NH: Court sides with sex offender who hired minor
A registered sex offender did not break the law by hiring a 16-year-old boy to work for his landscaping business, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled Friday.
Edward Proctor was convicted in 2017 under a law prohibiting certain sex offenders from undertaking employment or volunteer services involving the care, instruction or guidance of children. According to court documents, he hired the teen in February 2016 for snow removal work and again in May 2016, driving him to job sites for weeding, mulching and other landscape work. He was arrested after the boy’s mother typed Proctor’s name into an online sex offender registry database.
Proctor, who is serving a three- to six-year prison sentence, appealed his conviction, arguing that the law prohibits accepting certain types of employment, not providing employment. The high court did not weigh in on that argument but agreed with his second argument that the law, which specifically mentions jobs such as teacher, coach and camp counselor, only prohibits activity that inherently involves children.
The court reversed Proctor’s conviction and sent the case back to the lower court.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Still some common sense in NH/VT where laws are based on actual law and not emotion & scare tactics thats why so many sex offenders flock there. in VT last year alone they had an influx of 2000 sex offenders looking for relief of the harsh laws they incur around the rest of the country.
The only way to survive is to start your own business as a rso I don’t wouldn’t hire someone under 18 but that’s because of the power tools I use people will hire the low bid most times as long as you do a good job from there word of mouth keeps me going,now I turn people away
He was arrested after the boy’s mother typed Proctor’s name into an online sex offender registry database.
Damn she didn’t even Google him (general search). She used an online sex offender data base (specific search). I bet she has that database ready and in handy and types everybody she comes across with. So what if her son’s next boss has another type of record, is a drug dealer selling the boy drugs or is capable of violent tendencies but does not have any arrest record whatsoever.
Not to worry— the legislature will correct this loophole soon enough.
Shame on mom for turning a parenting decision into a police matter.
Guessing a rush to write a law forbidding registrants from hiring minors will be written within a week or so.
But seriously, how many registrants are in a position to be able to hire anyone in the first place? Most can barely provide for themselves, with whatever little bit is left over going to “treatment”, polygraphs, and whatever other insanity their court (or more likely, their PO) ordered.
In any case, the kids mom wasn’t comfortable with her son’s boss being a registrant. She makes him quit. Problem solved. Is there really a need or purpose of carrying the matter any further?