Letter published in Psychology Today

[_Lemmie]

Note that he was a 35 year old teacher and the girl was his 14 year old student when the girl's parents called the police. He plrd guilty to a misdemeanor and his sentence of community service also included a 10 year stint on the Sex Offender Registry.

There is no way a 35 year old teacher would only get a misdemeanor for sex with a 14 year old. It's inconsistent with everything I am reading in The War on Sex Book.

Read the news report.

We can all agree it was immoral, but does the guy really deserve a lifetime of severe punishment?

he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, served no jail time as far as i can tell, and got 10 years on the Registry. That is not "a lifetime of severe punishment," especially for a 35 year old teacher who had sex with his 14 year old student.

[_DoubtingThomas]

You can thank Justice Kennedy as the main culprit here, as he authored an opinion justifying treating sex offenders unlike other people convicted of crimes on the basis of their supposedly astronomical recidivism rate. The empirical claim he made was false. His source was a Psych Today article written by a counselor who, as best anyone can tell, made the number up:

I thought the Supreme Court didn't make laws. Can you please explain EAllusion?

[_DoubtingThomas]

Read the news report.

I have to do research. The US is no Norway, Germany, or Denmark, according to the War on Sex Book the U.S. penalties are getting harsher and harsher. It is possible the Chicago Tribune story has some inaccurate details.

Look at Tad Cummins, he is getting a minimum of 10 years in prison and a life-time as an sex offender, a minimum of 10 years if no evidence of rape or kidnapping is found.

he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, served no jail time as far as i can tell, and got 10 years on the Registry. That is not "a lifetime of severe punishment," especially for a 35 year old teacher who had sex with his 14 year old student.

But for now I am going to assume the report is completely accurate. If I were the judge I would have given him at least some months in prison (assuming she was really 14), but not require him to register as an offender. In my view sex offender registry should only be for dangerous predators, "the police complain that having so many petty sex offenders on registries makes it hard to keep track of the truly dangerous ones".

[_EAllusion]

You can thank Justice Kennedy as the main culprit here, as he authored an opinion justifying treating sex offenders unlike other people convicted of crimes on the basis of their supposedly astronomical recidivism rate. The empirical claim he made was false. His source was a Psych Today article written by a counselor who, as best anyone can tell, made the number up:

I thought the Supreme Court didn't make laws. Can you please explain EAllusion?

They don't. They interpret them. There are Constitutional limits on the types of punishments criminals can receive. Specifically, the Constitution forbids ex post facto punishments, where a person receives a punishment for a crime that was passed after they committed the crime. In other words, it's unconstitutional to punish you today for something you did yesterday that was legal for you to do yesterday. All sorts of retroactive limitations required by sex offender registries that not did exist when they committed their offenses looks an awful lot like an ex post facto punishment.

An appeals court found that a sex-offender registry law in Alaska was unconstitutional because of it violated the ex post facto clause. This was overturned in the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision with Ginsburg, Stevens, and Breyer dissenting. The majority logic contended that being on a sex-offender registry isn't punitive (hold your laughter until the end) and provides a important civil function by disseminating information to the public about people highly likely to commit crimes.

As such, a part of the majority opinion authored by Kennedy upholding sex-offender registry limitations relies on arguing that recidivism rates for sex offenders are high. The problem is that Kennedy got his number from a 1986 pop-article written in Psychology Today that was simply made up by a counselor as best anyone can tell. More accurately, he got that number from an earlier opinion he wrote on a related matter where he first relied on that source. The number isn't even remotely accurate. He supported his argument with junk science. The rest of the opinion relies on the nuances of legal tests for determining when a legitimate civil purpose constitutes a punishment if you care to read the opinion yourself.

[_Ceeboo]

he pled guilty to a misdemeanor, served no jail time as far as i can tell, and got 10 years on the Registry. That is not "a lifetime of severe punishment," especially for a 35 year old teacher who had sex with his 14 year old student.

but not require him to register as an offender. In my view sex offender registry should only be for dangerous predators

[_EAllusion]

A 35 year old teacher who has sex with a 14 year old student probably isn't a high risk to re-offend once no longer allowed to teach. We can't assume they are a "dangerous predator" based on that lone statutory case. This isn't Roy Moore creeping up on teens in the mall we are talking about. You can condemn his act, even argue for a jail sentence, while also thinking we aren't making society any better by banning him from Facebook and within 1000 feet of schools and libraries or whatever limitations he had imposed on him for a decade.

[_moksha]

There is no way a 35 year old teacher would only get a misdemeanor and community service for sex with a 14 year old, ...

Joseph Smith was able to offer all future descendants of the Heber C. Kimball celestial exaltation in exchange for 14-year-old Helen Marr Kimball. Had Mr. Perk been able to offer a similar exchange then such a listing may never have happened.

[_Kevin Graham]

A 35 year old teacher who has sex with a 14 year old student probably isn't a high risk to re-offend once no longer allowed to teach. We can't assume they are a "dangerous predator" based on that lone statutory case. This isn't Roy Moore creeping up on teens in the mall we are talking about. You can condemn his act, even argue for a jail sentence, while also thinking we aren't making society any better by banning him from Facebook and within 1000 feet of schools and libraries or whatever limitations he had imposed on him for a decade.

Ceeboo's worldview is black and white. You're either good or evil. Gay or straight. If you have sex with a 14 year old, he's probably of the belief that this makes you a sexual deviant who is really no difference from someone engaged in child pornography. Not a lot of room for nuance in the mind of religious folks. Of course, if you're a 70 year old orange guy who thinks his daughter is sexy and rapes his wife over a bad hair day, its all cool so long as you appoint a bunch of religious nutjobs to lifetime judgeships.

[_Ceeboo]

A 35 year old teacher who has sex with a 14 year old student probably isn't a high risk to re-offend once no longer allowed to teach. We can't assume they are a "dangerous predator" based on that lone statutory case. This isn't Roy Moore creeping up on teens in the mall we are talking about. You can condemn his act, even argue for a jail sentence, while also thinking we aren't making society any better by banning him from Facebook and within 1000 feet of schools and libraries or whatever limitations he had imposed on him for a decade.

Are you a father EA?

If you had a 14 year old daughter and this guy lived on your block - would you want him on the list?

[_Ceeboo]

Ceeboo's

God - this stalking me all over the board is starting to get a little concerning.

Are you okay, KG? Anything I need to worry about with you?