saraberri

Im not entirely sure where youre getting your information, but some of it is simply inaccurate. For example, the idea that possession laws can carry a far heavier sentence than sexual offenses, isnt true, at least in Kentucky. Here, Rape in the First Degree is a Class B felony [10 -20 years] (unless victim under 12 then Class A [20 - life]), whereas Possession of Controlled Substance First Degree (for the most serious controlled substances) is Class D felony [1 - 5 years] for first offenses, and a Class C felony [5-10 years ] for second and subsequent offenses. Also, the idea that registered sex offenders is a label only for rapists or those convicted of [multiple] sexual assaults isnt correct. Again, I cant speak for the rest of the nation, but here, you are required to go on the registry if, for example: your convicted or plead to a charge of kidnaping, or unlawful imprisonment, unless youre a parent (but a grandparent, aunt, step-mother, etc., are not given the benefit of this exception); or possession of matter portraying a sexual performance by a minor (i.e. possession of child pornography) [note your level of culpability or the number or nature of the images is immaterial to whether or not you must register, i.e., if you have a single image on your hard-drive of a minor in any state of undress, and you are reported, you could be an eventual sex offender. And, the list of required offenses seems to go up with each legislative session. Politicians love to be tough on crime, and no one is more politically unpopular than sex offenders.

Again, Im not disagreeing with the idea that Match.com and other sites should have some duty to screen, and Im not advocating that rapists or violent predators shouldnt be either incarcerated and/or kept on a very close watch when/if they are released. Im only pointing out that the label sex offender is potentially much broader than you may believe, and despite your personal opinion of the criminal justice system, its never as black and white as popular opinion would have you believe. [For example I once represented a man who came up behind a co-worker, grabbed her by the waist and said boo. He was charged criminally with Sexual Abuse in the 4th degree. After a shit-ton of litigation, and on the day of trial the charge was amended to Harassment with Physical Contact (both are Class B misdemeanors) which should have been the original charge to begin with and, as this crime accurately encompassed the facts of the case, and there really was no defense to the elements of that crime, he plead guilty. He was also sued civilly. My point in relating all of this is that this guy did something stupid, juvenile and certainly politically incorrect. I cant tell you what this cost him financially, and thats not the point - - but he certainly learned a very valuable lesson - - but he was charged with a sex offense. If he didnt have the luxury of being able to afford a very zealous and diligent defense, he would probably have been advised to plead to that offense, and AT ANY POINT the General Assembly could deem this to be a registerable offense [there is no ex post facto prohibition against this] and BINGO hes a sex offender.]

you and i look at this differently. kidnapping, dear, should result in a person being watched for life - that is a dangerous person. re:sentancing, i live in ny - we have a 3 strikes law which makes it not only possible, but a common occurence for someone in possession of controlled substances to rot n jail while our friendly neighborhood molester is enjoying his new relationship with a woman who has kids. (that 'family' lived down the street from us)
i also disagree that getting tough on sex offenses is a goal for many politicians. in the politics game, people don't want their name associated in people's minds with such a distasteful subject. and, being open about how many offenders live in your own neighborhood would alarm the public. ny's list of offenders by county. cruise through your state's registry, if you've got the stomach for it. all parents should.
as for your case example, again i see the scenario from a completely different viewpoint. you don't sneak up grab your co-workers in an office environment! the situation you describe shows a man physically accosting a woman in her work environment. you say waist, maybe she felt the contact was more personal (and it sounds like the ruling supported this). let me tell you, being suddenly touched by someone is a bit alarming, and being 'grabbed' is extremely aggressive, and not to be tolerated in the workplace. that woman has every right to be employed safely, to provide for herself and her family without being subjected to such harassment at work. you take a 'boys will be boys' stance on it, but thankfully the1950's era is long over. it's not juvenile behavior, he was an adult, and he should know better than to grab a woman in a no-no spot at work. is he such a sociopath that he drastically misreads cues about what is accepted behavior in the workplace?

the registry exists in an attempt to keep women and children safe from predators.