Comments on: Arkansas woman must register as sex offender after trying to frame husband for child porn

By: Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN Ret

Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN Ret — Fri, 05 Jul 2019 14:10:49 +0000

We must remember that the real intent of the registry is not to make the community safe but to be punitive action above and beyond the judicial sentence. The only person this woman was a threat to was her husband and that has been resolved.

By: Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN Ret

Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN Ret — Fri, 05 Jul 2019 14:06:43 +0000

I passed a polygraph several years running before I was released early from probation. It’s money. When they can no longer justify giving a polygraph they just let it go.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Thu, 04 Jul 2019 19:12:01 +0000

In reply to Jack.

Jack,

LE has already decided that a suspect has “failed” a polygraph when they ask or suggest a suspect submit to one. Make no mistake, when they make such a request or suggestion, it’s because they have no evidence in whatever they are investigating and need to coerce some.

That’s all polygraph examinations are – interrogations. If there was anything substantial to the so-called science behind it, pre-interviewing wouldn’t be necessary, it wouldn’t be limited to yes-or-no questions, said questions wouldn’t have to be repeated multiple times, and the results wouldn’t be the mere opinion of the examiner.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Thu, 04 Jul 2019 19:00:39 +0000

While I agree this woman should be screwed to the wall, registration in her case makes no sense. Nothing in the article indicates she is the kind of threat the registry SUPPOSEDLY protects against. I just don’t see how one can oppose the registry’s existence, yet celebrate when certain individuals are put on it.

However, the situation does show the general disparities of prosecuting men and women accused of sex crime that the registry is indeed punitive, despite the states’ and courts’ repeated, tired claims to the contrary.

By: DavidM

DavidM — Thu, 04 Jul 2019 03:37:08 +0000

He must have had a really good lawyer, or she made some very obvious and prove able errors in her scam attempt. Otherwise no judge would ever rule against the mans word over a woman or kids. This is 1in a thousand case.

By: JLL

JLL — Thu, 04 Jul 2019 01:43:01 +0000

In reply to Bea Ware. nah part of the punishment

By: JLL

JLL — Thu, 04 Jul 2019 01:41:47 +0000

In reply to David. everyday someones sentenced to probation for actually having sex but you forget to register you get a year and a day 30 years later on dozens of retroactive laws that "aren't punishment" to keep society safe but what you forgot or didn't know you had todo isn't causing any danger to anyone and was technical with no criminal intent.

By: David

David — Wed, 03 Jul 2019 22:48:00 +0000

Women are always treated differently! What about equal Protection of law??? She should be in prison!!!

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 03 Jul 2019 21:34:26 +0000

In reply to MJ. Why didn't he take an FBI polygraph test? OH that is right, if you fail it, they use it against you but if you pass it like I did, they say a polygraph cannot be used as evidence.

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 03 Jul 2019 21:31:16 +0000

In reply to JZ. Man you stole my thunder, I was going to type that but glad I looked before hand, I hate being a copy cat LOL Well done on the comment, I agree, what goes around comes around, just sometimes takes a while.