home

Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law

A really bad law will go into effect in Georgia on July 1. It prohibits anyone on the sex offender registry from living within 1,000 feet of any one of the hundreds of thousands of Georgia's school bus stops. (Text of law is here, in pdf.) As a result of this law, people will be forced from their homes and unable to live in urban and suburban areas.

The Southern Center for Human Rights filed a lawsuit on behalf of 8 offenders to block implementation of the law. Today, a Judge granted a preliminary injunction as to those 8 plaintiffs.

The law does not distinguish between offenders with a 20 year old conviction for having had sex with an 16 year old when they were 18 and violent sexual predators. Here are a sampling of the crimes for which the 8 plaintiffs were convicted (from the Complaint, in pdf ):

From the complaint:

Wendy Whitaker.... is on the registry because, at age 17, she had a single consensual act of oral sex with a 15-year-old boy. For this one act, committed ten years ago, the now 26-year-old Ms. Whitaker and her husband have been forced from one home and now will likely be forced from another.

Plaintiff Joseph Linaweaver was 16 when he had a single consensual act of oral sex with a 14-year-old girl. For this act, Mr. Linaweaver is being driven from his home.

Plaintiff Janet Allison was convicted of being "party to a crime of statutory rape and child molestation" because she did not prevent her 15-year-old daughter from becoming sexually active. Due to this conviction, Ms. Allison and her family will have to leave their home.

In a nutshell, the problem with Georgia's law is :

Georgia does not differentiate between people convicted of violent sexual offenses, such as rape, and people who violated the law by having consensual sexual relations when they were teenagers with someone under the age of consent. Georgia treats everyone like the worst offender.

Georgia already has a law governing where people on the registry can live. See Ga. Code Ann. § 42-1-13 (2006) (prohibiting residency within 1,000 feet of schools, child care facilities, and areas where minors congregate, including parks, recreation facilities, skating rinks, neighborhood centers, gymnasiums, and similar facilities providing programs or services directed toward children). HB 1059, signed into law by the Governor on April 24, 2006, substantially revises § 42-1-13, turning the law from one tailored to keep offenders away from children into one that essentially drives every person on the registry from all urban areas and many rural areas.

The punishment for failure to comply with the Act's residency and working restrictions is a minimum of 10 years imprisonment and a maximum of 30 years imprisonment.

The law also prohibits anyone on the registry from working within 1,000 feet of a church, child care facility, or school. Thousands on the list will lose their jobs, as well as their homes.

This is just stupid. Not to mention unconstitutional. The lawsuit lists these constitutional violations:

a. The Act violates the Ex Post Facto Clause;
b. The Act violates the procedural component of the Due Process Clause;
c. The Act violates the substantive component of the Due Process Clause and the right to family privacy;
d. The Act violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000©© (2006);
e. The Act violates the Free Exercise Clause and the right to freedom of association;
f. The Act violates the Takings Clause;
g. The Act violates the right to interstate and intrastate travel;
h. The Act violates the Eighth Amendment by imposing cruel and unusual punishment and by impermissibly punishing Plaintiffs based upon their status.

On July 11, the Court will decide whether to extend the injunction to all 10,000 persons on the Georgia sex offender registry.

Here is some media coverage of the law, known as HB 1059.

< Ruffling Big Media's Feathers | Alito is Swing Vote in Kansas Death Penalty Law >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#1)
    by aw on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:35:29 AM EST
    This law is so unworkable their only purpose in passing it must be to drive everyone involved out of the state.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:43:37 AM EST
    Given the availability of GPS and all that, and the requirement in most states for a certified map to prove the distance (e.g., when possessing/selling-drugs-within-1000-feet-of-a-school is charged), it would be useful to enter into evidence at trial of this case maps detailing where, exactly, within the State of Georgia people with any eligible conviction would be able to reside. My guess - somewhere in a van down by the swamp; nowhere else.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:44:37 AM EST
    The 1,000 feet restrictions of HB 1059 prohibit people on the registry from living or loitering within 1,000 feet of any child care facility, church, school or "area where minors congregate," including all parks and recreation facilities, playgrounds, skating rinks, neighborhood centers, gymnasiums, swimming pools, and most problematically, school bus stops. People on the registry are also prohibited from working at or within 1,000 feet of a church, school or day care.
    The inclusion of churches in the list probably is the lynch pin that kills it. When you say convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences can't go to church, you have a serious free exercise issue. Hell, most prisons and jails are within 1000 feet of a church, and many parole offices and courts are within 1000 feet of a daycare of some kind.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#4)
    by scribe on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 12:18:38 PM EST
    After reading the complaint, I especially like the part that (A) no one seems to have an authoritative list of where school bus stops are, so no one knows for sure, and (B) the locations of bus stops change every year (maybe even more frequently), as kids move in and out of the districts. One can easily see some local Boss Hogg scheming over some real estate plan and having his nephew Cletus change the school bus stops (or just dig a swimmin' hole somewhere) to force someone to sell, lest they be imprisoned for thirty years. Small wonder 'murca's the laughingstock of the civilized world.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#5)
    by Johnny on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 12:55:30 PM EST
    Georgia is for a$$holes, plain and simple. If they really want to prevent future sex crimes, abolishing straight white males from having contact with children will do the trick. Simply disallow any breeding to occur on the part of straight, white males. Force them all to live 1000 feet from anything. Forcibly remove existing children from their homes. Georgia, home of Kennesaw, where gun ownership is mandatory! Combine that with the recent fear-mongering against pederasts, and there will soon be blood. Idiot state.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#6)
    by HK on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 02:13:50 PM EST
    This law is without a doubt unfair and unworkable. It is a complete waste of time and money. I don't think sex offenders registers are particularly useful to society. Furthermore, I have never quite understood the logic of having a registry for sex offenders but for no other types of crime. After all, why shouldn't muggers or drugs dealers be forbidden from being near vulnerable young people if those on the sex offenders register are? And shouldn't homeowners know if they are moving into a street where a burglar lives? What about a Domestic Violence Register that dating agencies could helpfully check for their clients? The truth is that the sex offenders register is a 'look, we're doing something!' measure that has extremely limited benefit to society and has been instigated as a knee-jerk reaction to the type of crimes that most people find abhorrant and incomprehensible. Like this law, it is not designed to be of any real use, just to appease the electorate.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 02:41:52 PM EST
    From David the unconvicted: It seems to me as if there is something very wrong with a system of justice that would label such people as in this complaint (against Georgia's new sex offender law re living near bus stops and churches) sex offenders for life or even, sex offenders at all. We have a few cases here of one underage minor having consensual sex with another underage minor, and now one of those parties is restricted for the rest of their lives in terms of where they can live? That seems a very heavy price to pay for imbibing some MTV rather than giving earnest heed to their local holiness church that would have told them not to have oral sex with their friend at school! In fact, several of the cases were of oral sex, and the person was convicted of sodomy. Another case is of a fellow who inappropriately touched an adult female college student while he was inebriated at a party. He was convicted of 1st degree "sexual abuse." My, oh my! A mom was convicted because her daughter had sex and got pregnant and the mom didn't do enough to stop it. Are these the kinds of things that should make someone marked as a sex offender for life or even for a day? This kind of justice, I believe, really highlights the need for fully informed juries. A jury should have and constitutionally does have the right to judge the law, and to refuse to convict, if and when the law is bad or being wrongly applied. Of course, states have generally hidden this right and required jurors to take an oath to apply the law as the judge explains it to them, with the result that many juries convict people for such flimsy and meaningless "crimes." And, fully informed juries ought to be informed also of the likely penalty or penalties to be imposed. Those who are not familiar with fully informed juries, please learn about the trial of William Penn in 1670. And as for the adult woman who was "inappropriately touched," wouldn't a slap in the face of the drunk guy be a better response than to insist on bringing criminal charges that have this effect on a man for the rest of his life? Are your breasts or butt so sacred that this temporary error on the fellow's part provokes this response? I believe in the law and I believe in bringing charges for murder, theft, rape etc. You bring charges for "inappropriate touching" at a party where alcohol is served? Did you or the DA ever think of forgiveness?

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 02:43:02 PM EST
    In its original intent, offender registries weren't a terrible idea. It's been in the execution. As originally conceived, they would be only for the worst of the worst...repeat offenders. However, judges now feel compelled to put every person who commits any type of sex offense on it...including the ones where people under 18 are involved like noted above. This means the registries are now so large, they are essentially useless. I can go to the FDLE site, enter my zip code (and I'm in a reasonable upscale area), and something over 800 people come up. Now how could I possibly do anything reasonable to protect my children with that information? The size of the database also makes it next to impossible for law enforcement to actually enforce...Let's concentrate on the very worst offenders. Just another feel-good waste of time.

    The law does not distinguish between offenders with a 20 year old conviction for having had sex with an 16 year old when they were 18 and violent sexual predators.
    Are you sure about this? In Georgia, at least according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, sex offenders released prior to 1996 (10 years ago) are NOT required to register, and neither are 18 year-olds shacking up with 16 year olds...
    The following offenders are required to register:
    Offenders placed on probation, parole, supervised release or released from prison after July 1, 1996, for one or more of the following offenses:
    [snip] and
    O.C.G.A. § 16-6-3 Statutory Rape (unless the age of the perpetrator is 18 years of age or younger)


    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#10)
    by BigTex on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 03:22:42 PM EST
    From a practical matter why aren't people making this an issue in local races and using this to change the system from within? Maybe a majority likes the idea, but if so it is a nontraditional majority. There are plenty of silent conservatives who do not like this idea. The question is why haven't groups formed to give political cover to allow all those who oppose the current laws to band together. Sure both sides will have to swallow some arguments they do not like, or perhaps even agree with, but in the end coming together to make incrimental but steady changes, allowing both sides to debate with those they usually side with, and making this an election issue, will make this an open debate. From there let the chips fall where they may.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 04:40:18 PM EST
    Are you sure about this?
    You obviously failed to read the complaint. If you had, you would have seen this:
    Wendy Whitaker.... is on the registry because, at age 17, she had a single consensual act of oral sex with a 15-year-old boy. For this one act, committed ten years ago, the now 26-year-old Ms. Whitaker and her husband have been forced from one home and now will likely be forced from another.
    This happens to also be in TL's original post.

    macro, Wendy was convicted of oral sex, ie., "sodomy," on a minor, she did not "have sex" with a minor per TL's quote. While you may not agree, Georgia finds the two acts quite separate and distinct. Had she merely "had sex" she would not have had to register, according to the laws of the State of Georgia.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 05:38:05 PM EST
    Wendy was convicted of oral sex, ie., "sodomy," on a minor, she did not "have sex" with a minor per TL's quote. While you may not agree, Georgia finds the two acts quite separate and distinct. Had she merely "had sex" she would not have had to register, according to the laws of the State of Georgia.
    Your response is risible at best. Honestly, you are grasping at straws here.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 08:09:08 PM EST
    I'll guarantee Georgia will still have sex offenses, and a lot of undeserving people will get screwed. Some remedy.

    macro, There's nothing left to say to you.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#16)
    by Johnny on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 04:20:02 AM EST
    While you may not agree, Georgia finds the two acts quite separate and distinct.
    Tell that to the wrong-wingers when Clinton was president..

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 06:11:32 AM EST
    From a practical matter why aren't people making this an issue in local races and using this to change the system from within? You can't change the system in Georgia. The political candidacy rules are so archaic that an Independent can't even run. Even traditional party candidates have a tough time. Which is why 70% of Georgia's candidates are running unopposed this fall. And letting localalities decide what restrictions they want is a disaster. One has only to look at Florida to see what happens when cities and counties start palying one-up. Bottom line is there shouldn't be a restriction on where people live unless that restriction applies to all persons. The Georgia Constitution says so.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 08:35:37 AM EST
    This is an obvious case where serious revolt is needed. The people unjustly effected by this should arm themselves to the hilt, buy plenty of ammo and take stand. This crap has to stop. Resist by any means necessary. How dead Georgia cops will it take for them to realize this is wrong.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 08:50:38 AM EST
    I don't know what to call it...but it sure ain't freedom.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 11:29:04 AM EST
    Just curious. How many abductions have happened at school bus stops in the past 10 years?

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#21)
    by BigTex on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 01:19:55 PM EST
    Just curious. How many abductions have happened at school bus stops in the past 10 years?
    We've had a rash of attempted abdcutions at bus stops this year. Not that is justifies a stupid law like this, but it is a problem.

    Googling "child abduction bus stop" turns up several cases, some tragic. Certainly doesn't sound very commonplace though.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#23)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 02:32:20 PM EST
    thanks BT thanks SUO - I was wondering if it was a response to one incident or several. The next question of course would be did the offenders "live" 1000 feet from the bus stop or were they cruising around looking for a bus stop? It would seem to me that they would want to go to another area to abduct as the first place a cop is going to go would be the homes of the closest registered offenders, no? As long as you have bus stops, and you have sex offenders, no matter how close they live to them, they will still use it as a place to solicit victims no?

    Good points Jl.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#25)
    by BigTex on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 05:20:27 PM EST
    The next question of course would be did the offenders "live" 1000 feet from the bus stop or were they cruising around looking for a bus stop? It would seem to me that they would want to go to another area to abduct as the first place a cop is going to go would be the homes of the closest registered offenders, no?
    You are exactly right. In the cases here it was people driving out to the burbs to try to abduct there because the police weren't as used to working this type of case, and looked for the offenders of closest proximity 1st, though quickly ascertained that was not the case. This law is a symptom of the overall redicliousness and hysteria that the country has with sex offenders. They need treatment, and failing that a civil committment, so they can be released when rehabbed, if they continue to pose a threat to society. Those who pose on threat need to stop being branded with a scarlet P. But this gets back to the earlier question. Why aren't liberals starting groups who oppose these inane laws and welcoming conservatives who share the same thought to the groups? All it takes is getting the issue out in the open and forcing debate to make the issue come to what would likely be a favorable conclusion to our side. Those who are sex offender crazed operate off of emotion, not off of facts. In a debate we would squish the opposition.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 08:19:07 PM EST
    It is an election year in Georgia and even the most otherwise liberal politicians voted for it. No one wants to be labeled as pro sex offender. The law is being use to test the limits of banishment and ex post facto. (The US Supreme Court using twisted logic stated that being required to register at any time AFTER sentence completion was NOT punishment). "Sex offender" colors any argument for "sex offender" rights. Tennessee has a meth registry and the GA governor wants one. They will definitely come up with other registries in the "interest of public safety" which will include their attendant liberty restrictions. (I would like to see a car theft or theft by receiving registry). The stated purpose of the law is to move ALL sex offenders out of Georgia. Most of the "rural" law enforcement officials are often quoted as saying that they don't care if these people are 'inconvenienced'. How is being forced out of your home (and possibly work) and being given extremely limited choices (entire metro counties are off-limits) an 'inconvenience?' And they also tout the bogus, "protect the children of Georgia" argument. The GA legislature provided funding for 1000 pre-k slots and 4300 prison slots. ). If GA cares about it's the kids as they say, I'm sure the GA legislature could spend the money on the kids instead of the enforcement of a 'feel good' law. Georgia didn't stop with just SO noncompliance. 10 to 30 years. Any (vaguely defined) assistance in noncompliance gets 5 to 20 years. Georgia politicians just don't understand Math. (GA has 50th highest drop out rate). It costs 19,000 dollars a year to house in inmate in GA. 10 year x 19,000 dollars = 190,000 dollars to 30 x 19,000 dollars = 570,000 dollars. (This doesn't include cost of Prosecution, inflation and ongoing medical care). If the SO wife "claimed" she doesn't know where Chester (the Molester) is she gets 5 to 20 for harboring. (Another part of the new law). Add wife $95,000. The crime is noncompliance and not repeat sex offending. Now there will be SO families going to prison and children of SO's going to foster care and the government will divvy up their stuff just for noncompliance. No doubt bus stops will get wheels. This seems fascist.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 30, 2006 at 04:21:19 PM EST
    The problem is that everyone that actualy reads this page is using common sense and understands the problem. While you are asking extremly logical, pertitnant questions, the answer is simply " They are Sex Offenders, we should lock all of them up forever". This is political as more than 80% of sex offenses are from someone known to the victim. The myth of "Stranger Danger" accounts for a very small percentage of cases. The actual statistics of reoffenders is less that 3% for re-offending by a sexual crime. ( its about 11% for all crimes, including probation violation ) While I agree, keep the LEVEL 3 sex offenders under careful watch, The level 2's should have some restrictions, the level ones, such as consentual but underage sex acts, public uriniation, indecent exposure ( mooning ) are all considered level 1 sex offenders. These people do not deserve to be branded for life and subjected to restrictions once their debt to society has been paid as ordered by the court. The new GA law does make ALL sex offenders register for life, which makes them follow the silly rules like living 1000 ft from a community pool. There is absolutely NO evidence regarding the proximity of a residence to a re-offense. Good luck to us all, our freedoms are being eroded one by one.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 06:45:12 PM EST
    I REALLY THINK IT'S A SHAME THAT A SEX OFFENDER HAS TO BE LISTED LIKE THE WORST OFFENDER.WHY NOT HAVE IT LISTED IN LEVELS? YOU NEED TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SOME ONE WHO RAPES, KIDNAPS, AND MURDERS CHILDREN. THEIRS A BIG DIFFERENTS HERE.WITH SOME ONE WHO HAS CONSENSUAL SEX BECAUSE OF A AGE DIFFERENTS.PLEASE WE NEED TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THESE OFFENDERS.JUST REMEMEMBER BACK WHEN OUR GRANDFATHERS AND GREATGRAND FATHERS LIVED IT WAS NOTHING FOR THEM TO MARRY SOMEONE THAT WAS 14 AND UP AND SOMETIMES MOST OF THEM WERE IN THERE 20'S ARE 30.WERE THEY LISTED AS SEX OFFENDERS? NO. THEY WERE MEN AND WOMEN JUST LIKE WE ARE TODAY.THEY DIDN'T CONSIDER IT A CRIME.SOME SAY LAWS HAVE CHANGED, BUT THE CONSTITUTION HASN'T.THERE SHOULD BE A LAW FOR THOSE WHO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION THAT OUR GREATGRANDFATHERS WROTE.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 03, 2006 at 07:22:11 AM EST
    It's encouraging to see that there are people out there who are willing to think, instead of just having the knee-jerk reaction to "lock them up and throw away the key." At some point it would seem that the other states would take issue with Georgia's position; why should GA's failure to deal with its problem in a meaningful way become the problem of another state? Why should New York, Wisconsin, or any other state have to accept Georgia's sex offenders? I'm tempted to suggest that all of us who live outside of Georgia should write to our elected officials in opposition to allowing Georgia's sex offenders to relocate to our state. But based on the definitions of sex offenders in GA, many of them would do better in another state. It seems like they should leave, whenever possible, for their own sake. For now, I guess I'm happy that the preliminary injunction was passed, but now it remains to be seen where it goes from here.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 25, 2006 at 04:28:45 PM EST
    Judge Drops Ban Blocking Georgia Sex Offender Law Offenders could be forced to move, but not right away The judge has lifted the preliminary injunction.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 07:07:03 PM EST
    Rep. Keen's HB1059 had a single intent, to drive sex offenders from Georgia. In his January 2006, statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding HB1059, he said; "We want those people running away from Georgia... If it becomes too onerous and inconvenient, they just may want to live somewhere else. And I don't care where, just as long as it is not in Georgia... they will in many cases have to move to another state." On July 13, 2006, Rep. Keen told the Fulton County Daily Report, "Legislators were not concerned if the law [HB1059] would turn sex offenders into nomads and force them out of Georgia." This shows clear intent to deny due process protection to the wives, children, parents, and siblings of Georgia's offenders and former offenders. H.B.1059 will cause the largest FORCED RELOCATION since World War II. There are about 2,280, low or medium risk registrants in the ten county Atlanta metro area. If we add in the spouses, children, parents, and siblings, we are talking about 7,661 individuals this law will affect. Approximately 5,381 are innocent family members. Does no one care about these innocent family members? Evidently, Mr. Keen does not. At the end of the day, Keen's HB1059 goes a long way toward creating an entire group of disenfranchised or second-class citizens in Georgia. The legislators who voted for HB1059 failed to abide by their oath of office, to defend the Constitutions of the United States and Georgia, an obvious abuse of political power.

    Re: Federal Judge Blocks GA. Sex Offender Law (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Aug 22, 2006 at 07:04:11 PM EST
    The exact same laws apply, in Florida, where I live with my husband and 3 children. 9 years ago, my husband (whom was just my best FRIEND, at the time) was 19, was dating a girl whom LOOKED to be (at LEAST) 21 or 22 years old, carried an altered i.d. (it was still possible, back then, as the cards were still laminated) ended up telling him she was pregnant and confessed her true age (later on to find out, once it was too late) that she wasn't pregnant, but my (now husband) went to his father who turned him in (only to protect HIMSELF, due to his high county position, NOT out of spite), the girl's PARENTS didn't press charges, but the state of FLORIDA did. My husband WAS able to receive a lighter sentence of probation, but (out of fear, at his young age) he "ran" and was picked up on violation of probation; when this sentence was original (when he was given probation) he was charged as an "unlawful minor", but when he was arrested on vop, THEN he was convicted as a sex offender (although STILL charged as a youth). Now, I agree that he should not have violated PROBATION, but the FACT of the matter, is that if he was not convicted as a "sex offender", ORIGINALLY, then he should not have been arrested and convicted of a "sex offence" at the time of the VOP, EITHER, but merely as a youthful offender violating say, "contributing to the delinquency of a minor", or something of THAT sort. Needless to say, in the 5 years that he and I have been together, it has been HELL, but I love him DEARLY, and he has NEVER gotten into trouble with the law, either BEFORE or SINCE, for the same offence. My children have gotten into fights, over trying to "defend" or "protect" their dad. My husband cannot attend any school events, and since we are reborn Christians, we are involved a GREAT deal with the church, but my youngest son's school just happens to be IN one of the churches we attend, and due to Florida's laws, regarding registered sex offenders, my husband cannot even attend worship service, now that the Sr. Pastor has discovered his situation (just as father, out of ACCOUNTABILITY, not spite). As mentioned in other posts, here, the law does NOT differentiate between an older man, molesting a young child, and a young adult having a sexual RELATIONSHIP with a consensual TEENAGER. My MOTHER was only 15, when she married my father, and he was 32!!-- back in the "DAY" a 14 or 15 year old girl was considered an "old maid" if she WASN'T yet married, having children. NOW they call these SAME girls that we ALL have seen on numerous TALK shows "victims" when they are 12 years old, wearing 10 lbs. of makeup, VERY {physically} developed, wearing next to NO clothes, sleeping with SO MANY GUYS that they don't know who they're "baby's daddy" is, and roaming the STREETS until ALL hours of the night, not in school-- (you've seen them-- we ALL have) then these poor young men who fall into to their TRAPS, because they THEMSELVES are young (remember ALSO, it's ALWAYS been known that girls mature FASTER than boys) and then are LABELED basically as HORRIBLE MONSTERS, for the REST of their lives, their FAMILIES suffer, for the rest of their lives, their wives, their children; it's an endless "domino effect" of torture and cruelty. I've seen ONE web site which the administrator is calling my husband nasty names and saying "he's been released from custody, no doubt to find MORE victims..." and it "warns" people to "keep children in, after dark", from him. It's sickening. I personally know 3 OTHER young men in the SAME situation. As a matter of FACT, ONE of those men is ENGAGED to the girl, and has a 3 yr. old DAUGHTER WITH HER!!! Yes, I agree COMPLETELY, that REAL sex criminals (both men AND women) whom have FORCED a person (man, woman OR child) into engaging in any sort of sexual activities should, most DEFFINITLY be in the category of "sex offender". The MOST disgusting thing (get THIS)-- remember, I said that this girl (by the way, she was 14 at the time) ADMITTED she had lied about her age, but WILLINGLY slept with him?-- my 2 little boys, at ages 7 and 10 (before my husband and I become romantically involved) were actually MOLESTED, by my EX-HUSBAND (not their father, thank GOD. . .) and EVEN though they BOTH told the SAME stories to social services, the counselors, the police and DOCTERS, at SEPARATE occasions, the judge through the case OUT of court, because (as HE said) there was "not enough EVIDENCE"----and he is a FREE man, with NO restrictions on where he may live, or BE, yet my HUSBAND is suffering, for a stupid sexual RELATIONSHIP he had, with a GIRL, whom WILLINGLY "laid down" for him, because of a crush she had on him, while HE, TOO, was at a VERY young age? This is the way things are, ALL across the country, {sickly} when it comes to the "sex offender" laws. This is very comparable to someone at the age of 10 stealing a pack of chewing gum, and being treated as though they robbed a bank, as an ADULT (same principle). It's SICK, and TWISTED and SOMETHING has to be DONE about it. . .

    HB 1059 (none / 0) (#33)
    by hopple2304 on Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 09:39:19 PM EST
    Georgia's sex offender laws are insane. I was reading my husband's arrest record the other day. He was almost 19 years old when he was sent to prison in 1990 for aggrevated sexual battery against his sister. The record states his sister was 5 years old at the time. That is an untrue statement. She was 5 years old in April of 1986 when he was initially caught...meaning he was 14...his birthday wasn't until November of that year. So he was still a minor. I think the state just wanted to make an example of him...because the judge sentenced him to a mandatory 3 year psychiatric evaluation...his sister, now 26 years old...is trying to do everything in her power to try and get his conviction overturned...because of the fact that he was a minor...the state never looked at the FACTS...as I said...they just wanted to make an example of him. Anytime you hear someone say they don't send kids to prison...bs...my husband spent 15 years in Georgia's prison system for a trumped up charge...so that was a total of 18 years out of society...and now we live in a roach infested rundown motel and we have a baby due in September...I sent my 5 year old son to live with my parents because of this law...

    April in Augusta