More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jim Moret

Jim Moret

Posted: March 10, 2010 11:52 AM

Sex Predators - Trail Them or Jail Them

What's Your Reaction:

It's time we stop the madness and protect our children from predators in our midst. The rape and murder of seventeen year old San Diego high school senior Chelsea King, has sparked national outrage over the ease at which a convicted, registered sex offender moved back into the very neighborhood where he had struck before. None of the residents was ever alerted that a predator was living among them. He allegedly attacked at least twice before being caught again.

I last wrote suggesting that GPS devices should be placed on convicted sex predators as a condition for their release from prison. My argument was this: we routinely see GPS chips in phones and cars, and microchips in our pets - why not use them to track the movements of predators as well? Many people have questioned how this could work, with some calling it just a knee jerk reaction to yet another convicted monster falling through the cracks of an admittedly over-stressed and under-funded system.

We have Megan's Law, Jessica's Law and Amber Alerts. How many more children have to die to prompt new legislation aimed at ending this madness once and for all? I say the time has come and we have the means to make it happen and keep our kids safe.

If you drive a current model GM car equipped with OnStar - and you are involved in an accident deploying your airbag, a central station is immediately and automatically alerted so help can be sent right away. Air traffic controllers are familiar with crash avoidance systems which sounds an alarm if two planes are about to collide. Why can't a similar approach be used with predators? James Gardner III, who is currently held without bail in Chelsea King's rape and murder, was staying with his mother - not at the location he gave to authorities miles away. That home is the very same place where Gardner lured a thirteen year old girl inside in 2000 and beat and molested her. It is also just 1,000 feet from an elementary school, and a school bus stop is right outside the front door. Imagine if an alarm were triggered if this convicted molester ever came within a half mile of a school.

Some people have dismissed the idea by suggesting that monitoring would be too complex - crossing city, county, and state lines. So what? When airliners fly cross-country they are routinely handed over from one flight control center to another. Electronics make it a fairly straightforward operation. There can certainly be a federally funded national system to monitor the movements of these predators. Critics may cite the cost - but I say that cost of doing nothing or maintaining the status quo is even greater. The family of Chelsea King would most certainly agree. Their daughter did not have to die. The monster in their neighborhood should never have been free to roam and stalk, and potentially attack on a whim.

Once an offender is convicted of a sex crime I say they they must be required to satisfy this condition for release: accept a lifetime tracking system or remain in prison. Don't whine about civil rights. I say the rights of our kids are more important. Everything is a balancing act and things are out of balance the way they are. Besides, these creeps gave up certain rights when they violated a child. I called the tracking system a digital scarlet letter: "P" for predator. Now, I suggest we offer them a choice. Trail them or jail them.


 
 
 

Follow Jim Moret on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jimmoret

 
 
  • Comments
  • 11
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:52 PM on 03/11/2010
I'll tell you what, Jim. A good reporter would talk to experts in law enforcement, IT and telecommunications as well as the legal community (to determine if there are any constitutional issues involved here) about just what kind of infrastructure would be necessary for your scheme and then you could have an expert come in and devine the cost of it.

I guess that was too much trouble? I mean, composing a simple grandstanding rant on this site is much more convenient and less time consuming, right?
10:15 AM on 03/11/2010
Write all the “Tough On Crime” laws you want. They will not prevent anyone from committing a crime, if they are determined to do so. In fact, the harsh laws encourage the killing of a victim, because dead people cannot testify. Unless there is some kind of evidence to direct investigators to the Perp. So, how do you tell who might be dangerous? While nothing is 100 percent in this world, we must concentrate on the most dangerous.

1. The VIOLENT offender.

2. The REPEAT offender.

3. The offender who DID NOT KNOW their victim.

If you notice. The vast majority of these most heinous sexual assaults, fall into 1 or all three categories. We are wasting all the resources on the low to no risk while the predators are hiding in the registry.

This is so simple and so to the point! When people say, “Well, we can’t get rid of the register, what do you think we should do?” Answer, if we need a public register at all, and I truly don’t think the public has proven that they can handle it, then the only ones on it should be those that fell into the categories above!

The REAL danger to our society are the POLITICIANS who write all these laws while ignoring the Evidence Based Research” for VOTES! Oh yes, the entertainment news media who “EXPLOIT” and by doing so, also endanger our society for RATINGS. Nancy Grace, Bill O’Reilly and those of his kind.
10:14 AM on 03/11/2010
Speaking of the Sex Offender Registry. Yesterday, 3/10/2010, I checked the Oklahoma Sex Offender Registry. There are 6,441 registered sex offenders in the state. There are 180 registered as “HABITUAL” or REPEAT offenders.

Divide 6,441 into 180 and we get. .0279% or slightly over 1/4 of 1%. Now I ask you, With Oklahoma having a registry since November 1, 1989, 21 YEARS, 1/4 of 1% repeat offenders, wouldn’t you question these politicians who jump on this sex offender bandwagon?
The Senators are coming up for election and I smell a rat! Politicians in Oklahoma have been LYING to us for years about the recidivism rate. They have wasted MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of our tax payers money to promote themselves while keeping Oklahoman s in fear. It’s time to Fire them and get politicians who respect the constitution!

It’s no different in California. According to the California D.O.C. Recidivist rate for first time offenders is “LESS THAN 4%”!! http://www.law.stanford.edu/program/centers/scj…/JPeckenpaugh_06.pdf

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm

Highlights include the following:

* Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%),
burglars (74.0%),
larcenists (74.6%),
motor vehicle thieves (78.8%),
those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%),
and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).

2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape,
09:39 AM on 03/11/2010
Hey, let's just microchip everyone and trust the private corporations hired by the government to always have the right people identified for the correct crimes, knowing that no one would EVER hack the system, remove their own chip and implant a stolen one (location-ID theft?), change a person's criminal status out of revenge or just for fun or simply screw up.

And don't worry, the government-authorized brokering of your real-time whereabouts to marketers or any other random parties with the cash to pay for it definitely won't be used in an intrusive or privacy-invading way. Right... You've been told over and over again that your privacy is an unavoidable casualty of the digital age. In reality, there is too much money to be made selling everything about you and it would cost money to preserve your privacy, so why bother, right?
04:49 PM on 03/10/2010
I understand Jim Moret's outrage regarding the murder of Chelsea King. However, his article isn't logical or helpful. First he says sex offenders should be monitored more closely with new laws and interstate chips. Then he implys they should never be released. Neither of his suggestions is realistic. We don't chip people and most offenders with be released eventually. What is needed is not more laws and restrictions on all sex offenders but a more realistic assessment of offenders at-risk for reoffending and better surveillance of those offenders. Currently in California, an 18 year-old boy who is caught having consensual sex with his 15 year-old girlfriend has to register as a sex offender for life. Hounding people like this for life uses resources needed to monitor those likely to reoffend. James Gardner III was identified years ago as severely troubled. Yet there was no attempt made to mitigate his problems once he committed a crime.

I sometimes feel like the remarks of people like Jim Moret are made just for their own benefit, so they can feel better about themselves, like they have done something when really they haven't. He obviously is not educated in mental illness and prison practices. Before he spouts off he should find out what might really work to stop these tragic crimes and then he could write a column that could save someone's life.
photo
TexasDem0
USMC Vietnam combat vet
05:05 PM on 03/10/2010
He doesn't seem to know much about Civil Rights either.
photo
TexasDem0
USMC Vietnam combat vet
04:41 PM on 03/10/2010
Once you make the false case to track one sector of society, the door is open to track others. Who should be next? Track prisoners, in case they escape? Anyone who has ever been arrested? Would that include protestors fighting for social justice, like the freedom riders of the 1960’s, or other peaceful groups who were illegally arrested by overly aggressive police? Members of organizations you don’t like? People who support the wrong political party?

Maybe you would prefer to make them paint a symbol on their houses and businesses and wear a big yellow patch on their clothes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Sallis
04:38 PM on 03/10/2010
There are far more hate crimes against GLBT citizens than against children, but those hate crimes cause much less emotional strife than the emotional Holy Grail of causes - child abuse. Why not put a GPS collar on convicted hate crime perps also? Better yet, let's put the collars on any violent criminal. Even better, let's just collar all criminals - violent or not. Why, we could let a simple majority decide that all people wiith some defining characteristic should be collared, like men who leave the seat up or women who wear heels taller than 6"?
photo
TexasDem0
USMC Vietnam combat vet
04:48 PM on 03/10/2010
Senior citizens are also frequent targets of various crimes because they less able to protect themselves against physical attacks or financial skullduggery.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
01:29 PM on 03/10/2010
I can understand the sentiment behind this but I'm skeptical. This is the way people give away their rights. First we find some group that is considered less than human (and I agree can't think of anything lower than predators) and do things to them that we wouldn't do to anyone else. Then we start expanding it. I'm sorry but I just don't want the government putting chips into people. Period. I'm also skeptical that the chips would prevent anything. What are you going to do have some person sit at a computer 24 X 7 and monitor where the offenders go? Even if you do how will you know that they are doing something illicit there anyway?

The bottom line, I think, is that as hard as it is to admit law enforcement isn't perfect and there are bad guys out there and these crimes are not completely preventable. In this case it seems to me a better approach is to find out where the system broke down. Then punish anyone who made a major mistake and make any corrections to make sure the same mistake doesn't happen again.
01:06 PM on 03/11/2010
Then we have to replace every politician in California for refusing to rely on "Evidence Based Research."

Instead they used the fear factor that is pure "emotionalism." Which, by the way, guarantees laws passed on pure emotion.

So why is it that emotion make for BAD law? Simple, "EMOTION LACKS INTELLIGENCE!"