TX: More than a dozen sex offenders in Lamesa ordered to move

More than a dozen registered sex offenders are living too close to children, that’s according to the Lamesa Police Department.

The chief of police confirmed that 19 residents received notices stating they were in violation of the city’s code of ordinances.

Eugene Gaspar is a registered sex offender who said the department gave him 90 days to move, or face a fine of up to $500 a day. Gaspar said the notice came as a surprise because officers at the Lamesa Police Department approved his address when his family purchased their home more than two years ago. Gaspar said he has registered at the Lamesa Police Department every 90 days for the past two years, with no problem, until now.

Mary Sue Molnar is the founder and executive director of Texas Voices for Reason and Justice, a volunteer organization that provides support for sex offenders and their families. Molnar said she was contacted by multiple registered sex offenders in Lamesa who had identical stories to Gaspar’s.

SOURCE


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

16 thoughts on “TX: More than a dozen sex offenders in Lamesa ordered to move

  • October 7, 2022

    Well if they are going to do that, they better buy your house and pay for all the expenses associated with the move. I don’t believe this will fly imo.

    God is good!

    Reply
  • October 7, 2022

    Make an issue of the Lamesa PD’s failure to enforce their own ordinance that caused this so-called problem.

    I figure that if the registrants there were previously approved at their current residences in error, than the Lamesa PD should be responsible for both finding compliant, comparable housing and paying all associated costs of effecting the changes in residences for all those affected. There’s noting fair or reasonable about holding the registrants liable for the LPD’s failures.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2022

    To be clear, the town’s ordinance has nothing to do with proximity to children but proximity to certain places regardless whether there are any children there or not.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2022

    I hope he wins that very expensive lawsuit against the city and police chief. Hit them where it really hurts – their wallets.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2022

    It would seem that you’d be grandfathered in.

    Reply
  • October 7, 2022

    Lamesa is a town of about 6 sq miles (2m x 3m) and 9000 residents. A classic example of NIMBY, The ordinance was approved in 2009; 13 years later and trying to be enforced by a new Karen/Ken.

    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 *