Tim in WI
Thank you for insisting the misuse of the government database known as a sex offender registry be enforced by state’s DA. Exploitation comes in many forms.
A considerable amount of power rests in the prosecution ‘s lap given a scenario whereby “enforcement” or “not” for the misuse charge reflects a certain truth of self evidence.
In case 1: where Fairbanks remains uncharged- benefit to database existence remains as contrary efficacy evidence is omitted from the record.
In case 2: where Fairbanks is indicted- benefit to the database remaining- via disclaimer conviction + enforcement as apparent (yet unprovable) validation of benevolence in the public broadcast of the disclaimer itself as part of the registry.
Congressional underlying intent gets to import good faith from obvious malfeasance in broadcast. There would be no need for a disclaimer if Congress was ignorant of potential negative outcome in deliberation of bills.
What I’ve described here rests not on whether Mr. Fairbanks is convicted or not; It is the relative disposition that counts. This is precisely how the true nature of the electronic infrastructure is misunderstood and vastly underestimated by the people with respect to corrosive use. Either way liberty suffers infringement via the inherent abridging of traditional notions of sovereignty built into the database infrastructure itself.
Conveniently ATTORNEYS GENERAL come out roses either way.