Maine allows some sex offenders to be removed from registry

A major overhaul to the whole system of registering sex offenders is way overdue.

Firstly, Megan's should not apply to anyone whose conviction preceded the effective date of the law. To hold people accountable to a law that did not exist at the time they committed their offenses clearly violates the Constitutional prohibition against ex-post-facto law and is an insult to the Constitution. The fact that it somehow passed muster in the courts says more about the fact that our courts are still dominated by Reagan / Bush era Fascists than it does about the law itself.

Secondly, the law needs to temper emotionalism with facts. The facts, according to the U.S. Department of Justice and more than a dozen recidivism studies, are that sex offenders actually have a very low recidivism rate, especially if they received treatment while in custody. Furthermore, virtually of of those who do recidivate do so within three years of their release from custody. After five years, the likelihood of recidivism drops to around two percent; and after ten years, the likelihood of recidivism is a statistical zero.

Furthermore, I have to give credit to offenders who have obediently complied with registration requirements for ten years, despite the inevitable harassment and discrimination that results from being on the list. I'd probably fake my own death and assume a new identity if I were in that position. So despite their pasts, these people have demonstrated their rehabilitation and their commitment to obeying the law, and they should be automatically removed after ten years of offense-free living.

Finally, the list should not be anonymously viewable over the Internet. No one with a legitimate need to know who's on the sex offender list needs anonymity. Anonymous access just makes the registry a hit list for use by vigilantes and random wackos. Many tragedies, some of which also involved innocents, have resulted from the use of Internet sex offender registries by such types. To prevent this, people who want to view the sex offender list should be required to physically go to a police station and present valid ID. Yes, it's public information. But not all public information is required to be Internet accessible by random sociopaths.

-LL

p.s. Please arrest my ex-husband now and leave my family alone.

My ex-husband sexually abused both my children, drugged my daughter and later my daughter was given VIT A poisoning, all in northern Maine and was never arrested, even though it was reported. Pro-nuclear Republicans, pro-loggers, anti-environmentalists let him off the hook.. Corruption runs rampant all over this country. Favors are preformed at very high levels and they have nothing to do with truth or goodness. This country needs justice, the world needs justice, my family needs justice. GE and Comcast, stop with the mind control please. You people are bastards.

I think it's a good thing. It's not like they're letting everybody off the list. Just the ones who are most likely to integrate back into society. And it's not like it tells you what their sex crime is. It could be that they were barely 18 when they had sex with a 15 year old in high school who said she was 17.

Besides, the vigilantes who have been looking up the lists and killing people on it need to be stopped.

When my cousin was a senior in high school she was a cheerleader @ 18 and was dating the quarterback of the football team ( he was 16), she got pregnant / his parents (religous nutjobs) pressed the issue / she was convicted of sex with a minor / no jail time, but she got 5 yrs. probation, community service, fines, lawyer fees and almost didn't get into school. Now the both of them are college grads / happily married (6th year) / 2 kids. The bad news is that she has to register as a sex offender for her remaining days (married to her victim?) and cannot be a teacher like she wanted to her whole life. You would not believe the money and time they have used to get this corrected and have her record expunged. 98% of these scumbags deserve to be on the list, but the way sentencing is these days with mandatory minimums there will be more stories like mine. Not everything is "black n white".

Wow Maine. You have your shit together. Homosexual people can't legally choose to marry one another, but sex offenders can walk in anonymity.

I don't know all the specifics, but in general, I find taking people off the sex offender list a good thing. Most "sex offenses" do not amount to a danger to anybody. Also, I'm not sure that the sex offender list does any good even for serious crimes. Most child molesters molest children close to them (i.e. relatives). Is there any evidence that sex-offender lists have offered us any protection?

i think this is good and bad. good because those who didnt really do anything too bad, like someone said sexual harassment in the workplace, but where do you stop?

You can't allow progressive reform on same-sex marriage, so you'll take a shot at progressive reform for sex offenders?

Wow, Maine, what progress.

And you call yourself a New England state.

Sounds fair enough to me. People do change, and to treat a reformed person as if he or she were the same person as before the reformation is just going to cause regression.

We've all made bad choices. Just because someone's involves sex doesn't mean he or she should pay a disproportionately higher cost.

I think 's great how people can get out of the system when it's so easy to get in. The man can't keep us down anymore!

Time to boycott the state of Maine.

I think it would be based on the severity of the sex offender charge they had at that time, and if they have been up to date with the courts, and everyone else during the time they are registered. I think that after a certain amount of years everyone should get a 2nd chance. Unless it was a major situation then let them dwell on that list. Also some people are charged with that and they did not do anything so it would be based case to case i think on the removal from that listing.

look up dru sjodin grand forks, nd

I hope minor offenders can get this (public urination and mooning people can get you on the list even if there was obviously no harm). I even hope some statutory rape cases are thrown out (if a 17 year old has sex with his 16 year old girlfriend he should not be branded a rapist because his girlfriends mom and dad got mad)

However I think it is important that violent offenders and repeat offenders do not have such an opportunity

I have mixed feelings about this law.

Hopefully rapists and child molesters won't be able to remove themselves. I think this is more for less offensive crimes like public nudity, urinating in public, etc...

You'd be surprised at what can actually get you registered as a sex offender.
My friend was almost registered as a sex offender for urinating near a playground, even though no children were at the playground at the time. He had to fight it in court.

You know, this could lead to good things. I'm absolutely for the fact of having sex offenders registered -- but when you think about the fact that receiving fellatio while driving counts as a sex offense crime [as it legally should be], a 22-year-old receiving consentual fellatio while driving with his girlfriend/fianceé/wife at 2 AM could end up haunting him the rest of his life. While it should technically be illegal, I feel that calling him a registered sex offender for the rest of his life is perhaps a bit harsh. Now if the same 22-year-old raped a 14-year-old, by all means, register him and never let him get off that list.

what good does a registry do when they will refuse to prosecute or take action just for the fact that they are not on the registry.... i mean even some kids sending pics of themselves via "sexting" are being put on this registry..... serious child molestors need to be the only ones on this list.....

I am all for it for offenders that are on the list for sexual harassment in the workplace (which often is a he said she said situation) or for offenders that have their name put on the list for indecent exposure due to public urination or similar circumstances, but I question removing anyone else from that list.....

The criteria they are presenting seems somewhat flawed...

Depending on the judge, people can get off with under a years jail sentence for some heinous sexual crimes. I am not saying that they are bound to offend again, but I would like to know that they are kept in check by the community knowing that they are there.

What does the year have to do with it? Not everyone reforms their ways in 17 - 27 years.

And furthermore, no offenders with a class A offense should be allowed off of that list. When you commit one of those crimes, you forfeit your rights for anonymity.

These decisions should be made on a case by case basis, with careful scrutiny of the situations and attempts at rehabilitation.

i wonder how many offenders will be able to be taken off the list under these guidelines...