|
Comments:
addiann - 2004-12-18 12:46:15 Yes, I saw from my search that my zip code was apparently larger than I'd thought, too. I have mixed feelings about this list being online. Were I a parent, I imagine I'd pay close attention to those convicted of crimes with children. It should also be noted that it's said that the recidivism of sex offenders is higher than the criminal norm. But, people convicted of theft or drug crimes aren't online so far as I know. Perhaps it's perceived, probably correctly [aside from murder], that such crimes have less of a devastating impact on the victims' lives. But that's not a distinction I'm qualified to make, although someone has clearly made it, by publishing this info.* * * * * * * * * * * * Iss - 2004-12-18 17:51:57 Interesting that in my zip for all of East Lansing, there were only 25 listings. Many appeared to be 20-somethings with 'unwilling consent' or some such in this college town.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-18 18:42:22 Sometimes the person convicted moves and no one knows. Sometimes the house is sold, but previous people are listed in the sex offender list as still being there, sometimes the address is where the crime took place and it was a relative who did it and it was then and is now the address also of the victim. Some real estate purchasers in Ann Arbor found that they bought a sex-offender-address and had to spend thousands in court to exonerate their home. Lists are risky.* * * * * * * * * * * * brett - 2004-12-18 21:18:00 i think you pretty much said it all when you clarified you'd pay close attention to those convicted of crimes with children. The problem is, when most people here "list of sex offenders" they automatically think "List of child molesters". This isn't the way the police look at the definition, though, and all sorts of strange stuff ends up on a list like that depending upon the degree of puritanism in the local legal system. Buying a sex toy in Texas comes to mind. So does any state with loosely worded laws about 'sodomy'. Another, perhaps more appropriate story i read in the past year, and i think it was from pennsylvania, involved a 17 year old girl that took some nude photos of herself, and then shared them online. Not only is she now on the sex offender list there, but the prosecuters were going to try and charge her with distributing child pornography. It was a very bizarre case, and I'd try to find a link to the story, but somehow I think googling "Teenage nude girl photos" might possibly bring up some incorrect matches. Similarly, there's the fact that courts will convict a minor as an adult for a "very serious" crime, such as having sex with a minor (who may be the exact same age as him). The absurd logic there puts most people on a potential "list". * * * * * * * * * * * * yd - 2004-12-18 21:41:39http://www.state.mi.us/mdoc/asp/otis2profile.asp?mdocNumber=514239 Say hello to this asshole. His house is for sale on Forest. Special shower cams for boys in his house.* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2004-12-18 21:54:50 There's a wonderful piece in this month's Utne Reader reprinted from the Harvard Review by a woman who was raped. Not the usual story. Great writing.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-19 02:27:29 Lots of good comments here. Iss: your results are much lower than mine--a fifth of mine, although the E. Lansing area is much larger than my zip in Ypsi. Raymond: you are right, data on this list could be outdated in several different ways. People could read this list and notice House X on Street Y as "that pedophile's house" when the perp has long moved on. As you say, lists like this can be dangerous in that way. Brett adds further good examples of the slipperyness of such a list. yd: That is one disturbing photo. His eyes look a million miles away. Addiann: I checked this month's Utne Reader online, but didn't see (or overlooked) the article you mentioned; perhaps it's a print-version-only article?* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2004-12-19 11:14:18 You're right, it's impossible to figure out. "Betrayal by the Angel" is the title, and the excerpt on the site is the opening paragraph. It's a long piece but worth the read to the end.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-19 18:11:20 Maybe the S.O. list is broken. I cannot find #514239. Also curiously, can't find in OTIS a neighbor kid who was caught offending. When I make a list, I check it twice. Don't do much good though, still make errors and omissions.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-19 19:48:10 Ah, I see it, Addiann. It turns out it's subscriber-only, though (and the Harvard Review doesn't put its articles online, turns out); rats. But the subtitle sounds interesting: "What happens when violence knocks on the door and politeness answers?" Raymond, the link to 514239 worked just now when I checked, so it appears to be back online.* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2004-12-19 20:40:24 bummer. This is one of the magazines I read at Radio Talking Book and that's where I read it, print version. Oh well. If you see the Nov/Dec issue take a look at it. * * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-20 00:21:19 I have to be at Border's this coming week and will take a look; thanks for pointing out the article, Addiann. The Utne Reader is one of those magazines on the periphery of my consciousness that I know is good but never get around to subscribing to/picking up a copy.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-20 07:32:19 it's on the sex offender registry that i cannot find the entitity a.k.a. #514239. neither by name and age nor by z.i.p. code. it's on o.t.i.s. that i cannot find the kid (formerly from) across the street who is on the sex registry.* * * * * * * * * * * * frog - 2004-12-20 10:17:54 My problem with these lists is the false sense of security. I worked with sex offenders for a while (in an administrative capacity) and here's what I learned: You can't tell who is and who isn't. The guys who were there seemed like really nice men (with one creepy exception...)--the kinds of guys who might be friends with my father or brother.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-20 10:22:57 frog, I am glad to read a comment from someone with first-hand experience; that is very interesting, thank you. You are right; such a list does create a false sense of security. The fact that one cannot tell who is and isn't an offender is very thought-provoking; I'm mulling that over.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-23 18:30:29 Looking at the registry again on a snowy day when I'm pooped from outside work yesterday (plus I can't get the old tractors started)I noted: All of the offenders in Whittaker live(d) in the trailer park south of town and were born in 1980 and 1981. Sex club? No listings in Bridgewater. None. The heaviest weight seen was 415#. The youngest age noticed, now 17. The oldest age noticed now, 78. Many female offenders in zip 48170 are listed in jail now. Convictions for acts with ages 13-16 and with incapacitated persons are rather common. Many addresses listed are apartments. Several noticed are motels, especially two on E. Michigan in Ypsi (I have postcards of both). What I find missing but relevant are offense dates, or at least conviction dates. Each entry has a number. Some are low compared to others. What do the numbers mean? Are they sequential? Are the addresses updated? In so far as "lists" are part of my current research, I may have to go to Polk, or worse yet knock on doors. Ugh. Gack. Yuck.* * * * * * * * * * * * add your comment: |