The following story comes out of Texas, but it underscores a significant problem we have in our registry here. It fails to distinguish the low risk from the high risk.
The title to the story is, “Mom Upset Sex Offender Allowed Near Kids in Pee Wee Football League”. Naturally, what mom wouldn’t be upset about a sex offender coaching her son’s football team?
But as we read the story, we learn the offender isn’t a coach, but a parent of another player. We also learn that, “the offense happened when the victim and suspect were both teenagers… the offender is not on probation or parole and has no legal restrictions.”
With that additional information, does it help explain the individual’s motivation for being at the Pee Wee football game? Maybe he was just there for his son?
Does knowing the offense happened while he and the victim were both teens make us rethink his dangerousness?
What if there are a number of other factors we don’t know about? What if the girl lied about her age? What if it was an isolated incident 15 years ago and he took a plea to something that didn’t hold these consequences at the time? What if the victim was his girlfriend and he ultimately married her?
We don’t know and we simply don’t know much about the circumstances of these individuals we label “sex offenders” and put up on the same list, subject to the same restrictions.
Recent Comments