The Jerry Sandusky guilty verdict undoubtedly surprised no one, except maybe for the news breaking so late in the evening. This time is a good time to point out a few things about this entire debacle. .Now that Sandusky is convicted on 45 counts of sexual abuse, you must take a hard look at this man in relation to Megan's Flaw.
Megan's Law and subsequent laws, like the Adam Walsh Act and Jessica's Law, were birthed in high-profile cases. When we think of the registry, we think of people like Sandusky. However, if you look on the Megan's Law list, you would not find Jerry Sandusky's face. I discussed this detail in a previous blog post.No registry, no residency restriction, no GPS monitoring, no signs in the lawn, and no scarlet letter law could have prevented this man from committing sex crimes, because he is among the about 95% of sex crime cases that are committed by those with no prior record.
The second point. We think everyone on the registry is a Jerry Sandusky type offender, they all got a slap on the wrist, and so on. Well, people like Jerry Sandusky will never see the light of day. Then there are those who are out and on the list. All 750,000 of them will pay for what Sandusky did somehow. Some new law, some more tightening of the screws, and more vigilante violence.
Across the country, in Washington state, two people were being put to rest as a criminal with a history of drugs and assault shot and killed two people on the list and planned to kill a third. Both were free, they served their time and had been out for years without incident. One of the men was a 28 year old man who, at age 17, had a consensual relationship with another teen who was deaf. The parents did not approve and the boy was charged with the ominous sounding "first-degree rape." Since then, he got married and had two kids. These two children will grow up with out their father, and the person who murdered their father is declared a hero by society with Jerry Sandusky on their minds.
Patrick Drum did not kill two "Jerry Sanduskys." Nor did Sandusky's victims ever find him on the list.
The registry protects no one.
For another take on this, read Shana Rowan's blog:
http://www.iloveasexoffender.blogspot.com/2012/06/jerry-sandusky-never-was-never-will-be.html
Another take on this, from Shaun Webb:
http://amotionforinnocence.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/i-believe-sandusky-did-it-but/
"Through Wisdom and Knowledge, We Rise From the Ashes!" -- This is Once Fallen's blog for sex offense commentaries, OpEds and assorted elucidations. For sex offense research, support, and advocacy, visit www.oncefallen.com today.
Showing posts with label pedophile. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pedophile. Show all posts
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Sandusky's Guilty. Now what?
Labels:
Jerry Sandusky,
pedophile,
Sandusky Case,
sex offender
Monday, October 3, 2011
Stop the Semantics: There is NO SUCH THING as a "convicted pedophile"

It is time to set the record straight. There is no such thing as a "convicted pedophile." It is inaccurate. it is just plain wrong.
While some of you may think, "what semantic nonsense," the use of this term is derogatory and is on par with the "N" word. Allow me to clear the air.
First off, the term "pedophile" is a psychology term with distinct criteria.Below is the DSM-IV criteria for the diagnosis of pedophilia:
Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia
(cautionary statement)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually
arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity
with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or
younger).
B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause
marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
In order to be a "convicted pedophile," simply having a clinical diagnosis of pedophilia would be outlawed. That simply is not the case. Granted, anyone who admits they are sexually attracted to children would likely be harassed by LE and neighbors and subject to scrutiny, but simply having a pedophilia diagnosis would not be enough to arrest someone. Thus, you cannot be arrested simply for being diagnosed with pedophilia.
Stop assuming every registrant is a pedophile and misusing the term. You have done enough damage by misusing and abusing this term. Enough with the assumptions, the generalizations, and the downright lies. Quit trying to make progressively scary terms-- Pervert, Pedophiles, Predators, SVP, etc.
How about a little truth in addressing this issue? Fanning the flames of blind hate and stupidity has not helped matters. But then again, the media is all about milking tragedy.
Sincerely,
Derek
PS: I stand by my words, and certain braid-dead vigilantes need a crash course in reading comprehension. The "common use" of the word does not make it proper use of the word. The "N word" I mentioned is a "common usage" word but I doubt anyone but racists would think the N word is proper or ethical. Most will agree using it to refer to a group of people is unethical and just plain wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)