“If your screwing some girl you just met at the bar and she turns out to be 14 I guess that’s the chance you take, ignorance is not a defense.”

In the state of California….. Some young college men went out drinking. They were of legal age and showed ID. Some underage, MINOR, girls were in the same bar, they showed ID too.

The boys ended up arrested for statutory rape and the girls fake ID’s ended up in evidence. Even the California DMV couldn’t identify the fake ID’s as fake except by running the numbers through their computers.

Those boys were tried in court and thankfully the JURY had a brain and returned a not guilty verdict via jury nullification. If they had used your thought process those young men woud have gone to prison and then been on the registry.

I’m adding this as an edit: I know this story because those young men were friends of my step son. I could very well have been HIM that was in that courtroom.

I am amazed, ABSOLUTELY AMAZED and the lack of understanding of THE LAW in so many people. Or perhaps it’s not that many but just that they post a lot.

Jones….
You said “Personally I think it’s rude to just walk up to people and take their picture, whether it’s legal or not I think people should respect other peoples privacy, I don’t care if they are out in public.”

EXCUSE ME but if they are OUT IN PUBLIC there is no PRIVACY…..it’s a pretty basic concept when it’s outside and in view from public property.

You also said “Your parents let you walk 2 miles by yourself at 5 years old and your bragging about it, sounds like irresponsible parenting to me.”

Doesn’t sound like it to me. When I was 5 I was traveling almost that far from home just to walk to and from school. When I was 9 I was riding my bicycle 5 miles with my 7 year old brother (and occasionally my 5 year old sister) to go to the creek and go swimming. When I was 12 I was carrying a rifle and hunting with my 10 year old brother. When I was 14 I was carrying my own 12 guage shotgun and my brother was right there with me.
Of course we also rode in the back of a pickup truck for hours at a time, didn’t wear helmets on our bicycles, and a whole bunch of other “dangerous” things that people like you have legislated into crimes.

You also said “Why is a cop sitting on his bike a picture worthy occasion?”

It’s not but that’s absolutely not the issue. The issue is plain and simple. The officer overstepped his authority. He harassed, intimidated, and violated the rights of the citizen, under color of authority. The law is CLEAR. Without a warrant, he can’t destroy those images.

She either committed a crime (which she didn’t) and he couldn’t destroy them because that would be destruction of evidence OR she didn’t commit a crime and he had not authority to delete them. Either way, crime committed or not, those images could not LEGALLY be destroyed and therefore the officer broke the law.

When an officer of the law, or the courts, for that matter anyone in a position of authority, abuses that authority, they must be held accountable.

Photographing someone without there permission, in a public place, may be rude by some peoples standards. However, even if it is rude by everyones standards and the law remains as it is, it’s just being rude. It is not justification for an officer of the law to violate any law including the 1st, and 4th amendments.

For the person that said that “freedom of speech” doesn’t include photography, the 1st is about a lot more than just speech. It includes, religion, speech, the press, assembly. I suggest that you take a course in the Constitution.

Do you know you’re agreeing with me? That’s been my point all along. Violent sex offenders belong on the list. Who gets on the list and who doesn’t is different in all states. In NJ if you urinate in public you can get charged with Lewdness as a disorderly persons offense. I’ve been told that can get you on the list and that it can’t. I can’t find proof one way or the other. I did spend some time looking today.

I think my point is that people that got caught getting a bj, or taking a leak don’t belong on the list. Sometimes I wonder if it was really worth charging them at all. I guess they were breaking some law. But did they hurt anyone?

As for how many people can complete probation and not reoffend I’m sure it’s not that hard. Let’s assume he hasn’t reoffended, could that be because of the sex registry, with everything this guy is claiming has happened to him it sounds like he can’t even get an opportunity to reoffend. Maybe he just hasn’t got caught. Maybe the victim in this case wasn’t his first vicim, getting caught the first time, how common is that. Many people go years and years assaulting kids before they get caught, if they get caught at all.

The common charge for taking a leak behind a bar is disorderly conduct which won’t put you on the list. I seriously doubt anybody is on the list for simply taking a drunken leak outside a bar, they may tell you that’s what it’s for but I seriously doubt it.

I’m not advocating harassing your neighbors if they are a sex offender. I have some in my neighborhood and don’t pay any attention to them, right now I couldn’t even tell you who they are because I haven’t checked in years. My children are grown so it’s not something I concern myself with but if they were young I would definitely keep an eye on those things.

I don’t think the sex registry is perfect and your right it’s too inclusive I think there should be a lot more discretion as to who has to register. I also have a problem with the amount of info given. These websites that show them only give you the charge which isn’t always useful. I think the details of their crimes, or for your sake “alleged crimes” should be printed on the websites. This would help people determine who is a threat. If I see my neighbor is on the list because his girlfriend gave him a blowjob in the car or got caught taking a leak outside a bar then I’m not going to concern myself with him.

To me many of the things that happen to photographers at the hands of police are wrapped into other ways that police and society behave about other subjects, like the sex offender registry.

The police seem to always be looking for suspicious intent by people where there is none. They justify this by you just never know. So they tend to have responses that are out of proportion to what is happening. Now I’m not saying that if someone is doing something that looked out of context you shouldn’t ask some simple questions. That’s part of policing. What I’m saying is when police start doing things that escalate perfectly legitimate behaviour to a crime they are wrong.

The simple facts are there is nothing suspicious about taking a photograph in public with very few exceptions, like up skirting. It doesn’t matter what the person is taking a photograph of or what kind of equipment the person has. It’s a normal and customary activity.

It is off topic but I don’t have a problem with you guys having a legitimate discussion.

The point this guy is making, and not very well, is that he agreed to a plea when there wasn’t a sex offender registry. Many times people who did not commit any crimes agree to pleas because a known outcome is better then risking everything in front of a jury. In this case I don’t konw what he did and it doesn’t really matter. If you tell me that no one is ever falsely accused and convicted of a sex offense I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

This guy has done his time and paid his debt to society. How many people do a 10 year probation sentence and don’t reoffend? He deserves to get a job. He deserves to have the nightmare he’s been living end.

Like I said before mostly these lists do little to protect the public. Certainly guys like Otis Toole should have been on a list. But people like him account for less then 5% of the people on these lists. People that get arrested for taking a leak in an ally behind a bar because the mouth off to you don’t belong on these lists and they are ending up on them.

Just so you know when the lists first came out in NJ I ended up living down the street from someone on it. It was a nice neighborhood. The guy totally kept to himself, you never saw him. Yet people wrote stuff on his house and harassed him in other ways. So exactly who were the criminals at that point?

This is way off topic. Unless Carlos tells me it’s ok to continue I’m not going to post anymore about this off topic stuff.

Please come back to the photo where the person taking the photo didn’t do anything wrong. But the officer certainly broke many laws.

. In 1995 I agreed to a plea bargain of 10 years deferred adjudication probation in exchange for a guilty plea.

He then goes on and on about how nobody wants him to live in their neighborhood and nobody wants to be his friend and how his wife left him well no shit I wonder why. He doesn’t even have the balls to say what he did.

You want me to feel sorry for this guy, you think this is an example why the sex offender registry doesn’t work. I think this is a perfect example as to why it works. He doesn’t admit he was guilty but says he is determined never to break the law again so I take that as he is not claiming he’s innocent. He also says he was turned down from a job because he is a sex offender even though he wouldn’t have any contact with minors on the job so his crime has something to do with kids. I don’t really feel to bad for the guy, I’m more curious about how the victim got on with their life. Is the victim suffering any emotional problems because of this, how has it changed the victim’s life is more of my concern.

If you feel so bad for this guy have him move next door to you. Maybe he would make a good babysitter, after all he says he won’t do it again.

Ok, I will tell you that addiction is a disease. I wouldn’t say the choose not to take their meds. Compliance with medication is a very difficult problem. There has been lots of work done on this, it’s not only the mentally ill that don’t take meds, people with high blood pressure don’t, people with cancer don’t, people with all kinds of things have trouble taking meds. You can learn about suicide here, http://www.afsp.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&page_id=74295647-AAD5-B47F-340249697DAC238A it’s much more complicated than most people think. It’s obvious you aren’t up to date on current information on suicide.

It only takes one to kill you. As a citizen I wouldn’t be concerned about this but as a police officer in full uniform anytime somebody approaches you your on the defensive.

Did it ever occur to you that police taking a defensive posture with everyone that approaches them is a problem? If someone is being defensive people sense this. They don’t trust people that are defensive. It leads to escalations of every interaction the police have with the people. You know the Pagan Motorcycle Club talked just like you do. There are members and citizens in Pagan speak, in cop speak its officers and citizens.

I think 15 is pretty uncommon to be sneaking into bars. I know a lot of girls under the legal drinking age sneak into bars, they don’t even have to sneak at a lot of bars, but a 15 year old is highly unlikely. Besides why stop at 15, if a 12 year old sneaks into the bar she should be ok to nail because she is there she must be 21. How about having a little accountability for yourself. If your screwing some girl you just met at the bar and she turns out to be 14 I guess that’s the chance you take, ignorance is not a defense.

The point was 19 year old immature boys aren’t going to ask for ID. They aren’t thinking about that at the time. I’m not saying people shouldn’t be accountable. Just that in a case like this it’s nonsense to put the 19 year old on a sex offender list. It’s not like he went out and hunted down someone, stalked them like prey, he made a mistake. The girl was a willing participant. There wasn’t any violence. That’s the point. Now a guy that’s doing home invasions and raping woman, I have no sympathy for. A guy that’s following woman on the street and abducing them, no sympathy. Those people are true predators and need to be on a list.

Again it’s just common curtisy to ask first, espiecally when your taking pictures of somebody’s kids. I would be uncomfortable with a stranger coming up to my daughter in the park and taking pictures of her. He may have good intentions but as a parent am I supposed to just say, oh well, he’s probably just a reporter or some innocent guy that takes pictures as a hobby. My first thought, and I’m sure most people’s first thought would be what the fuck is this guy doing and would confront them. He wouldn’t be taking anymore without my permission. Sorry but if your walking around taking pictures of kids most people are going to view you as a pervert, you may not like it, just like they don’t like you taking their picture but it’s not against the law to think somebody is a pervert espeically when they give you a reason to think that.

The point is they are almost never perverts. Taking a photo of someone never hurt them. We laugh when we hear of aboriginal peoples being afraid of having their souls stolen by a camera yet we behave almost the same way. A guy with a camera doesn’t equal a pervert. What are you going to do to someone in public to stop them from taking your kids photo? How are you going to confront the person taking the photo. It sounds like you need some anger management courses and some lessons on how to behave in public. When people aren’t doing anything wrong you leave them alone. People with cameras taking photos aren’t hurting anyone.

I would like to hear the prosecution’s side of that story.

The story was the guy was suspected of selling drugs. They have a search warrant; they break in without an announcement. They do the search and don’t find any drugs but he was changing the kids diaper when they broke in. They can’t get him on the drugs so they charge him with child rape because they saw him touch the kid’s genitals in the course of changing the diaper.

I guess next your going to tell me drug addiction is a disease. Your right people don’t choose to have a mental illness but many choose not to take their meds so in a way they are choosing to have a mental illness. I don’t know where you get your stats but if 550,000 people attempted suicide last your your telling me only 33,000 suceeded. That’s about a 1-17 ratio. People who really try to commit suicide have a much higher success rate than that, I’m talking about those who really try to killthemselves not the ones who say they are and then swallow 10 aspirin. How do you know they suffer from mental illness unless they were diagnosed before they killed themselves. I don’t think medical examiners are diagnosing people with mental illness after they are dead. To say they don’t want to kill themselves is like saying anybody with a mental illness can’t make a decision. So if a person with mental illness orders a pizza your saying he might not really be hungry. I know that is an absurd comparison but it is in response to an absurd statement.

I don’t think that guns disguised as cameras are that common; I’d hazard a guess that there might be 100 in the whole world (including those in police custody, museums and the like) and there are millions and millions of cameras. So it’s just another irrational fear. Just as there are way more laser pointers then laser sights.

It only takes one to kill you. As a citizen I wouldn’t be concerned about this but as a police officer in full uniform anytime somebody approaches you your on the defensive.

15 yo girls get fake id’s and sneak into bars all the time

I think 15 is pretty uncommon to be sneaking into bars. I know a lot of girls under the legal drinking age sneak into bars, they don’t even have to sneak at a lot of bars, but a 15 year old is highly unlikely. Besides why stop at 15, if a 12 year old sneaks into the bar she should be ok to nail because she is there she must be 21. How about having a little accountability for yourself. If your screwing some girl you just met at the bar and she turns out to be 14 I guess that’s the chance you take, ignorance is not a defense.

The thing that bothers me is that just because a guy has a camera and takes a photo of a kid, he’s suspected of being some kind of pervert.

Again it’s just common curtisy to ask first, espiecally when your taking pictures of somebody’s kids. I would be uncomfortable with a stranger coming up to my daughter in the park and taking pictures of her. He may have good intentions but as a parent am I supposed to just say, oh well, he’s probably just a reporter or some innocent guy that takes pictures as a hobby. My first thought, and I’m sure most people’s first thought would be what the fuck is this guy doing and would confront them. He wouldn’t be taking anymore without my permission. Sorry but if your walking around taking pictures of kids most people are going to view you as a pervert, you may not like it, just like they don’t like you taking their picture but it’s not against the law to think somebody is a pervert espeically when they give you a reason to think that.

I saw it the other day now I can’t find it to post it. But this is all somewhat off topic.

I would like to hear the prosecution’s side of that story.

I didn’t say don’t supervise them. Just that it’s gotten to such a point that kids are supervised out of learning.

People choose to commit suicide, people don’t choose to get killed while sitting in a classroom

First I have to apologize to Carlos for the hijack because this isn’t a blog about suicide prevention. Most people that commit suicide don’t choose to commit suicide, that is a myth. 90% of the people that commit (33,000 a year) or attempt (550,000 a year) suicide are suffering from a treatable mental illness and are not being properly treated for that illness. The suicide attempt or suicide is a direct result of that illness. Depression can be a terminal illness. People don’t choose to have a mental illness just like they don’t choose to have cancer. It’s not about willpower and you can’t just snap out of mental illness, if you could there wouldn’t be any mentally ill because they’d all choose to not be ill.

Still don’t so what is so interesting about a cop sitting on a motorcycle but if you do how about just asking him first. Like I said, I’ve seen cameras and cellphones that are capable of firing a shot so I wouldn’t feel comfortable with somebody pointing anything at me.

I don’t think that guns disguised as cameras are that common; I’d hazard a guess that there might be 100 in the whole world (including those in police custody, museums and the like) and there are millions and millions of cameras. So it’s just another irrational fear. Just as there are way more laser pointers then laser sights. The reason you don’t ask him first is because it’ll spoil the shot. His body posture will be all wrong, he won’t look natural. Add that to the fact that he’s in public so there is no need to ask.

Are you on the list for one of these reasons? In my state the age of consent is 16 so your scenario of a 19 and 16 year old couldn’t happen here. A 19 year old and a 15 year old, that person should go on the list, your talking about a college aged boy having sex with a girl in 9th grade, I don’t have much sympathy for that guy. Taking a leak in public, that is usually charged as some type of disorderly person or something and that won’t put you on the list, I’m sure there are some on the list for taking a leak in public but I think it is pretty uncommon unless it was some sort of plea deal. I caught plenty of people taking a leak in bar alleys and none of them ended up on the list, if they were decent I’d usually give them a warning, if they were an ass they got a ticket and if they were a real ass they went to jail. The guy that takes a leak and does nothing to prevent anybody else from seeing him deserves to go on the list. At least go somewhere that you won’t be seen.

Nope I’m not on a list anywhere. You’ve got my name you can check. 15 yo girls get fake id’s and sneak into bars all the time but this is getting more difficult now. Tracy Lords was making porn movies when she was like 16. I’d think most 15yo’s would be sophomores. I’m not saying where the line should be drawn, just that where it is now doesn’t seem to make much sense to me. It’s different in every state. Well taking a leak where you purposely expose yourself is different from someone that’s going someplace where they won’t be seen. I’m not advocating that people be allowed to walk around in public flashing. Have you ever given a woman a ticket for urinating in public? Woman do it all the time.
Read some tales from sex offenders, http://reformsexoffenderlaws.org/tales.php

Your right, most crimes committed against a child are done by somebody the child knows, family, babysitters, parents of friends, teachers, coaches etc. Being able to check those people out is great. I don’t think a registered sex offender is likely to go try to get a job coaching young kids knowing that his dirty little secret is likely to get out.

Most of those people are already excluded in some ways except the parents. Or their behavior is covered up by the organizations they work for. Again taking a photo of a kid in public isn’t a sex crime unless you are doing something really strange. It’s a normal thing to do. Kids are wonderful photographic subjects. Their faces are so interesting. The thing that bothers me is that just because a guy has a camera and takes a photo of a kid, he’s suspected of being some kind of pervert.

I highly doubt that any parent is in prison today for simply changing a diaper.

I saw it the other day now I can’t find it to post it. But this is all somewhat off topic.

I agree but I don’t think that justifies not supervising your children.

If they spent 1 billion during that time on suicide prevention they would have saved a bunch of lives. If you paid attention you’d see that most of the people that did shootings in schools also suicided at the same time. Perhaps knowing more about how to prevent suicide would have prevented the school shootings as well.

People choose to commit suicide, people don’t choose to get killed while sitting in a classroom

Because he looks interesting. It’s actually a good photo for many reasons. I wish it was one of mine.

Still don’t so what is so interesting about a cop sitting on a motorcycle but if you do how about just asking him first. Like I said, I’ve seen cameras and cellphones that are capable of firing a shot so I wouldn’t feel comfortable with somebody pointing anything at me.

Because it’s the new witch hunt for the most part. A good idea has been turned into something it wasn’t supposed to be. Did you ever take a leak behind the squad car door? Well add yourself to the registry because in most places that’s an offense that will end you up on it. If you’re a 19 year old immature boy it’s really easy for you to end up on the list. All you have to do is have sex with a 16 year old mature girl and get caught, even though she willingly had sex with you. Besides most of these people never reoffend.

Are you on the list for one of these reasons? In my state the age of consent is 16 so your scenario of a 19 and 16 year old couldn’t happen here. A 19 year old and a 15 year old, that person should go on the list, your talking about a college aged boy having sex with a girl in 9th grade, I don’t have much sympathy for that guy. Taking a leak in public, that is usually charged as some type of disorderly person or something and that won’t put you on the list, I’m sure there are some on the list for taking a leak in public but I think it is pretty uncommon unless it was some sort of plea deal. I caught plenty of people taking a leak in bar alleys and none of them ended up on the list, if they were decent I’d usually give them a warning, if they were an ass they got a ticket and if they were a real ass they went to jail. The guy that takes a leak and does nothing to prevent anybody else from seeing him deserves to go on the list. At least go somewhere that you won’t be seen.

Your right, most crimes committed against a child are done by somebody the child knows, family, babysitters, parents of friends, teachers, coaches etc. Being able to check those people out is great. I don’t think a registered sex offender is likely to go try to get a job coaching young kids knowing that his dirty little secret is likely to get out.

I highly doubt that any parent is in prison today for simply changing a diaper.