Enough is enough: School district warns parents about registrant’s own children’s party.
Last week we reported about a person required to register for working as a santa. While there was nothing illegal about what he was doing, the fact that he failed to report it as “employment” earned him a registration violation charge and a whole lot of unnecessary exposure.
The man’s offense was 25 years ago. He has gone on to marry and have children who are enrolled in the Orange County Public School system. The day after his children handed out invitations to their classmates for their own party, the School took it upon itself to call all parents broadcasting a message warning them about the children’s party.
At what point does the punishment end? is 25 years enough? And at what point does this cross the line into punishing his innocent children?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Maybe I’m in the minority here, but, to me, common sense dictates that you don’t put yourself in any situation where there is the perception that your intent is to molest a child. A “sex offender” in a Santa suit should be a textbook example of that.
Granted not reporting it to his handlers was a violation, but it outed him to the public, thus making the school aware. Also, if you live in Duval [Jacksonville], there is an ordinance against “sex offenders” wearing any kind of costume:
“It is unlawful for any Sexual Offender or Sexual Predator to wear costumes, clothing, make-up, mask or anything that would alter a person’s appearance in the presence of any non-familial child if such altered appearance could or would entice, attract or lure a child to congregate around, or move closer to, that person.”
“Penalties. With regard to enforcement of this section, the City and the Sheriff’s Office may pursue any enforcement action or legal remedy available under the controlling state law and any legal remedy available to the City, to include, but not limited to, injunctive relief, arrest, a fine not exceeding $500.00 for each occurrence, or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 60 days or by both a fine and imprisonment for each occurrence, unless prohibited by law.”
https://library.municode.com/fl/jacksonville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TITXIXPUSA_CH685SEOFSEPRRE_S685.104PRACSEOFSEPREX
After placing a little thought into this i hope someone challenges the law about this as the law is vague:
what exactly is considered employment for this?
being employed and being paid by the hour? salary? self-employment? and if it is self-employment is it required that john the painter report that Mr. Smith who hired or contracted with John that owns John’s Painting Service to paint his home was his employer or would the name of Johns painting service be listed as his employer when that in itself is a DBA for John so then it wouldn’t it mean that since John is already listed then there is no need to list a DBA since it’s a DBA and not actually his employer.
This is an excellent Case to go forward and challenge this unconstitutional law.
*Disclaimer – anything stated above is not legal advice and I’m not paid or employed to post this
This is the type of issue that needs to get to SCOTUS so they can say either,” Yes this what we intended when we took the doors off of Retroactivity in Doe,” or more likely, ” Absolutely not!” and reverse their decision.
No more onerous than a Sam’s Club Application, my ass!!! Ask this guys poor children. The school going to support them when they start self medicating? Start thinking suicide, as a result of this clear overreach on their part?
Maybe it’s time for a registrant militia. During WW2 the French underground became very effective against the enemy. I’m not advocating violence but I am saying a group of trained individuals could cause a great deal of havoc within the law. An SOR special forces if you will. Merely uncovering the secret lives of some of these people that attack us would give us an amount of satisfaction. It is becoming more difficult to remember “vengeance is mine sayeth the lord”. I speak hypothetically of course…
I am totally with ya there brother. But no one seems to want to support something like this. Why? I have absolutely no freakin idea. When the govt of their time became just mildly oppressive to what we have now, they stated their intention to revolt (Dec. of Ind), and backed it up with rifles and bayonets. Violence only ensued because the other side caused it (Boston Massacre). In theory, the “other side” has already caused violence vis a vis the many examples of vigilantism that we’ve seen across the country. So, rising up on our part is justified, violence included.
Good on him for turning his life around. But he had in his background, a hands-on offense against a very young victim, and had lately been in the news for apparently concealing his Santa business from the register, amirite?
If the school had knowledge that invitations to his house were being handed out on school premises, what SHOULD they have done? Nothing?
And his case there is no enough is enough he sat there and put himself in a situation which was unconscionable when it comes to protecting yourselves and the lives of the innocent I don’t care that he feels that he and his children I have receding undue attention you cannot be a Santa Claus as a registered sex offender in any way shape or form ever ever fact he thought he could even do that shows how ridiculous his behavior system is so in part the school showing if he’s willing to be a Santa and be touching children all day what else is he willing to do they’re doing their due process and protecting the lives of the innocent and there’s nothing wrong with that he should know better he’s the dumbass he’s the problem
Actually Red, if you took a moment to educate yourself and paid attention to the news article, there is no law or anything that says a Sex Offender can’t be a Santa. So your information is wrong. What got him in trouble wasn’t him working as a Santa, it was that he failed to register the job as self-emplyment. Please educate yourself.
Good response, Bill. You are correct.
If he is not on probation, there is no restriction on him working as a Santa, Easter bunny, performing in a circus or against his children hosting a party for their friends in his home.