Some Va. sex offenders held long after sentence up

Some Va. sex offenders held long after sentence up

www.google.com

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Having already served their sentences, hundreds of Virginia sex offenders are held behind bars for months — some for years — while waiting to see whether they'll be sent to a psychiatric center indefinitely, an Associated Press review has found.

Judges acting on the requests of both prosecutors and defense attorneys routinely shrug off the legal deadline for making that decision, leaving the inmates in limbo well beyond their designated punishment and without access to the very kind of treatment the state says they may need.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cbsnews.com

This is not a feel sorry for sex offenders thread. Nevertheless, it is a thread dealing with a growing problem. Inmates kept way beyond their release dates. And the AP article blames it on everything but the one thing that immediately popped into my mind when I first read it.

What benefit is there to keeping inmates from months to years after their release date? And why sex offenders?

A quick google search turned up a few answers. It seems inmates are valued at about $40 per day, per inmate. That's good money.

And that sex offenders seem to be the ones singled out in this case just says to me they are easy prey considering their crime. Who's gonna care that a sex offender spent 4 years more than he was sentenced for? No one.

The problem with that is, sooner or later it won't just be sex offenders. In fact, in my searches, another little story popped up about a Los Angeles County Sherriffs Dept. that just can't seem to get his inmates released on time either. articles.latimes.com...

www.google.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The "benefit" is us taxpayers paying for these individuals to stay in prison.

second line.

reply to post by kimish


I would take a 10% tax increase if it meant keeping all the sexual predators in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

reply to post by superman2012


Perverts and Pedos - yes. Someone labeled as such for sleeping with a 17 yr old that acts and dresses like she's 30? no. Someone that has to take a leak and it so happens to be on school property after hours or on a playground? no.

So, I somewhat agree with you but not %100

I mean, %100 of all sex offender cases can't be the disgusting type we all loathe. I am not siding with them at all, but their are some people labeled as offenders and it's kind of absurd.

reply to post by Klassified


And there are quite a few offenders in there due to statutory sex that the girl had no problem with, but the Dad did. And there is a difference between a sexual predator and offender.

This is definitely an issue to contend with in society because if we are so willing to condemn folks this easily, what's to say it won't grow larger? All they have to do is change the age of consent.

Do you know that according to the UCMJ or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the missionary position is the only allowable sexual position? I knew a guy in the Navy who got kicked out because he had a twosome. This could be construed in today's society as a sex offense and lead to more exploitation.

A seemingly never ending epidemic...what to do with perverts and where to draw the line?

If a 19 year old man sleeps with a 17 year old woman (girl if you prefer)...he is by law a sex offender...and if a 30 year old man touches a 11 year old girl...he is by law a sex offender....is there a distiction?

We all know a sick perverted little boy or girl toucher should be sent to death immediately...but there is a never ending dispute for the 19 year old that sleeps with a 17 year old....why is that?

Seems clear enough...if your a sicko...society should judge you that way...if your normal...well then the same should hold true....it is all in the eyes of the beholder I guess.

My mom was married at 15 years old to a man of 22 years...with blessings from all sides...a different day of course but had it not been a different day...I wouldn't be here...so it brings many questions...right is right and wrong is wrong...pretty simple in my opinion.

I know in my state the rule is 5 years, meaning that if a 15 year old had sex with a 20 year old, the state would not prosecute unless there was extenuating circumstances. However, if the 15 year old slept with a 21 year old, well the 21 year old is a sex offender.

So a 14 year old can have sex with a 19 year old and a 13 year old is able to be with an 18 year old. I still do not agree with this law simply because I would not want my 13 year old with an 18 year old.....then again I am originally from a southern state and it is still somewhat traditional to date after menarche and marry by 18. I have a family member that began dating at 13 and is 15.5 now, still with the guy and is already planning her wedding after graduation, she wants a "twilight" wedding, just like Bella.


That is not really the point, the point is, I agree in the difference between "offender" and " predator". Predators have very little chance of rehabilitation, so our society needs to find ways of dealing with these people. They definetly do not need to be in society. They are mentally unfit for society and need to be institutionalized, usually for life.

in my state age of consent is 16 and i have known several 30+ year old guys who married 16 year old girls because they got them pregnant. in my old state age of consent was 18 years . an 18 year old girl a few years back got pregnant by her 17 and a half year old boy friend they locked her up for statutory rape labeled her a sex offender since she had sex with a minor , she was baNNED FROM BEING AROUND CHILDREN SO AS SOON AS HER BABY WAS BORN IT WAS IMMEDIATELY PLACED IN FOSTER CARE.

Originally posted by jerryznv
My mom was married at 15 years old to a man of 22 years...with blessings from all sides...a different day of course but had it not been a different day...I wouldn't be here...so it brings many questions...right is right and wrong is wrong...pretty simple in my opinion.

You describe something that's anything but simple and then you say it's simple?

For example, was your dad a sicko, or not? I don't think so, but a lot of people seem to think there's something wrong with a 22 year old man and a 15 year old girl becoming intimate. And where do you draw the line between the two cases you described of the 17/19 combo versus your parents 15/22 combo versus the 30/11 combo? I think in Mexico 11 is too young and they draw the line at 12 years old in some places. Not only do different countries draw the line at different ages, but different states within the USA draw the line at different ages.

A sex offender can be serving time in one state for an age difference that would have been perfectly legal in another state. Considering all this, I think it's anything but simple.

If you want to see simple, some isolated human tribes have made it pretty simple: when a female has her first period she's at that point presumably capable of having babies, and is then considered a woman, so sexual activity before that is forbidden, and after that is allowed, with her husband. Your parents marriage would have been perfectly ok in that tribal custom and apparently at the rules of the time, but there are a lot of reasons we consider this tribal custom unfit for modern society. One reason is the high value we place on education, and a 15 year old girl will have a hard time finishing high school if she's raising a family, for one thing. So there are good reasons we create laws mandating older ages for sexual activity than the biology of nature would dictate.

However, it may be helpful for us to realize that one contributing factor to the large population of sex offenders in the US today is the fact that relationships like that of your parents when they were married are illegal in many places. It's one of the consequences of making laws that conflict with biology. In some places in the US, sex under 18 years old isn't legal, yet over half of 18 year olds have had sex, thus we have created laws which make the majority of 18 year olds sex offenders. No wonder we have so many sex offenders.

I have no sympathy for these sub-humans, let them rot well after their time is "up".

Don't like being in Jail? Don't sexually assault people. Seems pretty simple to me.

Originally posted by superman2012

I would take a 10% tax increase if it meant keeping all the sexual predators in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

But if a drunk driver hits a bus and kills 10 kids you say - "Call it an accident and forget it".

the problem is with statutory rape and the like, each person is different. There is no magical age when all people become old enough to have sex, hell there are some people in there 30's that should probably be banned from doing it!

Those that prey on the young and vulnerable deserve to be castrated with a sledge hammer but the boundaries are hard to define and can get very blurry at times.

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45

Originally posted by superman2012

I would take a 10% tax increase if it meant keeping all the sexual predators in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

But if a drunk driver hits a bus and kills 10 kids you say - "Call it an accident and forget it".

I don't think comparing an accident to Sexual Assault, which is an INTENTIONAL attack of much more than just the physical, is fair at all.

Drunk driving is a mistake resulting from poor judgement. Sexual assault is an intentional, malicious, deeply selfish and disgusting act worthy of castration and life-imprisonment or worse.

while i can understand wanting to keep them behind bars...because few people deserve it more..but from a rights stand point the should be sent for treatment as soon as possible...houston texas has a very similar issue..not with sex offenders but with anyone on probation..they will let a person serve 99% of the probation sentence then revoke and have them put in jail as long as possible to make more money off them...its even worse with people that signed on deferred adjudication because then they are put in for the maximum sentence the original charge carried...the justice system in most states is corrupt and crooked and should be reformed

Originally posted by johnnygamble
...the justice system in most states is corrupt and crooked and should be reformed

AMEN!

Second line to say - Ghosts sit around the campfire telling Chuck Norris stories.

reply to post by kimish

Someone that has to take a leak and it so happens to be on school property after hours or on a playground? no.

Did you just watch Horrible Bosses?

Edit: I understand that some sexual assault cases are borderline gray area, that is why I typed sexual predator.

Originally posted by Klassified

This is not a feel sorry for sex offenders thread. Nevertheless, it is a thread dealing with a growing problem. Inmates kept way beyond their release dates. And the AP article blames it on everything but the one thing that immediately popped into my mind when I first read it.

What benefit is there to keeping inmates from months to years after their release date? And why sex offenders?

A quick google search turned up a few answers. It seems inmates are valued at about $40 per day, per inmate. That's good money.

And that sex offenders seem to be the ones singled out in this case just says to me they are easy prey considering their crime. Who's gonna care that a sex offender spent 4 years more than he was sentenced for? No one.

The problem with that is, sooner or later it won't just be sex offenders. In fact, in my searches, another little story popped up about a Los Angeles County Sherriffs Dept. that just can't seem to get his inmates released on time either. articles.latimes.com...

www.google.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 11/19/2011 by Klassified because: fix link

Another possibility is that incarceration is cheaper than a psychiatric hospital. I work in a psych institution and we have a patient waiting to go to state hospital, its a 18 month wait list. Keeping them in jail is actually saving money.

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45

Originally posted by superman2012

I would take a 10% tax increase if it meant keeping all the sexual predators in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

But if a drunk driver hits a bus and kills 10 kids you say - "Call it an accident and forget it".

Is that what I say? Thanks moron, I didn't realize that being against sexual predators makes me cheer on drunk drivers...use your brain.