WA: $9.5 Million Settlement for Registrant Attacked Behind Bars
Pierce County, Washington, has agreed to pay $9.5 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that failures in jail policies, supervision, and staff training allowed a man convicted of a sex offense to be brutally attacked by other inmates.
Whether you agree with someone’s crime or not, this case shines a light on a reality that is too often ignored: people labeled as “sex offenders” are among the most vulnerable populations in our nation’s jails and prisons. Their offenses are often public knowledge, making them frequent targets for intimidation, extortion, and violent assaults by other inmates.
Correctional officials know this. They have a constitutional duty to take reasonable steps to protect those in their custody. When that duty is ignored, the consequences can be catastrophic. Unfortunately, the danger doesn’t exist only behind prison walls.
The public registry has made identifying people convicted of sex offenses easier than ever. Across the country, registrants have been assaulted, threatened, harassed, had their homes vandalized, lost employment, and in some tragic cases, even murdered by individuals who found them through publicly available registry information. FAC has long warned that publicly branding people for life carries real risks—not only for registrants, but also for their spouses, children, parents, and neighbors who often become collateral victims.
This $9.5 million settlement is a reminder that the government cannot place a target on someone’s back – whether by incarcerating them or by placing them on a government-sanctioned public registry — and then ignore the foreseeable risk of harm. When the government creates or amplifies the danger to an individual, it has a corresponding duty to take reasonable steps to protect those individuals.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Nobody deserves to be beaten Mr. D. Whether it’s another inmate with some “moral code” a CO or sheriff’s deputy. It’s not justified.
If you assault a child or human sexually you get what you deserve simply put. He better get that money and move out of the USA. If you think he’ll be able to live here in peace he better rethink that.
Hey Mr. D,
Did you take the time to look up this victim’s case and determine IF he was ever charged with assaulting a child or human sexually? My guess is: you passed judgement from a news article and the victim’s status as a sex offender. I am on Florida’s sex offender registry even though I never assaulted a child or other human sexually. Did you know that a lot of judges nowadays order people to be placed on theses registries even without a sexual component? My guess is: No. A lot of us are simply trying to comply with these draconian laws while we fight for our individual rights.
You should take the time to educate yourself.
@ Mr. D
Should a man be punished twice for the same crime?? Y/N
If yes, explain why you believe that way.
Can a criminal rightfully judge another criminal seeing that he himself is a criminal?? Y/N
If yes, explain why you believe that way.
Did you actually read the article? This guy was back in for a failure to register charge. His original offense was when he was 12 or 13 years old, and none of us know the circumstances. Besides, someone who has paid his debt should be able to live in peace. You seem to be one of those who blindly generalizes all sex offenses as violent sexual assaults, and all offenders as incurable sociopaths. An excerpt from the article is below.
Woods had been jailed after being sentenced to nearly two years in prison for failing to register as a sex offender for a third time, stemming from a 2002 conviction as a juvenile for first-degree rape of a child, court records show. According to the lawsuit, Woods was 12 or 13 years old when he “had a relationship with another minor.”
The sexual assailant here was himself a child at the time.
You know that, right?
Should adult strangers get to beat us up for things we did at age 12?
Im wouldn’t waste time trying to change MR. D mind hes entitled to his own opinion but it can be wrong too my has been the opinion that is
How can he move out of the USA? He’s probably a vegetable, or something close to it.
I’ll say this directly to you Mr. D. (and anyone reading who agrees with you and is too scared to post it): If you happen to be living near one of us, you better rethink your life choices if you choose to come over to disturb the peace. You will get what YOU deserve.
As they say, _ _ _ _ around and find out.
As a veteran, I fought for everyone’s rights, including the right to have and express an opinion. Mr. D did not directly threaten anyone, and that distinction matters. While people may disagree with what he says, the right to voice an opinion is a freedom worth defending.
Peace requires that we allow people to speak, even when their words are difficult to hear. Not every opinion will be accepted, and sometimes feelings will be hurt, but protecting the ability to have open discussions is part of protecting the freedoms we all share.
Ryan, don’t be naive. His post was not an opinion, but a veiled threat.
We have been dealing with these kind for a very long time. Him and others like him will brag about woodchippers online, but will bully or attack the helpless and elderly without provocation, just like the subject of the article (who by the way may never have any sense of a functional life in the future).
And before Mr. D’s groupies start complaining about victims having no future – that is absolutely false. I personally know multiple examples of people who were subjected to sexual crime as minors who are living and functioning very well today. The potential for healing is there, if one wants to stop claiming victimhood as their identity, so I don’t believe for one second that all sexual crime victims have had a life sentence of harm inflicted on them. This article isn’t about victims of sexual assault anyway. It’s about how human beings should treat each other. One evil act will never justify another.
The social contract is pretty clear: people should have the right to live in peace, and in return respect everyone else’s rights to the same. That goes both ways. Don’t harass the PFR who has to walk to the store past your house because society won’t give him a decent enough job to afford a car. Likewise, despite what fantasies you may conjure up in your head, the PFR could care less about bothering you or your kids. It’s that simple. The facts back us up on this: a tiny fraction of sexual crimes are committed by PFRs today. It’s your kid’s coach, teacher, friend’s parent, local cop, or YOU that’s doing most of that now. Go bother those out there offending today if you must, but leave us alone, thank you.
I still stand by what I said. His opinion is his own, and to my knowledge, he is an American citizen. I will defend his right to express his opinion, even if I don’t agree with it. He didn’t target anyone specifically.
We need to move beyond violence and threats. Instead, we should focus on knowledge and facts—not just opinions—and make sure factual information reaches the people who have the power to change the laws.
Do I think Mr. D poses a threat to anyone? No. Like the rest of us, he knows that if he breaks the law, he is subject to it. That’s true for everyone in America.
Ryan, thank you for your service, BTW. Truly, we don’t know Mr. D’s intentions any more than he knows ours. That is why public perception is so skewed from reality. They don’t WANT to know any more about us or the complexity of how sexual offending actually happens to be properly informed on the subject.
Apparently, popular consensus is that if a “vigilante” dispatches one among our number, regardless of how long they have been living a law-abiding life after conviction, the “vigilante” should be hailed as a hero, and not given prison time. If they do face the consequences of their actions, they will get the support of the public to help them beat the charge.
Now listen carefully to what I am NOT saying. I’m not giving a pass for people to abuse children. If a person is caught in the act of abusing a child and that parent puts a few extra holes in the perpetrator in the moment, that is perfectly justified. If the guilty person is caught and serves time in prison in proportion to the offense – that is also justified. On the other hand, if the guilty person has been punished and has successfully completed all of that (which is a lot for those who are not in the know), then nothing more should be asked of them except to remain crime-free. That is JUSTICE. Anything added to it is INJUSTICE, period.
Much of the public’s perception has been shaped by years of messaging that portrays every person on the sex offender registry as a dangerous “boogeyman” waiting to harm someone, especially children. Fear is a powerful motivator, and when public safety becomes the focus of the message, it is often easy to gain support for expanded policing and constant surveillance. The problem is that this approach has encouraged many people to believe that all sex offenses are the same and that everyone on the registry presents the same level of risk.
In recent years, however, I’ve noticed a shift. People who get to know me before learning I’m on the registry are often surprised. Instead of reacting with fear, I’ve heard comments like, “It seems like everyone knows someone who’s on the registry,” or “I have a friend or family member on it.” For many people, this is the first time they have personally confronted the reality that those on the registry are not all the same.
I’ve also noticed that some members of the press are beginning to ask more questions. Rather than simply reporting that “122 registrants were arrested,” they want to know what those arrests were actually for. That distinction matters.
For example, when law enforcement announces a large drug bust, there is often physical evidence of illegal drugs, trafficking, or other criminal conduct that directly threatens public safety. By comparison, many registry-related arrests involve technical compliance violations, such as failing to report a vehicle, updating an address late, or missing an administrative deadline. Those are legal violations and can carry serious consequences, but they are fundamentally different from committing a new sexual offense.
I’ve seen this difference firsthand. A friend on probation failed to disclose a change of residence. He spent 15 days in jail awaiting a judge, and the outcome was additional classes added to his probation. In many jurisdictions, however, a registry reporting violation can be charged as a third-degree felony carrying up to five years in prison, even when there is no allegation of a new victim or new sexual offense.
As more people look beyond headlines and examine what these arrests actually involve, they are beginning to recognize the difference between someone who commits a new violent crime and someone who violates a complex registration requirement. That doesn’t mean reporting laws should be ignored, but it does mean the public discussion should distinguish between technical violations and offenses involving new criminal harm. More people seem willing to ask those questions today than they were just a few years ago.
Volusia County Branch Jail did that to me in 2014. They gave me paperwork there right before transfer to the processing center in Orlando. It gave me problems until I could dispose of the paperwork. I guess that I should consider myself lucky.
Oh and the Sexual Assaults was 4 times.
Yea Florida should have to pay me Like 100M for being sexually assaulted, Attacked by fellow inmates and Staff. All because of a charge.
Every single person who experienced this while behind bars needs to be filing their own suit. Since prison staff have no moral center, they will only understand practical consequences.