On The Sex Offender List…For a Dog Euthanasia

Wednesday, August 1st, 2012

Hi Folks — It’s Lenore here, from Free-Range Kids. So why am I posting about a sex offender and a dog? It’s sort of a long story, but it boils down to this:

At Free-Range Kids we LOVE safety…we just don’t believe that our kids are in constant danger. Lately, though, a lot of society has decided they are. That’s why, for instance, many schools won’t let the school bus drop a kid off at the bus stop unless there is a PRE-APPROVED GUARDIAN waiting there to escort him or her home. Even if the parents say, “It’s ok! I trust my kid to walk a block!” — no dice.

That same kind of fear of everyday life has come to pervade many adult-child interactions. The idea being: WHY does this adult want to be around a child? PERHAPS HE’S A PERVERT! In this state of panic, our country has passed laws that have little to do with keeping our kids truly safe and lots to do with suspicion of adults. Particularly egregious is the Sex Offender Registry. Instead of it listing adults who pose a big threat to kids, it is littered with people who did things like peeing in public, or going to a prostitute. You can get on the list if you’re a high school senior, age 18, and you sleep with your freshman girlfriend, age 14. Here’s a great article about the whole mess. 

And here, at last, is the article about a man on the registry for coming to help a neighbor with an ailing dog.It’s from 2010 but I just saw it today. And wept.

I feel the way this guy looks.




Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

58 Responses to “On The Sex Offender List…For a Dog Euthanasia”

  1. #1 |  marie | 

    The naming and shaming should be about the prosecutor, don’t you think?

    Naming and shaming kids is dirty. But the prosecution who moves forward with a case based on a false accusation…those bastards need a reason to think twice the next time one of these cases come up.

  2. #2 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #38 Bernard

    Dave, you’re only part-right there. The paranoid culture creates an environment in which people who are poorly connected CAN be railroaded like this, but if the reason for railroading them were really cultural then rich and well-connected people wouldn’t get away with obvious crimes so much.

    I didn’t mean to confuse the railroading with the paranoid culture. The railroading is universal in the justice system independent of our sexual paranoia. The replacement of jury trial with plea bargaining is mostly motivated by politics, justice system empire building, and the continual growth of prosecutorial power.

    The sexually paranoid culture, on the other hand, is what permits the justice system to get away with treating people convicted of sex crimes much more severely than other convicts. I think most people (victims included) would consider murder to be at least as serious a crime as most sex crimes and yet murderers are not subject to the life-long systemic persecution that comes with being a registered sex offender. Even if recidivism rates could justify sex offender registries, it wouldn’t justify how they are currently used as a means of delivering perpetual punishment.

    And I completely agree with your assessment that being an insider makes you more equal than others. That is certainly inherent in the culture of government.

  3. #3 |  Leon Wolfeson | 

    @50 – Yes, I’ve called for years for knowingly malicious accusations to require the same sex offender registration as the crime they accused someone of.

    (Parents “made” the girl accuse? Well, then can go on instead…)

  4. #4 |  Shell | 

    A year ago I moved my family to another state to get away from the county school system where we had lived, where I had spent my entire life, because the system had deteriorated so far that it put the “funk” in dysfunctional. By that I mean the system is so bad that they lost accreditation, the first in the nation to do so in years and years, then got it back and almost immediately was put on probation under threat of having it pulled again.

    As bad as it was and is the one thing that school system didn’t do was make me undergo a background check and get a school-issued I.D. to wear on a cord around my neck just to visit my childrens’ classes or to just *stand outside the school on the playground and watch Field Day activities* like the county where we live now does.

    I work in private security and before the last school year began I had to pass two background checks to get the licenses required to work in that field in Florida. My wife has had three brushes with the law in her life, all traffic citations. My mother-in-law, none at all.

    But my resistance to the requirement isn’t just based on that. In January 2008 we learned that a man I had known for eight years, that I had worked with for two years and that we as a family had called a friend for five years, is a pedophile who’d had unfettered access to our oldest daughter for most of that five years.

    He has two daughters slightly older than mine and they had become friends, spending time at both our houses, having sleepovers every weekend at one or the other, spending several days together during off-time during the school year and Summer vacations from school. He broke bread with us many times, we took the children on outings together. A good time was had by all. The reason all that ended and we found out about him is his ex-wife found something that made her suspicious of his “relationship” with our daughter and went to the police.

    He is an ex-police officer and security professional who was still certified to work in law enforcement in our home state (he’d kept it current), had been chief or assistant chief of security at several major venues and businesses in our home city (and in being in those positions had worked with the Secret Service, FBI, et al during presidential visits to some of those places) held a CCW permit, and was working as a security officer when he was arrested.

    That is to say, he had passed numerous background checks throughout his working life. He never made a blip on the official radar.

    My point is – any parent or guardian who wants to do more than eat lunch with their child(ren) at the local schools has to pass a background check. In my experience, so what?

  5. #5 |  Weird Willy | 


    “You sound like an angry MRA…”

    Ah, the old name-calling technique. You know what they say, when one cannot advance an intelligent argument, one can always resort to name-calling! Personally, not knowing what an MRA is (angry or otherwise), I really don’t care that you choose to characterize me as one. What I find much more revealing and pertinent is the fact that you resort to slurring me at all, which indicates the true character of your thought and contemplation

    “Most gains…are won by fighting tooth and nail…”

    True, it is not always easy to convince authoritarians that one’s personal cause has the traction necessary to distort pre-existing social relationships and facilitate the expansion of authoritarian dominion. As you correctly note, one often must push the agenda of a special interest with great zeal in order to achieve this end.

    “Anyway, they could more easily expand authoritarian dominion over women by doing nothing.”

    This seems to show the predisposing effects of the militant feminist perspective; all efforts toward social ingress must specifically target women or they simply do not exist (or at least they are not suitable for discussion). It seems you have committed little thought and even less time studying special interest politics, which involves processes whereby different groups are targeted for a loss of standing at different times. The measures discussed here were not specifically intended to expand authoritarian dominion over women, nor was such even implied. How does it even occur to you to introduce this into the discussion?

    “There’s nothing wrong with the idea that ‘sluts’ can still be victims.”

    And now our old friend, the Straw Man, makes an appearance! Not only is there nothing wrong with the idea that sluts can still be victims, it is a proposition that I wholeheartedly endorse. Ignoring all preceding evidence to the contrary, I still assume you are trying to make a legitimate point, but (whatever that point might be) this does nothing to advance it.

  6. #6 |  Weird Willy | 

    Addressing the purported validity and good intentions underlying rape shield laws, such purport could not even be made in an environment not defined by the overwhelming anti-sexual paranoia to which Dave Krueger alludes. Absent this paranoia and the diseased, culturally conditioned sexual aversion that underlies it, I would imagine that the courtroom presentations that these laws purportedly address would (figuratively) go something like this:

    Defense Attorney – “The evidence we will bring forth is going to demonstrate the fact that Ms. Blank actually enjoys sex, has been known to have sex in the past, and has even had sex with a number of different partners. The evidence will show that she has clearly established herself as someone who is willing to have sex.”

    Jury (in tacit response) – “Yeah, so what? She likes to have sex, I like to have sex, we all enjoy having sex, and hopefully we all have had more than one partner. Big deal. Are you going to get to the issue of whether or not she was forced to have sex against her will in this instance?”

    If rape shield laws were really intended to preserve the fundamental rights and dignity of a complainant, they would not be crafted in a way that preserves the shame and stigma heaped upon women who choose to have sex. By deeming a woman’s sexual history necessarily shameful, something that cannot be voiced respectably in the light of day, and must be concealed if she is not to be deemed a “slut” who cannot possibly be raped, these laws help perpetuate the very value system that condemns women for being sexually active. The overriding and causative problem, as Dave Krueger correctly observes, is the perverse, anti-sexual revulsion and paranoia that predominates within this culture. Laws that function to maintain and reinforce this ill condition cannot be helpful, and cannot reasonably be seen as well intended.

  7. #7 |  Weird Willy | 

    50, GeneralGarbage

    “How do you make that determination?”

    If the fellow in this story is in the position described, he already knows for an absolutely certain fact that the girl has made up the accusations. No further determination is necessary, and he would be wholly justified in pursuing the means described by GT.

    As for your slur that GT “sounds a little rapey,” this only goes to show the distortions inherent in your perspective. No “naming and shaming of sexual assault victims” was contemplated in GT’s post, only the naming of a person whom a party personally knows to be a false accuser. To suggest that one’s impulse to hold a malicious malefactor accountable for her actions only arises within the mind of a potential rapist is a deliberate distortion that reflects very poorly on your character.

  8. #8 |  Stace | 

    OMG! this story is the exact same as my husbands only take out the dog, replace the accuser with a 13 yr old daughter of a mother who retaliated after the courts gave custody to my husband of the 4 kids…same thing happened..there was no proof except a written statement that was emailed to the county attorney and signed by the daughter. Whom had no idea what she was signing. Now the same thing is happening with the next oldest daughter, only she came to us and told us what her mother was trying to do and said she would not go along with it because it did not happen. She want’s to live with us but can not because of the registry. The mother has lost the oldest daughter due to abuse and terrorist threats, and now is under investigation for the other 3 daughters for abuse, neglect and drinking and driving a minor and blew a .29 when pulled over, but we’ve been told what she did still is not as bad as you being on the registry…are you kidding me? She could of killed those kids or someone else but apparently death is more acceptable than being falsely accused and being on a registry. My husband was told by the attorney he didn’t want to go to trial because he is basically already seen as guilty because it was a minor in a small town with small minds, so the plea was for a misdemeanor…small town folks would of convicted him on no evidence. The only evidence they had was this typed letter that was signed by the minor. Now tell me this…if you truly thought your daughter was molested by the father would you let the other 3 daughters still see him regularly? I know I wouldn’t, so something is wrong with that..and it was ok for us to have the girls for a whole month while she did jail time. The system does not work. I do not have any faith in it and hope like hell I never get accused of anything I did not do. It has ruined his life, can’t get a job, we have no friends when they find out, the retaliation from the community and the embarrassment is more than tolerable. Something needs to be done, the registry has caused many harmless men and women a life of hardship and homelessness. It is ridiculous!!