“And more than 96 percent of defendants charged with a sexual offense in 2016 had no criminal history of sexual violence.”
This statement makes the assumption that the word “offense” means “violence” when it involves sex…”
Great point. And we see that so often in the media.
A particular example I mentioned on a previous post regarding Bill Cosby’s recent case, in my view, illustrates it even further. I’m no defending Cosby’s crimes for which he’s been convicted. He was convicted by a jury, and punishment is in order. I’m not disputing that.
However, a “State assessment board” has recommended to the court he be placed on the registry for life, and further be classified as a “Sexually Violent Predator”. I find his case particular interesting; in that the government has so often stated the registry is not punitive but simply a public protection tool.
So…classifying an 81 year old blind man that can barely walk NOW as “A Sexually Violent Predator” and requiring him to register for life protects the public how? Whether you support Cosby or not, seems we could all agree he’s relatively harmless now, and that this is clearly a punitive measure. What other pupose could it serve?
Truth is I’m no Cosby fan. But, I’m pretty certain his days of being a violent sexual predator have since passed; being labeled one now and requiring he register is clearly only a punitive excessive measure in my view.
Should Cosby receive punishment for his jury conviction? Yes, in my oppinion. But, does any citizen out there really feel “protected” because an 81 year old blind man’s ( who is virtually imobile now) picture is posted on the public web with the caption “Sexually Violent Predator “. At this point. I think the most anyone in the public could easily fend off this “Violent Predator” with a fly swatter…
It will be interesting to see if a judge is willing to apply some logic in Cosby’s case