Time for me to make an unpopular stand...

[conuly]

Or not.

First of all, I love how "I want proof that they're so mentally ill that they need to be involuntarily committed past the time that the law said they should serve (but not so ill that they couldn't go to prison like normal people)" turns into "Being a sex offender isn't wrong in any way". Let's read what's actually written.

Secondly, am I the only one who doesn't want the government saying via fiat that if I go to jail for something (and there are such things as wrongful convictions!) I can be kept there indefinitely, even past my sentence? Oh, sure, now it's "those damn sex offenders", but that's... that's just a *really* bad precedent. By which I mean bad. I don't care if we're talking about notorious mass murderers, I don't want that precedent being set. (Not that it hasn't already been...)

And, of course, I agree with the judge in general. If somebody is that ill that they're a constant threat to others (and it's not being mentally ill that merits, in any view, being committed, it's being a danger to everyone else), you need to *prove* it. One conviction isn't proof, no matter what the conviction is for - or if it is, then they need to be committed outright, not chucked into prison first.

Edit: Well, I just called that ditz of a girl an idiot. I feel better now.

Comments

[carlanime.livejournal.com]

For some reason, the phrase "sex offender" makes people acquire that peculiar *type* of stupidity wherein they fail to realize that 1) crimes vary in severity, and so do punishments, and 2) it is possible to be wrongfully convicted, or wrongfully jailed beyond one's sentence, and the "sex offender" part doesn't magically make that "not matter."

[stejcruetekie.livejournal.com]

And "sex offender" also doesn't neccesarily mean kids were involved (which is where I think people get the most upset). An 18 year old with a 17 year old can be labeled a sex offender.

(And conuly - I agree with you).

[conuly]

*nods* Thanks.

[conuly]

This person apparently thinks that all criminals deserve to be locked up indefinitely. Man, do I ever wanna try that on her.

[kibbles.livejournal.com]

I left that community...was just too much for me.

[conuly]

Wise, wise woman. Some of the posts are interesting, but most of them are...

It's sometimes nearly as bad as liberal, and that's saying a lot.

[maelorin]

seems to me some people are confusing their own "sense of 'appropriate' outrage" for actual concern.

i can't post in the group, but my reply pretty much goes along the lines of "stop being so self-centred and selfish".

as lawyer, i often want to strangle the stupid freaks who insist on calling things they don't like "loopholes". especially when they go blaming lawyers for the decisions of politicians - who are quite happy to let lawyers carry the blame for having to implement the idiocy of elected ... freaks.

there are all manner of 'defences' i might pose in support of the judge, but they're unecessary here. and many have already been put forward by others.

[carlanime.livejournal.com]

An 18 year old with a 17 year old can be labeled a sex offender.

::nods:: Yup--which is why the whole "lock 'em up forever" thing scares me.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

I don't know how New York's program works, but I can tell you that in New Jersey, sex offenders who finish their sentences are then evaluated to tell if they're actually a danger to society, and if it's determined that they are [usually because they've committed at least two violent sex crimes and admit having uncontrollable—or nearly-uncontrollable, I guess—urges to do so on a regular basis; that's just my understanding based on reading Supreme/Appellate Court decisions], they're committed to a specific psychiatric hospital subject to annual review (the hospital is under the jurisdiction of my court, so we work with it a lot), and there're something like ten or twelve steps they have to take (rather like AA, IIRC—they include admitting you have a problem, genuinely wanting to change, finding alternative ways to deal with those urges, etc.), and then if they complete them, they're released. They're also evaluated before they begin their sentences with the goal (possibly not always carried out, I admit, but the goal) of starting treatment while they're in prison.

I have issues with Megan's Law and with CSL (Community Supervision for Life), which is a stricter form of Megan's Law for particularly violent sex crimes, and I wish the review of the SVP (Sexually Violent Predator) patients' status was more frequent, but I think the program itself is a fairly good balance. It may not work as well as it should, but the design is good. It doesn't, as the judge said, lock people up indefinitely, nor does it lock them up at all without psychologists' and psychiatrists' evaluations.

My issues with Megan's Law stem mostly from cases of 20-year-old men with 15-year-old girlfriends, though also from what I know is a non-zero number of girls (usually teenagers) who make up charges because they're mad at their stepfathers/uncles/teachers/brothers/etc.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

BTW it's a very small percentage of people convicted of sex crimes who are sent to the SVP program. Something like 5%, I believe.

[carlanime.livejournal.com]

For some reason, the phrase "sex offender" makes people acquire that peculiar *type* of stupidity wherein they fail to realize that 1) crimes vary in severity, and so do punishments, and 2) it is possible to be wrongfully convicted, or wrongfully jailed beyond one's sentence, and the "sex offender" part doesn't magically make that "not matter."

[stejcruetekie.livejournal.com]

And "sex offender" also doesn't neccesarily mean kids were involved (which is where I think people get the most upset). An 18 year old with a 17 year old can be labeled a sex offender.

(And conuly - I agree with you).

[conuly]

*nods* Thanks.

[conuly]

This person apparently thinks that all criminals deserve to be locked up indefinitely. Man, do I ever wanna try that on her.

[kibbles.livejournal.com]

I left that community...was just too much for me.

[conuly]

Wise, wise woman. Some of the posts are interesting, but most of them are...

It's sometimes nearly as bad as liberal, and that's saying a lot.

[maelorin]

seems to me some people are confusing their own "sense of 'appropriate' outrage" for actual concern.

i can't post in the group, but my reply pretty much goes along the lines of "stop being so self-centred and selfish".

as lawyer, i often want to strangle the stupid freaks who insist on calling things they don't like "loopholes". especially when they go blaming lawyers for the decisions of politicians - who are quite happy to let lawyers carry the blame for having to implement the idiocy of elected ... freaks.

there are all manner of 'defences' i might pose in support of the judge, but they're unecessary here. and many have already been put forward by others.

[carlanime.livejournal.com]

An 18 year old with a 17 year old can be labeled a sex offender.

::nods:: Yup--which is why the whole "lock 'em up forever" thing scares me.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

I don't know how New York's program works, but I can tell you that in New Jersey, sex offenders who finish their sentences are then evaluated to tell if they're actually a danger to society, and if it's determined that they are [usually because they've committed at least two violent sex crimes and admit having uncontrollable—or nearly-uncontrollable, I guess—urges to do so on a regular basis; that's just my understanding based on reading Supreme/Appellate Court decisions], they're committed to a specific psychiatric hospital subject to annual review (the hospital is under the jurisdiction of my court, so we work with it a lot), and there're something like ten or twelve steps they have to take (rather like AA, IIRC—they include admitting you have a problem, genuinely wanting to change, finding alternative ways to deal with those urges, etc.), and then if they complete them, they're released. They're also evaluated before they begin their sentences with the goal (possibly not always carried out, I admit, but the goal) of starting treatment while they're in prison.

I have issues with Megan's Law and with CSL (Community Supervision for Life), which is a stricter form of Megan's Law for particularly violent sex crimes, and I wish the review of the SVP (Sexually Violent Predator) patients' status was more frequent, but I think the program itself is a fairly good balance. It may not work as well as it should, but the design is good. It doesn't, as the judge said, lock people up indefinitely, nor does it lock them up at all without psychologists' and psychiatrists' evaluations.

My issues with Megan's Law stem mostly from cases of 20-year-old men with 15-year-old girlfriends, though also from what I know is a non-zero number of girls (usually teenagers) who make up charges because they're mad at their stepfathers/uncles/teachers/brothers/etc.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

BTW it's a very small percentage of people convicted of sex crimes who are sent to the SVP program. Something like 5%, I believe.