Senators back amendment targeting past sex offenders
By DAVID A. LIEB
Associated Press Writer
Associated Press Writer
Mar 26, 2008 - 10:26:53 CDT
Shattering the Silence
Read the Daily Journal's Shattering the Silence series at www.dailyjournalonline.com for more information about sexual exploitation of children in this area, ways to keep your children safe and signs to look for if they are abused.
Read the Daily Journal's Shattering the Silence series at www.dailyjournalonline.com for more information about sexual exploitation of children in this area, ways to keep your children safe and signs to look for if they are abused.
The Senate’s effort to increase the tracking and public notification of people convicted of decades-old sex offenses came just moments after a registered sex offender urged a House committee to use restraint in imposing new restrictions.
Aside from registering their names, addresses and other information, sex offenders also are prohibited under Missouri law from living or loitering near schools and child care centers.
An amendment added to a Senate bill Tuesday would require registered sex offenders to avoid all “Halloween-related contact with children” by remaining in their homes, with the external lights off, between 5 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on Oct. 31. They also would have to post a sign stating they had no candy or treats.
Separate bills heard by a House committee Tuesday would make public swimming pools and parks with playgrounds off limits to child sex offenders and would bar them from serving as coaches or trainers for youth athletics.
As more restrictions are added, “the invisible walls of incarceration that keep going up around me keep re-sentencing me,” said Ted Mason, 50, of Blue Springs.
Mason was sentenced to a 120-day prison treatment program and five years probation for felony sexual misconduct involving indecent exposure in front of a child. The offense occurred in 2001, according to Department of Corrections records. After going through a community-based treatment program, Mason said he has changed.
Yet Mason said existing restrictions have forced him to sleep in a separate home from his wife and two children. That’s because the home they bought, after gaining clearance from the state probation office, turned out to be too close to a home-based child care center, he said.
“The news screams, ‘There’s a monster on the loose!’ Society says, ‘Kill it!’ And lawmakers say, ‘We will,”’ Mason said in an interview after testifying before the House Crime Prevention and Public Safety Committee.
He received some sympathy from Rep. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, who noted that parents such as Mason couldn’t even take their own children to the park if the House proposal passed.
“I am not for sex offenders,” Nasheed said. “However, I do believe we can go too far.”
In the Senate, there were no audible “no’s” on a voice vote giving the proposed constitutional amendment first-round approval. If passed by both the Senate and House, that measure could appear on November statewide ballot.
The amendment seeks to undo a June 2006 Missouri Supreme Court decision that sex offenders convicted of crimes before Missouri’s registry law took effect in January 1995 cannot be required to register. The high court ruled the law violated the state constitution’s prohibition on retrospective laws.
As a result, the sex offender registry maintained by the Missouri State Highway Patrol no longer lists the addresses of 4,364 people whose most recent sex-offense conviction occurred before 1995, said patrol spokesman Capt. Tim Hull. The registry still listed detailed information for 6,995 other offenders as of Tuesday, Hull said.
“If the state of Missouri says that it is in the best interest of the citizens to have a sexual registration list, should it make any difference when that predator committed their offense?” sponsoring Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, asked rhetorically during a brief debate.
“It’s almost false advertising if the state of Missouri has a list, and then everyone who committed an offense prior to Jan. 1, 1995, is not on that list,” Crowell said in an interview
His proposed constitutional amendment would allow retrospective laws for the sex offender registry. It also would allow laws prohibiting sex offenders from living near schools or child-care centers to be applied retroactively.
Following much the same logic as with its earlier ruling, the state Supreme Court in February upheld a decision striking down a 2006 law that would have forced sex offenders to move away from schools and child care centers, even though they had lived there before a ban on doing so took effect.
The measure also would allow mandatory DNA samples to be taken from felons, even though they were convicted before a state DNA testing law took effect.
Sex offender bills are SJR34, SB714, HB1397, HB1536, HB1560.
On the Net:
Legislature: http://www.moga.mo.gov
Ads by Yahoo!
Free Credit Score and Report
Get your free credit report and score from FreeCreditReport.com™.
www.FreeCreditReport.com
Reader Comments (28)The comments below are from readers and do not represent the views of the Daily Journal
thingsneedchangin posted on Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I would like to see a list of ALL felons living in the area...Like who has been charged with breaking in and entering, meth lab, and such!!! I wold also like to see a list of who is receiving disability benifits and perhaps cheating the system.
Report Abuse
HOW STUPID, AGIAN!! posted on Monday, April 21st, 2008 at 10:07 am
Of course i wouldn't lock myself inside my home if I knew an offender lived next door!! As a matter of fact, I know one lives down my street, we have a right to know! I always keep a close eye on my son, but when one (or more) live(s) so close, you keep a closer eye on them! You're just more aware, it's our right to know that when we have childern & it's children they've hurt. And I wouldn't wanna live by someone who watched & knew Jerry Springer so well they went around calling people by his name! Now THAT'S scary! I'm not 'so uneducated' about these issues, I know what it's like to have my childhood taken from me. I'm hurt & angry that people defend these monsters. Why can't more people understand that? It's not like robbing bank, serving time & it's over. The bank recovers. A child never does.
to: how stupid posted on Sunday, April 20th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
I'm guessing from your "professional" opinon that are a leading psychiatrist with many years of experience in treating those who have committed sex offenses. Since you are not, your comment is nothing more than Jerry Springer psychology. What would you do if you knew an offender lived next door. . ..lock yourself inside your home? I wouldnt want to live near someone who was so uneducated about issues that they make stupid comments. I think i will lobby for a list that shows where these people live.
It is a Deterrent posted on Friday, April 18th, 2008 at 7:43 am
I hear a lot of people say that this like the death penalty does not deter crime. I disagree. When the needle hits the veins and they draw that last breath, I can guarantee that they will never reoffend. Thus, crime is deterred. This isn't as tough as the death penalty, but I bet it makes the freak think twice before they do reoffend. Everybody knows who and what they are and has no problem sending them to the death chamber.
HOW STUPID... posted on Wednesday, April 16th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I, too, would like to know if a child molester is living next door, or down the street from me! Let's stop talking about their rights, they blew them when they becames sex offenders. Lets talk about OUR rights, OUR KIDS' rights to stay safe! Someone can't change by doing time if they've molested a child. It never leaves their mind. I know it's different if someone has an affair with a minor, but that's THEIR problem, not mine. THEY should have known better! Stop whining about the 'list' people & stop sleeping with minors! Then there wouldn't be a problem. And yes, it is as simple as that. We ARE NOT animals.
kmc86 posted on Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 at 9:09 am
While it may be true that having a "list" will not prevent the crime, but having knowledge does! As a law abiding citizen I have a RIGHT to know if there's is a sexual predator living next door to me, down the street, or even on the next block. You can go to Missouri state highway patrol website and when searching for an offender's name you can click on he or she and find out the crime commited and the victims gender and age, then you can make your own assumption on whether that person victimized someone or is a victim of a ticked off ex lover.
to: the truth posted on Friday, April 11th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
The problem with the registration law is that it lumps ALL OFFENDERS into one category, which is certainly not fair. To say that a teenage boy who gets caught with his teenage girlfriend ONE TIME has the same risk of repeating as the subject you described is wrong. The law was created to protect against those who are deemed by courts to be predators. The truth is that most guys (had they been caught in their teen years) would be subject to the list. AND, requireing registration is like requireing handguns to be registered, it doesnt prevent crime. Missouri finally did away with handgun registration, it was a costly law that had "0" affect. The same is true with Sex Offender registration. It costs the taxpayers tons of money and has no bearing on the prevention of crime.
You can't handle the truth! posted on Thursday, April 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Come to my crime scene when I am investigating these crimes and collect the evidence so it doesn't get thrown out by some liberal judge or slick talking defense attorney, and I would imagine after about ten minutes you'll be puking and begging to not see anymore.
When you have to stand in an ER and photograph a sexually and forcefully violated 18 month old baby girl that has been ripped open by some sick bastard and I do mean ripped...literally; your views will change. This is often times what makes or breaks a new officer. It takes a strong stomach and bullet proof mind to do this job.
By the way, how old is your daughter or son?
When you have to stand in an ER and photograph a sexually and forcefully violated 18 month old baby girl that has been ripped open by some sick bastard and I do mean ripped...literally; your views will change. This is often times what makes or breaks a new officer. It takes a strong stomach and bullet proof mind to do this job.
By the way, how old is your daughter or son?
Rob posted on Wednesday, April 9th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
To Demosthenes -
You said "This law is absurd. What about the Constitutional rights of those released from jail?" What about the rights of children who are molested and intimidated to not tell anyone?
You said "If they are Americans, they should have a right to freedom." I agree Americans have freedom...but they only have it until they take away someone else's.
You said "I have a child, too and my child is safe. He went to a great daycare... over to other people's houses unless I have met the parents and know them.
If you supervise your kids and make good choices about where they go to school and daycare..."
You bring up some good, but faulty points. Did you know that 95% to 97% of child molesters are teachers, babysitters, Sunday School teachers - other words, people you know that get you to trust them? Your comment about daycare is interesting considering the man in Ste. Gen who is on trial for several child sexual abuse cases...he and his wife ran their daycare for 30 something years. I bet every parent who dropped their kids off their trusted him, don't you think?
You said "This law is absurd. What about the Constitutional rights of those released from jail?" What about the rights of children who are molested and intimidated to not tell anyone?
You said "If they are Americans, they should have a right to freedom." I agree Americans have freedom...but they only have it until they take away someone else's.
You said "I have a child, too and my child is safe. He went to a great daycare... over to other people's houses unless I have met the parents and know them.
If you supervise your kids and make good choices about where they go to school and daycare..."
You bring up some good, but faulty points. Did you know that 95% to 97% of child molesters are teachers, babysitters, Sunday School teachers - other words, people you know that get you to trust them? Your comment about daycare is interesting considering the man in Ste. Gen who is on trial for several child sexual abuse cases...he and his wife ran their daycare for 30 something years. I bet every parent who dropped their kids off their trusted him, don't you think?
one who knows posted on Saturday, April 5th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
I have one more thing to say to all of you who defend the sick, twisted people who think child molesters or sex offenders should be free after serving their time. You must be trying to protect someone you know. If you had to go through knowing an innocent child who's life was ruined, or if your own childhood was cut short you'd think differently. I'm not talking about a 19 yr. old & a 16 yr. old, either. Our children is our most precious gift, why can't we do everything to help protect them? Who cares if a person commits 1 offense 20 yrs. ago & no longer thinks he/she SHOULD be on the list. For our kids, lets protect them. I'm not reading anymore of your comments on this, say what you want. All of u that are for 'freeing' the offenders just don't get it. So let them babysit YOUR kids when they get out. But I wanna know where they are! Nobody 'burst my bubble', either. At least not a little paper reader! Yes, everyone has rights, but NOT to have sex with children & still have full rights, YOU educate yourself.
To:kmc86 posted on Friday, April 4th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I agree with you that a crime is a crime. But NO OTHER CRIME, including murder,rape or drug sales, carries a LIFETIME SENTENCE. Once you serve out the sentence, society must give you the chance to move on. I also believe that those individuals who are identified as "predators" should be committed to treatment and not released, but that is a very low number of people. thanks.
To: One Who Know posted on Friday, April 4th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
ALL CITIZENS are PROTECTED and ENTITLED to the same rights and priviledges of the constitution. Your comment about "once a child molester" shows your lack of knowledge. Do you have any idea how many offenders that are required to register are "child molesters"? Very few. Do the research. How does having a list of names protect anyone? it doesn't and the research by experts in the field indicate that. This law was created as a smoke screen, but it is a failure in every State. Sorry to burst your bubble.
one who knows posted on Thursday, April 3rd, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Yes, let's get a class action suit going on behalf of the sex offenders. Let's protect THEM. That makes sense. Who's protecting our kids?! That Mr. Umbarger (whoever he is) is being ridiculous! Once a child molester, ALWAYS a child molester!!!!
kmc86 posted on Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
A 19 year old that has intercourse with a 16 year old is ILLEGAL, consentual or not, law stands, punishment follows, sorry it was your family member. As far as urinating in your yard, if you live close enough for someone to see it you should get punished for that, who does that!? And to the superparent who has their child in daycare and private school, kudos to you, but what about the kids that get assaulted at daycare? HELLO!
the Scarlet Letter posted on Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 at 12:59 pm
There is currently a clas action suit filed by a courageous attorney on behalf of sex offenders.
His suit will challenge this archaic, ineffective registration law that was designed to protect against court defined "sexual predators". The registration law goes way beyond that scope and continues to punish those who have served the sentence of the court. It is time to join in this battle.
When government can make "law" to dictate what you do at your home on a holiday (halloween), what's next? will they mandate anyone who has received a ticket for DWI to not drive on New year's eve? Sex offender registration is ineffective and most likely unconstitutional.
Cudos to the attorney (mr Umbarger) for upholding his oath and "defending the constitution". Don't our sentators and state reps take a similar oath????
His suit will challenge this archaic, ineffective registration law that was designed to protect against court defined "sexual predators". The registration law goes way beyond that scope and continues to punish those who have served the sentence of the court. It is time to join in this battle.
When government can make "law" to dictate what you do at your home on a holiday (halloween), what's next? will they mandate anyone who has received a ticket for DWI to not drive on New year's eve? Sex offender registration is ineffective and most likely unconstitutional.
Cudos to the attorney (mr Umbarger) for upholding his oath and "defending the constitution". Don't our sentators and state reps take a similar oath????
kj posted on Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 at 12:14 pm
To all of you. You really think people look at the list and try to detirmine who is bad or there because of 1 bad decesion. Well most people do not. All they get out of it is these people are bad no matter what the crime. They do not look into it to find out. It keeps people from getting jobs a place to live and I'm not talking about liveing near a school or daycare. I agree there should be a list for several things sex offenders included. But each case should be examanied carefully before that person is branded for the rest of there life. By the way do not get caught urinateing in public or for that matter in you'r own yard. Sounds silly hu.. But, guess what if you'r seen. You to will be put on the list for Public Exposure. What I'm trying to say don't lump everyone together because this is what the state does no matter what the crime is concerning the offender list.
Krista posted on Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 at 11:54 am
This is to Demosthenes. I can not believe as a parent you would write something so ignorant. You talk about those released from jail need to have freedom and if they are so dangerous the should remain locked up. That would cost money and for some reason who ever is in control feels like our children aren't worth every dime in this world, to keep them safe from the disgusting creeps that are out there. What about the rights of our children? These sick people are not going to get better. You touch a child once, you will do it again until the day you die. We release them from prison only to find out that they've done it again. It's whenever you feel your child is safe that you let your guard down. And to me it sounds like that is what you've done. So you meet your child's friends parents, and you say you know them. It's what you don't know or see behind those doors that could hurt your child. WAKE UP!!
one who knows posted on Tuesday, April 1st, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Just because your child goes to private school doesn't mean he's 'safe'. Kids are molested everywhere, even at expensive daycares, preschools, etc. I would have thought you'd (DEMOSTHENES) would have known this. Stop being naive. We can't even send kids to church & KNOW they are safe. And to 'kj' you are not 'also one who knows'! I'm not talking about back in time when two people fell in love & one happened to be under 16 years old. I'm talking about a sick, twisted individual that can't stop thinking about sex with kids. And if someone worried about being put on 'the list', then don't date someone under age!
And to kj: Your family member who was 19 should have not been having sex with the 16 year old! It's his own fault if he's in trouble. What's wrong with waiting? No, he's not a child molester in my eyes, just a kid who made a bad decision.
And to demosthenes: you think you know the parents of your kid's friends just because you met & talked to them?! Keep thinking that & tell yourself that as you push up your rose colored glasses.
And to kj: Your family member who was 19 should have not been having sex with the 16 year old! It's his own fault if he's in trouble. What's wrong with waiting? No, he's not a child molester in my eyes, just a kid who made a bad decision.
And to demosthenes: you think you know the parents of your kid's friends just because you met & talked to them?! Keep thinking that & tell yourself that as you push up your rose colored glasses.
To KJ posted on Tuesday, April 1st, 2008 at 8:47 am
KJ-while you blieve your situation is not fair , I believe this experience is more common. It was a 10 yr old girl and a 36 yr old man. It involved rape and videos of the act. A lot of the people on the register are violent predators. Society needs to know and be protected from them. You can look of the crime and see for yourself.
unknown posted on Monday, March 31st, 2008 at 11:09 am
Demosthenes-Don't be blind. If you think that just because you paid for your children to go to daycare and private school that someone there would not sexually abuse them wake up! The people you least expect will do this to children! I know you say you supervise your children, and that is great, but what about children who don't have parents that watch them. Should they be exposed to a sexual peditor just because there parents don't watch them!! I know more parents should step up and pay attention but reality is they don't! I don't think that true sexual preditor should be able to go where children are.
kj posted on Monday, March 31st, 2008 at 9:28 am
See here is the problem. Everyone thinks that the people on the list are predators violent offenders. The reason I know about this subject is a family member was 19 and his girlfriend was 16. Yes they were haveing intercourse. And the parents apporved of the relationship until they broke up. When the parents found out they had had intercourse even though the girl agreed to the intercourse and it was mutal. The parents reported and he was charged with statutory non-forcible rape. So now it follows his young life. Might I he is a straight A studnet in college never was in trouble before or after. And wish I could say he was the exception. But, when I did some research on his behalf there is several of people on the list with simalar circumstance. So realy take look at the list just do not assume everyone on there is a child molster violent offender or repeat offender. So again I ask who should be on the list and the laws made for.
Demosthenes posted on Saturday, March 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
This law is absurd. What about the Constitutional rights of those released from jail? If they are too dangerous for society, keep them in jail. Don't impose these ridiculous restrictions on them. If they are Americans, they should have a right to freedom. They should live where they want, go to the park, and be able to drive up to the 7-11 and buy a Slurpee on Halloween night.
I have a child, too and my child is safe. He went to a great daycare when he was in preschool (this cost money) and went to a great private school for the first two years of his education (this also cost money). Whenever he goes somewhere, I take him and he is supervised. He doesn't go over to other people's houses unless I have met the parents and know them.
If you supervise your kids and make good choices about where they go to school and daycare, you don't need registries to feel that your kids are safe. Assume that responsibility and see how fast this problem disappears.
I have a child, too and my child is safe. He went to a great daycare when he was in preschool (this cost money) and went to a great private school for the first two years of his education (this also cost money). Whenever he goes somewhere, I take him and he is supervised. He doesn't go over to other people's houses unless I have met the parents and know them.
If you supervise your kids and make good choices about where they go to school and daycare, you don't need registries to feel that your kids are safe. Assume that responsibility and see how fast this problem disappears.
kmc86 posted on Friday, March 28th, 2008 at 10:54 am
That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. You're grandmother consented, 99 percent of the people victimized by the perpetrators on the "list" did not. That's the difference.
kj posted on Thursday, March 27th, 2008 at 9:49 am
In response to all the other comments after my previuos comment. I to am one who knows. But, I'm confussed so everyone is a repeat offender? So if you make 1 mistake and never do it again. Become a productive citizen non-violent offender , and not a child molester should be on the list and be told he or she can go with his or her family? Why not just keep them all in prison or tell them to leave the country. Hey and while were at it tatoo it across there forehead. As my grandfather told me if he had been with my grandmother in this day in time he to would be on the list because of there age difference of 6 years. By the way they have been married for 45 years now. So was he a terrible person? So who should we be putting on the list and who should all the addmendments be made for? Again I ask who should be on the list ?
one who knows posted on Wednesday, March 26th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
I can't tell you how much of an idiot 'reader' sounds like to me. So, if someone molests your child 'only once' then serves their time, your okay with that? You'll go on with your life like nothing happened? Good for you, because your child's life will be ruined; once is all it takes!! I'm glad some of the laws are getting tougher on these creeps. We need to protect our kids as much as we can.
Oh, and this has nothing to do with murder or meth, one thing at a time!
Oh, and this has nothing to do with murder or meth, one thing at a time!
JM posted on Wednesday, March 26th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Once a pedophile, always a pedophile. They are repeat offenders and deserve far more restrictions than what they are getting. If anything, there's not enough being done to prevent them from getting to children. Parents SHOULD be doing all they can to protect their children, but what IF it's a parent who's doing the abusing? Sex abuse is one of the most sneaky, silent crimes there is and it must come to a stop.
kj posted on Wednesday, March 26th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
I totaly agree the first comment. There are also people on the list who are non-violent ,non-predator first time offenders. Why treat them different when they have did their time. How about the murders, drug dealers, and theives. Where's there list. Where's their admendments prohibiting them from going places or doing things with there famliy and friends. To much law cause anamosity towards everyone. Why do they get a chance to change where others do not i.e. the list. And how can we think they will change if we the people keep them from haveing a normal life.
Reader posted on Wednesday, March 26th, 2008 at 11:12 am
When are too many laws too much. We cannot continue to depend on the system to protect our children. At some point we will have to be parents and protect them from sexual predators.
All of this discussion on the "list" Why do we not have a list for other crimes? Personally if it is so important for me to know if a sex offender lives by me, isn't it equally importaint to know if a meth house is next door? What about a murderer?
I am so tired of this insanity! They serve their time, they do their classes, they register... Why continue to punish, this is not what this country was founded on!!!
All of this discussion on the "list" Why do we not have a list for other crimes? Personally if it is so important for me to know if a sex offender lives by me, isn't it equally importaint to know if a meth house is next door? What about a murderer?
I am so tired of this insanity! They serve their time, they do their classes, they register... Why continue to punish, this is not what this country was founded on!!!
Search the archives
Last 30 Days
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Most Commented News
Last 30 days
- North County discusses staggered start times (128)
- Bond issue fails - UniTec stays put (57)
- Attorney says Farmington appears to be in violation of Sunshine Law (43)
- Mother, boyfriend face charges in baby's death (34)
- Indictment: Couple were under influence of alcohol, drugs (23)
Most Commented Sports
Last 30 days
- Trojans pull off upset in extra innings over Raiders (18)
- Farmington ace throws one-hitter at Central (11)
- Knights' hot bats and stifling pitching gains half-title (11)
- Dragons post road shutout over Raiders (10)
- Knights pushed by Raiders, but still complete shutout (6)