’Reilly’s website. My understanding is Idaho is only one of 4 states in the U.S. (MT and WY being 2 of the others) who have NOT progressed with Jessica’s Law.

Any good search engine with Bill O’Reilly, Jessica’s Law and ID will get you where you need to review for your class.

Let us know what you find. Let us know if there are any new strategies for influencing Gov. Otter. You may be surprised general web info, from other Idaho residents who are concerned.

Good luck in your search and possibly solution to getting Gov. Otter to listen to adults trying to protect Idaho children.

I agree. I have long advocated civil commitment for sexual predators of children. Most would agree (see, for example, Wesley Alan Dodd, molester/murderer of small boys in Washington State, who stated, before his execution, that he would certainly rape more children if ever set free) that if released, their “urges” will occur again.

In other types of cases (murder, for example), when someone is found “not guilty by reason of insanity” or “guilty but mentally ill”, they can be committed to a secure institution until they are no longer a danger to themselves or others in the GBMI cases, they are then sent to prison to serve their sentence). There was a state (Kansas?) several years ago, that was experimenting with such “civil commitments” but I don’t know what happened. I will try to research that.

Bottom line: what more of a “danger to others” is there than a predatory sexual offender?

Here comes the ACLU storm on my head. . . .

here is a link to a wikipedia discussion of the Kansas case I was talking about, as well as its subsequent history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_v._Crane

“A safe place to live out their lives”??? Are you kidding me Nemesis? Do you honestly believe he deserves that? I don’t personally. He took the innocence of numererous children over the span of 29 years, that we’re aware of that is. More often than not, people like this have been molesting children far longer, it just so happens they finally got caught and that’s the first victim they were able to tie him with 29 years ago. This scum does not deserve to “a safe place to live out his life”! I know you don’t like name calling on the site, but I call him a scum because no real “man” would do this to a child! It just sickens me to no end that somebody could do this to a child. He deserves to be put in general population where the other inmates despise pedophiles and child molestors. He need to experience what it feels like to have somebody bigger than him violate him in ways no person should ever be violated. I’m sorry, but I’m all about “an eye for an eye” when it comes to issues such as this. This person deserves no mercy and I can’t even believe the judge set his bail so low, let alone gave him bail at all! It’s an absolute outrage and like C67 said, the judicial system in this state needs to get it’s priorities straight and start protecting our children more. We need harsher sentencing and free counseling for the victims of these horiffic crimes.
I’m going to stop there for the time being because I’m getting too worked up too early in the morning.
I was just shocked to here you say this person “needs a safe place to live out his life”. In my opinion he lost that right when he decided to molest children for the past 3 decades!

Do the words “Cruel and unusual punishment” mean anything to you? It’s a constitutional right to NOT be subjected to this. I totally agree that these guys need to be put away for life, but safely.

TMI alert, don’t read further if you don’t want to know too much personal information about me.

I was molested for a period of time over several years as a child, by my dad and two of his friends (one married and one single). Nothing was done to them because it was never reported to the authorities, although after it was over I did tell my stepmother and she told the wife of one of the men. (Neither of the women left their husbands.)

That other married man (at least) continued to offend and was eventually arrested for things he did to another child 10 years later, and given 3 years of probation. HA! I was so mad. I knew he had to have other victims in between.

That crappy probation sentence was 25 years ago. I’m able to look back on it pretty calmly now. And, I can say, constitutionally, all prisoners deserve to be protected from those of us (or others) who would harm them.

Because of my history, I totally understand the disgust, the anger, the need to inflict harm on the perpetrator. If it were done to my child I’d be first in line to kill them outright. That’s where the rest of society needs to step in to stop me, and let the law prevail rather than my personal need to take an eye for an eye.

Thanks for letting me speak my piece!

Right, I agree that he needs to be put away forever. (Libertarians are against the death penalty.) But regardless of what he did, he is entitled to his constitutional rights of protection from others while serving his time, otherwise it’s cruel and unusual punishment.

Laws such as Jessica’s Law help our society get these perpetrators off the streets. We really need to have something stronger in Idaho.

I disagree that it’s a liberal viewpoint to protect the constitutional rights of people even after they commit a crime. I think it’s a patriotic viewpoint. I believe in the Constitution.

Thanks for your kind words, El Diablo, but it’s ancient history to me now. I bring it up just to point out that I understand what it’s like to be on the other end of this, so if folks think I’m kinda easy on the perps by saying they should be safely put away for life, they should know I’ve got a history.

I agree there are no easy solutions. I also know that studies show the child typically still loves the parent and is horribly conflicted, sometimes to the point of recanting.

I can tell you that I high-tailed it away from home as soon as I could get out of there. My parents left Idaho and went back to Kentucky after I got married in 1976, and I saw my dad one final time over the Christmas holidays in 1977. I spoke to him by phone only 3-4 times in the next 25 years before he passed away. We never ever discussed it. He became a Pentecostal preacher there, and I was told that he ‘confessed’ to his congregation in the early 80s, and they ‘forgave’ him. That made me incredibly bitter, I remember.

I am still ambivalent about whether I should have tried to establish a good relationship with him as an adult. My daughters never met him, and I apologized to them when they were adults, but they both said they understood. I didn’t go to his funeral, but I did feel bad enough to take one day off to mourn (probably just feeling sorry for myself more than anything.)

If my dad had been arrested, I don’t know how I would have reacted. I’m trying to be honest about it, and I guess that even though I knew that what he did was wrong, and that I was innocent, I probably would have felt very very guilty about turning him in. I have no idea what kind of sentence I would have wanted. Is the child better off with the parent in jail? If it makes them safe, absolutely. Beyond that, it’s really hard to know, and you make a great point about trying to decide what to do in those situations.

Whew! How strange to be discussing this so dispassionately! But don’t feel sorry for me, it’s over and done. What we need to do now is work towards helping the children of today and tomorrow to not be in danger from repeat offenders. Jessica’s Law would help.

I agree. It takes a big person to come out and talk about something like that and I have to give you props for having the courage to speak out. Thanks for sharing your experience with us, it couldn’t have been easy to talk about. It’s hard for any of us to “say” what we would have done in that situation and being a family member like that had to make it all the more difficult. O4N is exactly right in saying that many people choose to be “the victim” and take the “whoa is me” route, and others choose to put it behind them and move on with their lives. It’s nice to see that you’ve chosen the latter.
Thanks again for sharing.

Thanks, CR67. As I said, it’s over with now. I had a hard time of it in my 20s, but after a while, I just decided it wasn’t going to define me.

So, I moved past it, for the most part. I know it can be done.

Gosh, that’s so true! It’s almost 100% opinions, very few facts, and we second guess everyone based upon our mental models mixed in with what we have been told.

It’s not like it’s journalism, it’s tabloid mentality! And I’ve prided myself for years to be above that, only to just now realize that I’m thick as thieves with the very sleazy ooze I make fun of all the time!

Oh, the humility. I HATE it when I realize I’m no better than anyone else, after all! (But I love it when I have epiphanies like this one…)

Thanks again, CR67, for bringing me closer to the light. hee hee.

Ditto to all. . . especially ditto to those comments praisig Nemesis for her honesty.

My daughter has been molested. I have been told that he will get a six month rider, if we are lucky, even though he is being charged with a class A felony that carries up to a life sentence. Most likely he will serve a little local jail time, some probation and have to register. I am trying to get more justice for my daughter and I don’t know how. If anyone out there can help please let me know. Thank you.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,558160,00.html

Gotta love the Fox Headline re: Jessica Lunsford case.
Pretty young to die of natural causes, at least taxpayers in Florida don’t have to foot his bill anymore.