I can locate my car and even find my phone with a tracking device. So why not do the same with Registered Sex Offenders? It's time they give up heir ability to roam freely once they are convicted of such a horrible crime. As a lawyer, I believe strongly in protecting the rights of the accused, even of the convicted - but not at the expense of past and future victims. They have rights too, most importantly the right to live. Yes, I am a lawyer, but I am also a son, a husband, and a father. I want my loved ones to be protected from known dangers. This is not a science experiment - we needn't gamble with innocent lives. We've done that far too many times and too many people have lost.
Ask the family of Chelsea King.
John Gardner III, a convicted sex offender and a dangerous predator, was arrested and charged for the vicious rape and murder of this beautiful high school senior. Chelsea, a straight-A student, musician, and long distance runner, had a lifetime of promise wiped out in a horrible crime that did not have to happen. She had gone to a local park to run on the trails and she never came home. Her body was discovered in a shallow grave covered by debris.
Gardner, who stands accused of this heinous attack, was convicted in 2000 of a sexual assault on a thirteen year-old girl, whom he beat and molested after luring her to his home. Her friend who testified against this monster at his preliminary hearing when she was just fourteen, still lives in the same neighborhood ten years later. Incredibly, as of last week, so did this predator. Not a single resident was notified that Gardner was released after serving just five years and that he was, once again, living among them. How many young women were needlessly put at risk? Consider fourteen year old Amber Dubois who went missing from the area a year ago while walking to school. Authorities now suspect Gardner in Amber's disappearance. Or think of the young Colorado Springs graduate student who was attacked last December 27, while jogging in the same area from where Chelsea went missing. She successfully fended off her attacker. She has reportedly, since been shown Gardner's photo and proclaimed, "He's the same guy." Gardner has yet to be charged in that attack or the abduction. He has pleaded not guilty to the rape murder of Chelsea King.
Still, why weren't residents put on alert that this monster was in their midst, on their street, and incredibly, just 1,000 feet away from an elementary school? What system of justice protects criminals but not the public? How many people have to be victimized, raped or killed for us to rise up and say, "enough!"
I say that time is now.
My iPhone has a GPS chip which enables me to find it if it is lost or stolen. Many cars have a similar device. We insert microchips in our dogs and cats for identification - why can't chips be implanted in convicted sex offenders to make sure we always know where they are? I suggest that for certain crimes - crimes which are so repulsive and for which studies tell us the perpetrators are never rehabilitated - we should require that a tracking device be placed on (or in) every sexual predator as a condition of their release from prison. One offense is enough. Forget three strikes. Strike one: go to prison and win a GPS for life.
Is this an abridgment of their civil rights? No. Those rights were relinquished after their conviction. Felons routinely lose their right to vote, own a gun or hold public office and no one calls "foul." Why should they be allowed to move about freely, invisibly, putting so many others in potential danger? Registries alone are not enough. We need to know a predator's whereabouts BEFORE he can strike again - not after. I want to be able to log onto my computer and KNOW where these predators are living, where they are hiding. Consider it a digital scarlet letter. "P" for predator.
Follow Jim Moret on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jimmoret
I know the cost is high,but the alternatives are MUCH
MORE SO ...economic,emotional or even life or death
itself. SADDEST PART OF ALL ISTHAT WE EVEN HAVE TO BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AT ALL!!!
It's not necessary to implant chips in people when nearly all Americans remain blissfully ignorant of existing tracking capabilities.
See -- http://www.newsweek.com/id/233916 or just google "cell phone tracking."
As the term "sexual violence" has been redefined, it now includes any adult having "sexual contact" with a minor below a certain age (these ages vary by state from 14 to 18). The term "sexual contact" itself varies by state, as well, and can include fondling through clothing even if what is being fondled is not genitalia.
The mere act of having sexual contact with someone under that age is, as a legal definition, "sexual violence". No actual violence need be employed.
This is crucial to understanding governmental policy on sexual offending today and to providing a fuller, more balanced, view of the context in which these terms are used.
Without doubt, some offenders labeled "S.V.P." are truly violent in the way everyone understands the term. The problem is, when the term 'violent' has been so radically redefined by the state, it's often impossible to know who is violent and who isn't. In no way does that empower and protect society.
Predators - if we assume they cannot be rehabilitated - would be, per Mr. Moret, punished in perpetuity. Beyond the sentence passed at trial. There is something fundamentally wrong with that. Even though it might make us feel good - as would lots of vengeful, mob punishments - it strikes me as wrong. As though we are incapable of finding a solution to this problem so we do the easy thing. Even if it's wrong.
And just because it's "better" than keeping them in jail forever, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
I don't know what the answer is. But I am bothered by this solution.
THIS is an act that you cannot succumb. THIS is a worth whatever it takes.
There are some people I just can't stand. I just don't like their face. So, I don't interact with them. My sanctity is not a paramount issue. Not for you to get up and scream about it. And I sort of deserve respect for that. In her case, I don't think she had the opportunity to think twice about who would or would not murder her. No choice at all.
Opportunistic crime is a either an oxymoron or a paradox based upon your standpoint. Opportunistic tragedy is a car accident. It's just easier to kill yourself. Really. But it's not suicide.
.
If GPS works, afterall the use is ubiquitos, it is an option. I don't like the "guilty label". It haunts me. But I am a better man. I take every opportunity to point that out to you.
I'm not satan and so I care, both for Chelsea and John. That's what I said. I am a better man.
My opinion is biased. If the system were perfect, OK, I don't think we would be having this discussion. There are "Pedofiles" et al, truely mentally defective individuals who cannot stop committing crimes. GPS is a great idea for these people. They tend towards the outskirts. We are already really good at catching them. So in a small wooded area it is one heck of a surprise to find this.
Look, he buried the body and left a shoe and underwear -- with his "DNA" on it...
this was a murder.
Al beit it took a long time to find her.
If the GPS goes off line on public transit, say, it would not necessarily be so easy to locate him.
I imagine this to be a very strong deterrent. Note again: John Gardner was tracked until 2008. And it appears his activities started soon after.
Again: There is no infrastructure needed as far as I understand. The GPS device will record the individuals movements and a database of their movement can be queried when necessary.
Moreover, because of the possible costs of this, it will have to be relegated to just the worst of the worst, the level three sex offender.
Heck, since we have the strategy, why don't we also make them wear miniature surveillance cameras at the same time? Or listening devices? How far are you willing to go and how much are you willing to pay for it?
There exists a class of violent criminal willing to stalk and prey on victims. I suggest people keep the discussion to that class of individual.
Obviously GPS collars won't solve the predominance of sexual abuse cases, given that sexual abuse occurs amongst those known. But predators do exist, and a person like John Gardner who has confessed to picking up a girl, taking her home, and violently attacking her is the perfect candidate for a GPS collar.
Or, perhaps, we should simply keep the violent offenders behind bars, and use the more creative means of rehabilitation on non-violent offenders.
John Gardner was a violent sexual predator. This is just the type of person who deserves to be collared. He could have gotten 30 years. Instead he could have been collared for life.
In summary, I think collaring violent sexual offenders is an excellent idea.
When these crimes are committed, those who profit from GPS sales and monitoring send lobbyists to Washington in an effort to pass laws that, if passed would require the sale and monitoring of their products and services. That includes some of the biggest corporations in the world. Check out who sells and monitors GPS devices, and you will see it's true.
If there was any evidence that monitoring prevents crime or saves lives, the cost might be justified. However there is very little, if any evidence of that.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/12/19/offenders/index.html
It's a red herring.
Also, there are not 700,000 violent sex offenders in this country. And the recidivism rate for violent sex offenders is high. John Gardner was the perfect candidate for GPS monitoring. He took a girl he did not know into his house, beat her, and molested her.
Stop protecting the sex offenders.