Reply To: Restore sex offenders? No, policy makers prefer them dangerous

#8907
Avatar
Where is Hamilton Berger when you need him?

Most parents are only parenting the way they were taught to parent (or whatever website they refer to for parenting info). Not condoning that because only some of it carries forward in time with applicability while other times there are more modern ways to parent. They also are projecting their own life instances and fears (as noted here) onto others which does absolutely no good because it is usually counterproductive in modern times.

This was a DA making a name for themselves obviously. If you refer to the CT age of consent law and how it can be applied, this was a misapplication of law. There are several websites that come up when CT age of consent is entered via a search engine, but it seems 16 is the age with a 2-3 yr age difference allowed, e.g. 16 and 14 is approved – http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/connecticut-age-of-consent-lawyers.html

The key factor here should have been the alcohol, not the sex, and where did it come from, etc. Using it as a tool is what lead to this most likely. Had there been no alcohol, this probably would have been a non-starter due to CT law. This guy ought to look an appeal, if possible, this conviction with the sex grounds being tossed for inapplicability.

As for the YMCA, all about the insurance, their good name and nothing more. It is ok to toss one man aside for the greater good – so Christian of them in the name of the good book.

As for the registry knock – yes, same song different day – it needs to go.