The sex offender does seem to be in a delicate position. Can't talk about for fear of discrimination but things still need to come to light for healing, long term change and acceptance. My son just went to prison....he's a good man, made a serious mistake, has to deal and he will, but I worry about the rest of his life.

Thank you for this info. I will look into it.

LifeGoneWrong - I beg to differ that the reason they don't know is because "we" have been good at hiding. There is a large and growing community who have been out there telling people about the recidivism statistics for over a decade. My experience is that the large majority of people when engaged in a one on one conversation in person are very sympathetic to our plight. I have found this is even the case with law makers - and I've talked to at least 200 legislators over the past nine years. The problem is the misinformation that is intentionally spread in the media and by many within law enforcement and also many of these same law makers who say one thing to your face but something very different in the public eye.

If you haven't been active in the "activism" fight against these laws then prepare yourself for what you will happen once you do become active in this fight. It can get ugly. Trust me - I know from personal experience.

In terms of the laws being changed - I do agree that they will change over time. It took over 20 years for the unconstitutional practices of the U.S. Attorney's Office in federal drug cases to be ruled as such by the SCOTUS. During that time tens of thousands of federal defendants were given 20+ year sentences that remain in effect to this day - some 7 years after the SCOTUS ruling in Booker/Fan Fan.

Just in the past five years alone there has been a huge change in the tides that surround these laws - in our favor. But we still have a long way to go, and my guess is that it will be another 10-20 years before sweeping changes are made.

Terry , could you give me a little history on this booker ruling?

cancolwee The truth be know he can become a better man, if he uses his time to better his education to find work for the day he gets out of prison. The type of Job he should be learning about is something that will allow him to become self employed. Family could start today to help him with money for the day he get out! Share this with family and friends and see if you can start a savings account (NOW) that will inable him to continue his life ? sorry I dont spell good but any ways. He needs a goal and this will help him so much because for him to find work it will be imposible if you dont help him for the day he is released. I am tring to start a business to help other became self employed and its very hard but you have the time to help him to even help others. Ps dont put your return address on his mail, He should know it.

The Booker case was really a growth of an argument that came out of a 2000 case called Apprendi vs. New Jersey. In Apprendi a white guy fired a gun into a black family's home (this is obviously a crude synopsis of the case) - he plead guilty to shooting the gun into the home and originally even confessed that it was because the black family had moved into the neighborhood and he didn't want them there. His plea was only to the gun charges and not the enhancement for the fact that it was racially motivated (a hate crime). The judge sentenced him to 12 years in prison, which was two years above the statutory maximum for the crime to which he pleaded guilty. The enhancement was based on a "preponderance of the evidence" that the judge found that his actions were in fact racially motivated.

The appeal went to the SCOTUS who ruled that any fact which increases a sentence beyond the statutory maximum has sixth amendment protections attached (that is to say that such facts must be charged in an indictment and proven beyond a reasonable doubt).

For over 20 years the U.S. Attorney's Office made a practice of doing two things that were ultimately held unconstitutional. First, in the case of guilty pleas in drug cases they would allow a defendant to plead guilty to something like "possession with intent to distribute a pound of marijuana," or something along those lines - essentially a crime that would carry a guideline range of less than five years in prison. But then the federal probation office would prepare a Presentence Investigation Report wherein they would say things like, "Jose Garcia - a coconspirator in this case - would testify that the defendant purchased over ten pounds of marijuana each week for over three years in addition to 10 ounces of crack cocaine each week for over five years." And so on. They would then base the type and quantity of drugs for which the defendant was responsible according to the supposed testimony (rarely would anyone even ever testify to these facts - the PO simply took what the FBI and the US Attorney told them and put it into the report) that would have been elicited at trial. The judge would then find those "facts" as true under a preponderance of the evidence and impose a sentence of 20-30 years or even life in prison in many cases.

Second, in cases where federal defendants proceeded to trial the government would often present evidence of one drug type (marijuana in many cases since that was often easy to prove and seemingly less worrisome to the defendant who assumed such a finding would expose him to minimal prison time) and quantity and simply ask the jury to find the defendant guilty of possession with intent to distribute that drug type and quantity. They would then pull the same routine in the PSR phase exposing the defendant to much harsher penalty provisions associated with other drug types and quantities. The Courts would routinely simply adopt anything that was put into the PSR as fact.

Booker and Fan Fan essentially said that the Apprendi rule applied to federal drug cases such that type and quantity of drug are elements of the crime to which Sixth Amendment guarantees attach. The SCOTUS finally agreed ending over 20 years of wrong doing (and INTENTIONAL wrong doing by the federal government). But unfortunately the SCOTUS did not make the ruling explicitly retroactive as they must do in order for those serving unconstitutional sentences to receive any relief.

Lifegonewrong - that is an excellent point. Being self employed IS the best solution for RSO's. There are some issues to consider with this to assure that when some litigious asshole customer (because they are RAMPANT out there in the US where many people sue just because they know it is less painful for businesses to settle rather than to spend the money to fight in court) finds out about the label they will make it difficult for the RSO to continue to sustain a solid customer base.

There are definitely challenges, but this is clearly the best route for a RSO.

Thanks Terry,
I know my sons PSR had stuff in there that wasn't true. According to them he said he downloads certain cp and said he masturbated to them, which he never said. In fact most of the government's case against my son is lies and using their words as if my son said them.
I don't like the retroactive not happening. I worry about that when these laws go the other way if that happens.
I'll have to look up that case and study it further.
I worry, also , that when it's time for his release they'll charge him with pot possession because they took it as evidence as well. They're doing that here in Florida. My attornye says no but I still worry about that.
If we had the right attorneys and if the government could be held accountable for lying , which they aren't according to the law, then we'd have a lot less SOs. They say and do whatever they want and get away with it.

Yeah, the PSR "facts" are a concern - these are used for the rest of our lives when dealing with the feds. If he ever faces another situation with them they look to that document as if it was the facts of what happened. And it is also used by the probation department during post-release supervision.

TerrB2012 beg to differ that the reason they don't know is because "we" have been good at hiding.
I did say we are good at hiding and I believe this has caused our problem today. If people had know we have been living among them and that we have family jobs friends and family our crime may not be look down on as hasrhly, seeing other crimes have moives showing how there lifes had changed HOW many movies have you seen of a sex offenders life change? NONE! Legislators may not of been able to lie to the public so easily or intentionally or been able to spread misinformation to the media to pass the Law had the public know the truth. I think the public needs to prepare themselfs if these law dont change. Our fight is not against only the laws but our lifes we have nothing to lose YOU SAY PREPARE YOURSELF FOR WHAT WILL HAPPEN it already happen the day they used my crime of 33 years ago and have been telling the pubic HE has just commited this crime today for me this crime will be every day for the rest of my life if they continue using my picture every year Its already ugly

Life - let me know when your movie is out - I'll be the first in line to see it.

We need to find those ex- sex offenders that have been living among society for the last 10-60 years to realize they have so much to offer themself and others. The public needs to know that more than half the sex registrants have more than 10 years with no other crimes.
I have been talking to the school and letting them know my crime was 33 years ago as well as other people around my community, they did not know sex offenders lived among them and are very shocked because they thought sex offenders just commit another crime as soon as they are released. That is why the Megans Web Site was put out I was told because of the danger before they return to jail The public dont know so many lifes had changed and this Law will put a stop to this from happening

They always have laws named after kids but are there any names after offenders

I dont want to start a move I just want people to realize we have over 750,000 registrants and I believe about 600,000. have never commited another crime, as in my case its been 33 years . Sex offenders are at the lowwest returnd rate of all crimes if I am wrong I need to know. I've seen in alot of reports return rates have been from 3% to 15%

Lifegonewrong - have you seen the 140 page report from Human Rights Watch? If not you should spend some time with it. It is our best tool in fighting these laws.

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0907webwcover.pdf

I beg to differ they know we can chang there just making laws and making it harder for us to prove end can change