PA: Sex offender: ‘I am not a monster’

The former combat medic and EMT says being on the registry for his child pornography conviction only prevents him, and others like him, from moving on with life and becoming productive citizens.

“When I first got on [the list], I was a mess,” he said. “I was homeless for about a year and a half because I was still paying child support and I lost my job. It is more of a vigilante law.”


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

8 thoughts on “PA: Sex offender: ‘I am not a monster’

  • May 16, 2018

    It’s not just an extra punishment. It actually gives the public the right to discriminate against us. There is almost no limit on how much we can be discriminated against either: employment, housing, recreation, etc.

    Reply
  • May 16, 2018

    Protecting our children!! Why aren’t the drug dealers that are harming our children not on a list!!!

    Reply
  • May 16, 2018

    Anyone who thinks the housing restrictions and being on the registry are not ‘punishment’ are delusional. Destabilizing any population will increase the likelihood of criminal activity. If someone doesn’t have a stable place to live it makes it difficult to have a job let alone anything else.

    It is a law designed for lawmakers to say they are protecting their kids while pushing the problem off to another neighborhood. It is internal banishment and it is wrong.

    Reply
  • May 16, 2018

    This guy with the district attorneys office is a clueless idiot. he says the guy would not be on the registry if he did not commit the crime. Well f there was no registry he wouldnt be on it either. He says sex offenders claim this is done to them, it is because I do not see every felon on a registry for murder or theft. We are singled out so it is being done to us where its not equally done to others. It is furthered punishment. This is profiling on the highest note to me. He makes it out like I pre planned my crime so I should have to suffer the consequences.

    Reply
  • May 16, 2018

    Kudos to ch 27 for at least getting both sides of the story. Notice how all the prosecutor kept saying They did this to themselves he never mentioned if he thought all of the offenders needed to be on the registry or if it was fair to increase someone’s sentence after their conviction. 19K paying the price for 2,100 is insane. A Law enforcement only registry for violent and repeat offenders makes sense. I know some don’t want any type of regisry at all but lets face it some of us don’t and will not get it and will always need some type of supervision. Thank you to the people at NORSOL for your continued support.

    Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *