Unjust and ineffective

[Trinity]

A very good read...........


America has pioneered the harsh punishment of sex offenders. Does it work?

ONE day in 1996 the lights went off in a classroom in Georgia so that the students could watch a video. Wendy Whitaker, a 17-year-old pupil at the time, was sitting near the back. The boy next to her suggested that, since it was dark, she could perform oral sex on him without anyone noticing. She obliged. And that single teenage fumble wrecked her life.

Her classmate was three weeks shy of his 16th birthday. That made Ms Whitaker a criminal. She was arrested and charged with sodomy, which in Georgia can refer to oral sex. She met her court-appointed lawyer five minutes before the hearing. He told her to plead guilty. She did not really understand what was going on, so she did as she was told.

She was sentenced to five years on probation. Not being the most organized of people, she failed to meet all the conditions, such as checking in regularly with her probation officer. For a series of technical violations, she was incarcerated for more than a year, in the county jail, the state women’s prison and a boot camp. “I was in there with people who killed people. It’s crazy,” she says.

She finished her probation in 2002. But her ordeal continues.



rest of story here............
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14164614

[crin63]

In California the Megan's Law website gives the specifics of the offense but not the age of of the offender at the time of the offense.

[avatar4321]

im not seeing how it's unjust. For one she didnt have to provide oral sex to anyone. She had more than a right to discuss the case fully with her attorney. She chose not to. She was placed on probation and continued on probation because she failed to live up to her responsibilities.

Seems to me that its alot more than a single teenage fumble. She obviously violated probation multiple times or she couldnt be on probation so darn long. At any stage of this, all she had to do was comply with probation and it would be over. She failed to do that.

To pretend that her noncompliance is somehow the systems fault is bullcrap. She has to take responsibility for her actions. Not blame others for her mistakes.

Is the law stupid? Yes. Well so is lewd conduct in public. She knew she wasnt supposed to be preforming oral sex in a classroom during school. She may not have completely realized how bad the consequences would be but she knew it was wrong. She did it anyway.

I

[5stringJeff]

Sex offenders who are released from prison should be treated no differently than any other prisoners. They should not be forced to register, and they should not be treated to public scorn.

Sex offenders who are likely to recommit crimes should not be released from jail.

[DragonStryk72]

Okay, I disagree with the sodomy charge as it relates to consensual sex. there's no reason at all for this kind of law, and in fact, the constitution directly states in the 10th amendment that the government is not afforded that right.

Now, with that point made, she is guilty of lewd and lascivious behavior, and on that note, where's is the boy's punishment?

[Insein]

Now why does the law get involved in this. Parents and the school should have dealt their punishment and let that be that. It is ludicrous that this situation could occur. Yet it happens all the time. Usually its a 17 year old boy with his 16 year old girlfriend but nonetheless the same. The government has no right to interefere with consentual sex. Now public indency, public nudity, etc. Im sure their are misdemeanor violations there. This girl made a mistake at 17 and it will follow her till the day she dies now.

I understand the need for harsh punishment for sex offenders. Rapists, child predators and the like need to be locked away for GOOD! Punishing teenagers for sexual promiscuity with criminal action is ridiculous. Let the parents and school officials (if the situation calls for it such as this one) decide their fate.

[avatar4321]

Okay, I disagree with the sodomy charge as it relates to consensual sex. there's no reason at all for this kind of law, and in fact, the constitution directly states in the 10th amendment that the government is not afforded that right.

Now, with that point made, she is guilty of lewd and lascivious behavior, and on that note, where's is the boy's punishment?

The 10th amendment limits the powers of the federal government, not the state government. It reserves all powers not invested to the federal government to the states and/or the people.

did they say the boy wasnt punished?