Darn it! What Janet is saying, not Jackie.

Had my son's lawyer gone done that road, I fear what the outcome would have been.

But civil commitment is real and everyone is used against someone. What should a defense attorney do? Serious question, I'm not being rhetorical.

I suppose as a guardian of an individual who pleaded guilty to a sex offense, I should weigh in on this topic since it is certainly one of great importance.

The unfortunate reality is that those in government fixate on studies showing people with severe disabilities such as mental illness, developmental disabilities, and mental retardation pose significant risks of committing sex crimes [because of] their disabilities. Thus, drawing attention to their disability can and many times does backfire very quickly, as it simply arms law enforcement and prosecutors with the ammo they need to secure convictions even easier.

These same government officials also see the studies showing these people are at high risk of giving false confessions of guilt, as being the pathway to secure convictions quicker. They do not see the studies as a warning that they could be very well sending an innocent person to prison -- nor do they care because the stigma is, they are "just" some "crazy person" so who in society and government is going to care about them and sadly they are correct.

In terms of sex offender laws applied to them. Politicians wrote these laws without contemplating the severe and pervasive adverse impacts they will have for people with severe disabilities and the federal laws the state laws violate such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the Disability Act, to add to the already severe burdens forced on RSO's to find suitable housing and therapeutic programs, services, or activities.

My experiences have been that when you go to a politician and discuss sex offender issues, they are prone to ignore you on the basis of sex offenders being the worst criminals existing. But when you throw in that the person has a severe disability such as mental illness, the door quickly slams shut in their having any willingness to even talk to you, and many will look at the advocate as a "nut case" themselves to justify and rationalize ignoring any empirical evidence they provide that advocates for these citizens.

Even in private advocacy groups, the trend is not one of including disability issues in organizational goals and efforts to draw attention to the human rights issues going on. But worst of all are these private non-profit organizations that get public funding to run community programs for people with severe disabilities such as developmental disabilities. Many of them refuse to take on such clients, and those that do, do not step up to the plate to advocate for their clients among politicians to have registration and residency laws changed.

When it comes to civil commitment, yes, states use disabilities to claim they are more likely than not to commit more sex crimes and any effort to introduce countervailing evidence or testimony showing that the person does not pose such dangers on the basis of having proper levels of supervision, is often thrown out and barred. The entire so-called "civil trial" is really nothing more than modern day witch hunts on a platform that is predisposed against the person to severely prejudice them. Rarely do these individuals win their freedom in trial nor at any time thereafter.

studies showing people with severe disabilities such as mental illness, developmental disabilities, and mental retardation pose significant risks of committing sex crimes [because of] their disabilities.

I'd like to see those studies. Who conducted them? What was the longitudinal design of the study as far as how many years they tracked? Everything in my experience as a parent, advocate and person who has spoken to hundreds of parents in these situations contradicts that.

Parents of children with disabilities who have been arrested for these types of crimes. Hundreds because I work in the advocacy realm for adults with disabilities and heard many stories firsthand.

The real reason for why the advocacy disability groups won't get involved? It's a slam on the brand. Bipolar? We don't want the associated with sex crimes. Asperger's? Same thing. It's a "let's not taint the brand" issue. That part is 100% true.

Because if "bipolar" or "Asperger's" or any disability or mental illness is associated with sex crimes, from the point of view of the advocacy groups, it further stigmatizes them. It's a purely political position. I understand it although I strongly disagree with it and have made it known to them.

@michigan, almost everything dealing with sex offenders and the registry is a political issue. Reason, common sense, or critical thinking is never used when dealing with sex offender issues.

Regarding arguing for mitigation, the defense has to ask whether any mitigating factors will even be taken into consideration. With most prosecutors, I don't think they will, or if they are, only to a small degree.

Arguing for mitigation is a touchy proposition with civil commitment looming the background. A defense attorney must weigh the risk vs the benefit.

Most criminal defense attorneys have had dealings with the prosecutor in the past and can usually determine how far they can push the mental disability factor at the plea negotiation stage to stay out of hot water.

I have seen a couple of cases of civil commitment in which the offender was placed in civil commitment for a very slight mental disability. So, given the wrong prosecutor, it does not take much for a civil commitment hearing or trial.

rewdiazepam

Here is an article from The Arc, which is a community provider that services people with developmental disabilities.

http://www.thearc.org/what-we-do/resources/fact-sheets/sexual-offenses

The most frequent sexual offenses reported in one study were indecent exposure, other minor offenses, and sexual assault of young girls (Day, 1997). Another nationwide study that surveyed 243 community agencies found the most common sexual offenses were inappropriate sexual behavior in public (62.2%), sexual behaviors and stimulation that inappropriately involved others (42.6%), sexual activity involving minors (42.6%) and assaultive/nonconsensual sexual activity not involving minors (34.5%) (Ward et al, 2001). Another study found the most common sexual behaviors are those seen among people without intellectual disability – offenses against children, genital exposure and rape (Murphy, et al., 1983).

This article is from Cornell University School of Law, Social and Science Law.

http://courses2.cit.cornell.edu/sociallaw/student_projects/FalseConfessions.html

This article discusses the high risks of people with severe disabilities giving false confessions of guilt to sex crimes and murder. The kicker is that such incidents are not uncommon, nor are they unknown by law enforcement personnel, defense and prosecutors, and judges -- rather, it is that none of the folks really give a damn.

Common sense, let alone logic, dictate that when a defendant is known to have severe disabilities, how in the hell can a judge actually think that asking the defendant who pleads guilty to a crime, if he or she believes they were represented properly, if they are giving their confession absent threats, intimidation, or coercion, and other questions like this. And yet, they are asked such questions and the judge accepts their plea of guilty.

At least the Arc is arguing for no jail time. They are arguing for a diversion plan to be worked out with the prosecution and the judge. This is a good thing.

In autism, recividism in my experience tends to be extremely low. Black and white thinkers. Rule learners. Once they know it is wrong and truly absorb what they have done, they KNOW it and will NEVER break that rule (or law) again.

Don't get me started on false confessions with the DD. I will read this article tomorrow. Thank you so much, Legal.

It is really unbelievable to me that anyone having to register is treated lie an animal. even our local county
re-entry program that was formed to help those coming out of prison will not talk to someone accused of a sex crime coming out of prison. It is so sad I can not believe this if it had not been for this happening to my son I would not know about this, most people are clueless there must be awareness brought to this crime against humanity so many really innocent men who would never hurt anyone caught in these online stings.

THANK YOU ALL I don't know anywhere where people (like US) can come together and share perspectives and links and realize we are not alone in all this. A prime example are all the comments on the Discussion

HOWEVER I am getting scared about what the 'new and improved' G+Daily Strength may look like. I went on the 'tell take a look" page and couldn't even get 'signed in' so I could comment. If this site gets too user Un-Friendly where oh where CAN we gather? I sincerely hope to be able to come here and find friends like you all. Janet Mackie