RI: Lawsuit settlement says no cap on sex offenders at Cranston shelter

SOURCE

CRANSTON, R.I. — The settlement Wednesday of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, means there will be no cap on the number of sex offenders allowed to live at the Harrington Hall homeless shelter.

This all stems from a state law that was set to take effect a year ago, limiting the number of sex offenders at Harrington hall to 10% of the shelter’s population, or 11 people. But then the ACLU filed a lawsuit saying that was unconstitutional.

The ACLU argued that Harrington Hall is a “shelter of last resort” for homeless sex offenders, and that in many cases the only other choice for these men is to sleep on the streets. The lawsuit also contended there was no increase in re-offenses tied to the number of convicted predators living at the Howard Avenue shelter.

“It means that as long as Harrington Hall makes sure that there’s no other place for these individuals to go, they’re allowed to stay at the shelter. Nobody is well-served by having these individuals just out on the streets, and particularly during winter months. So we think the settlement is favorable to everybody,” said Rhode Island ACLU executive director Steven Brown


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “RI: Lawsuit settlement says no cap on sex offenders at Cranston shelter

  • December 6, 2018

    Could have used THAT aclu here in florida with our voting rights. Is it that the organization is factioned to the point that there are differences in philosophy per region?

    Reply
  • December 6, 2018

    This is another prime example of those supporting the sex offender registry are not interested in protecting anyone , there only objective is to torture and kill. Just like the mob lynchings of the 1900s. They can’t do it to blacks anymore so they have to find someone else to hate. Fortunately there is a few judges out there that can see it doesn’t seem quite right. Thank You ACLU.
    These rulings are just to few and far between.

    Reply
  • December 6, 2018

    They ALWAYS have to throw in that word “PREDATOR”, instead of just sex-offender.
    It is a “click-bait word. Nothing more, nothing less. It is to get you to “click” on that article.
    (Just say) I peed on a lightpost…. NOW I am a predator?? Couldnt I sue for Defamation of Character?
    This word “Predator” is being thrown around more than “Collusion”

    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 *