[Robin Vander WallAdmin]

By Robin . . . In a significant victory for registered citizens in Florida who have been hounded by the ever-increasing reach of residency restriction
[See the full post at: Florida: Significant ex post facto victory in Ft. Lauderdale case]

[emma]

God is Awesome! We are all human beings.

[WC_TN]

This is a wonderful victory for registered citizens in Florida. It seems the courts are our only resort. Thank God there are some judges of honorable character who are not afraid to call things like they are.

In my opinion, the next thing that needs to be attacked is the fact that individual municipalities are able to set their own residency & presence restrictions. The state needs to set one fixed standard and leave it at that. When each municipality can set their own statutes, it becomes one-upmanship on who will pass the harshest restrictions to stop offenders who are legislated out of one municipality from moving into another with less stringent restrictions.

What I predicted is finally happening. These sex offender regimes are starting to collapse under the weight of their own punitive nature. Let the legislators keep heaping on the restrictions. They are too stupid and short-sighted to see that they’re actually spelling doom for the very laws they rubber stamp every legislative session. The more restrictive they become, the harder it gets for them to maintain a “non-punitive” intent.

[Debi B]

Is there any hope for dissolving the sex stings? People are obviously set up on these and are turned into criminals then required to register. Men who have never committed a crime in their life, who would never molest children. What is being done to help them?

[Hank]

Well said.

[D]

It is no wounder after a federal court found it to be punishment naturally the lower courts are supposed to follow the lead. My question is if it is punishment then why is the registry not be abolished since an additional punishment is double jeopardy.

[misdemeanor offender]

D:

Double jeopardy is an interesting path. However, for double jeopardy to work, there must be a trial. Because sex offender laws are created by Ex Post Facto methods it would be very difficult to perhaps argue that viewpoint. However, I do understand where you are coming from because it does serve some validity that additional punishments or requirements are handed out long after the judicial trial phase.

I would suggest the best path is to argue Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I have been a long advocate of registered offenders to seek legal advice under the Rational Base test because it allows the individual to file a complaint. Under that legal test, the law must have a legitimate interest. Naturally, the state will seek the interest of public safety. The next step is that there should be a rational connection between the law means and goal. The state again would seek that additional sex offender laws reduce recidivism. Please keep in mind that I am not an attorney and not providing legal advice. I am only voicing a conversation and opinion.

The best way to remedy silly and fear-based registry laws is to use the data against the state. There are plenty of scholarly and impartial articles that demonstrate sex offender laws do more harm than good. The real issue is money is that most sex offenders are either banished from fair accessibility by specific requirements to keep them out of legislative buildings, public libraries seeking research, universities that insist that sex offenders pose a risk on campus, churches, among just a growing list of off-limits areas. It is time for the courts to be shown this data; which is non-existent. Judges need to be shown proof by impartial and convincing evidence.

[Debi B]

What is being done about the sex sting operations? They only turn innocent men into criminals, men with no prior record and men who have no intent of molesting.

[FredAdmin]

Hello Debi,
We have a conference call next week to discuss the issue of internet sex stings. I hope you will be able to join us.

Can they do that?

[Bill]

The wisdom of Solomon shines forth. Unfortunately, she will probably be voted out next term.

[Interested Bystander]

“3) no rational basis for restricting registrants from residing at night within 1,400 feet of facilities that are only populated by children during a portion of daylight.”

Finally a judge that gets that! Residency laws only block where one sleeps at night. So stupid.

[misdemeanor offender]

Agreed.

I am still trying to understand the rationale of why an offender cannot live near a school or daycare? What is the coalition between a school after 6 PM and an offender sleeping in his/her home during normal bedtime hours? There is nothing that indicates a threat to children or anyone for that matter? It seems rather silly and not thought out.

[Abolish Registries]

Registry has destroyed my life. It’s ex post facto implementation after 2 decades of rebuilding my life has been devastating. Now it is finally being called punishment…it is torture. I will be paid damages or I will seek revenge for the violations done unto me my family my friends. If it’s an eye for an eye then there must be some pain for those whom have inflicted this upon those whom already paid the debt.

[Anthony]

That is right take down all the residency restrictions in which a sex based offense has nothing to do with proximity or protect children. It is all punitive!

[NH Registrant]

Residency restrictions are ridiculous. If someone is determined to re-offend, they will travel miles to get to their victim(s). But, less than 5% of all registered citizens ever re-offend!

[JEV]

For most that are not Lawyers you need to turn this Legalize mumble jumbo into language we humans can understand?

[Robin Vander WallAdmin]

Did the best I could do. I am sorry it doesn’t meet your expectations. But thanks for the criticism.

[Author]

Posts